Skip to comments.
The September 11th Attack: Pearl Harbor or Reichstag Fire?
e-mail ^
| unknown
| Mark Ortiz
Posted on 12/12/2001 6:22:03 AM PST by m1911
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-103 next last
1) Have fun, destroy innuendo with facts
2) DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER!
1
posted on
12/12/2001 6:22:03 AM PST
by
m1911
To: m1911
Leaving aside all the kooky conclusions that are not based on fact, the author gives us a false choice between Pearl Harbor and the Reichstag Fire. This is entirely different. Pearl Harbor was a legitimate military target. The Japs did not just go in and bomb Honolulu. No, this is far, far worse thatn Pearl Harbor.
To: m1911
Mark Ortiz: TinFoiler Off His Meds or Democratic Political Consultant?
3
posted on
12/12/2001 6:26:43 AM PST
by
wideawake
To: m1911
BUNK
4
posted on
12/12/2001 6:27:56 AM PST
by
Ranger
To: m1911
BUMP
5
posted on
12/12/2001 6:28:12 AM PST
by
Aurelius
To: m1911
>Reichstag Fire?Well, the whole purpose of the "Reichstag Fire" scenario is to cause big changes. The 911 attack certainly did that.
But isn't the simple (and frustrating) reality that there's just NO WAY for us "average" citizens to know one way or the other?
It's just ANOTHER topic of endless speculation, "evidence" leading a person both ways.
Mark W.
6
posted on
12/12/2001 6:29:57 AM PST
by
MarkWar
To: m1911
"Idon't mean to deny the significance of 5,000 or more human lives, but wouldn't it have made more sense to take out two or three nuclear power plants with those planes? That would have killed millions, and rendered major population centers uninhabitable. It would not have taken a genius to think of this. (It still wouldn't -- a good argument against nuclear power.) 1. Chernobyl went in to a full melt-down, and nowhere near "millions" died as a result.
2. This all assumes that a plane crashing in to a Nuclear Reactor would cause a meltdown. This is very unlikely. Any disruption to the normal operations would cause the reactor to shut down. Sure, if there was complete penetration of the concrete there would be a small radioactive release, and the site would become uninhabitable, but that would, in my opinion, have been preferable to the WTC event.
To: MarkWar
It's just ANOTHER topic of endless speculation, "evidence" leading a person both ways. This article offers no evidence whatsoever.
To: m1911
Very juvenile to equate Bush with Hitler.
Would someone please tell me where all this wonderful oil is in Afgghanistan? And why is there not tons of oil companies sending over exploration teams right now? I'll tell you why - there is no oil there.
This is more leftist tripe who live in Ivory Towers.
To: m1911
September 11th is much more similar to the Pearl Harbor attack ---- for a Reichstag Fire comparison, I would use the '95 Oklahoma City bombing where Clinton immediately attempted to lay the blame on "right-wing militias" and talk show hosts.
To: MarkWar
It's just ANOTHER topic of endless speculation, "evidence" leading a person both ways.Would you care to cite some of the evidence that would lead an intelligent person to conclude that this was a U.S. plot? I certainly didn't see any in the paranoid rant that was posted.
When one person says "the earth is round" and another person says "the earth is flat", the fact that two people have differing views doesn't mean there's some sort of intellectual equivalence between the two arguments.
Occam's Razor is a very effective tool. It applies here.
To: m1911
This Ortiz character is obviously trying to manipulate the tinfoil futures market. I have alerted the SEC.
To: m1911
"We are expected to believe that somebody could hijack four airliners, and use three of them as missiles against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, in a country where no airliner had been hijacked for 12 years, over a time span of nearly two hours, with no response from the US Air Force."
Well, I'll take a stab at this one. The sad fact is that the security in our airports has had big holes in it for a long time. Bin Laden's network skillfully did their research, tested it, and then worked out plan to take advantage of it. No, no one would have believed it prior to September 11th, but isn't that the hallmark of an expertly conceived strategy?
Secondly, it is hard to really judge how fast the Air Force was on the case. The problem was that prior to 9-11 hijackings did not involve suicide or wholesale destruction of the aircraft. Therefore, the Air Force was acting in a manner to SAVE as many lives as possible. Since 9-11 we have seen a much tighter display of tracking. Hindsight is always a better teacher than foresight.
The bottom line is that just because the plan was successful, doesn't mean that the only one who could have executed it was the government itself.
13
posted on
12/12/2001 6:45:56 AM PST
by
wjeanw
To: m1911
The only thing Afghanistan and the Taliban regime have gotten from the attack and its aftermath is their own destruction, and more mayhem in their countryThey thought they could bog the US down, like they did the Soviets. Or that we would do nothing but pontificate, like Carter vs. Khomeni
He's merely speculating, he has no proof whatsoever. A fantasy exercise.
To: m1911
A FORMER MUSLIM PROFESSOR ON WHY HE LEFT ISLAM (click on picture)
The Hardcover edition.
15
posted on
12/12/2001 6:54:39 AM PST
by
Cacique
To: m1911
CIA? Shadow government? Imagine if this were true...and "evidence" came to the world's attention to prove it. Can you spell REVOLUTION & world turmoil? Chilling.
What was the name of that Clinton campaign funder that testified about this oil pipeline a few years ago. I think his name is Roger something...
To: m1911
The grand conspiracy (gc) wants to get a pipeline through a country controlled by agents of the gc, so it has the agents attack the land of the gc so that the agents land can be bombed to snot so the gc's pipeline can be built.
Anyone see any problems here?
17
posted on
12/12/2001 7:23:33 AM PST
by
m1911
To: KC_Conspirator
Hell, I've read the quote from GW that a dictatorship wouldn't be so bad, if he could be the dictator.
To: KC_Conspirator
It is not claimed that there is oil in Afghanistan. As the article says, the oil is around and under the Caspian Sea. The most practical means of transportation out is by a pipeline through Afghanistan.
19
posted on
12/12/2001 7:44:46 AM PST
by
Aurelius
To: Chi-townChief
Whatever OKC was or wasn't it is amply clear that it was a case of home grown terrorism perpertrated by a punk who hated the U.S. government - the same government that is performing magnificently in Afghanistan.
20
posted on
12/12/2001 7:48:58 AM PST
by
SBeck
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-103 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson