Replies

Were you there, or are you just repeating the story that was told several weeks later?

Were you there?

Have you EVER watched a breaking news story unfold on TV? Ever sat in front of a newswire as breaking news is unfolding? I have, because I've worked in the newsrooms of both a news channel and a wire service. The initial information is almost always WRONG. On a story the size of 9/11, the true story is refined slowly over a period of days or weeks, as the crap is sorted out from the facts. (Or do you really believe the State Department was bombed on 9/11 too? After all, it was reported!!!)

In short, the story from "several weeks later" is always more reliable than the "so-and-so said that..." pseudoreporting and tinfoil BS that's tossed around as the events are actually occurring, when nobody has the time of manpower to track down what's truth and what's merely empty rumormongering.

And again, for the 50,000th time, it's establish fact that Bush gave the go-ahead to shoot down any planes that appeared to be hijacked. And he had a 90% approval rating anyway. It's beyond obvious that the public was more than ready to accept having a passenger jet shot down. So what's the point of lying about it?!?!!?!? Why are people seeing conspiracies when every person in the nation is IN ON IT?!!??!

First, in this day in age of media censorship of sensative issues, the initial reports are generaly the most accurate. I discount the stories generaly when the "news makers" have had a chance to get their stories straight. That being said:

So what's the point of lying about it?!?!!?!? Why are people seeing conspiracies when every person in the nation is IN ON IT?!!??!

The point is that there would be people who would make this a huge issue for Bush. Just look at this article! Think about DU, Begalla, Carville and the otehr ilk. They would be calling Bush a murderer for ever. There are millions of idiots who would not have seen it as justifiable. Look at the anti-american stuff we have seen since.

The cell phone calls were a godsend, like I said. Why admit a shootdown, even though most people would understand it was justifiable, when you can simply skip that scenario all together with this sensational story? It would make no sense to "rock the boat". They knew that after 9/11, they would most likely not have to shoot down a plane, because they were already rounding up the known terrorists that they had let in with visas. They knew no terrosist could ever again hijack a plane with a box cutter. And no arab looking person could get on one without intense scrutiny. There was no reason to tell the truth. None whatsoever.