The rules that were in place prevented data sharing, but don’t reach over into Trutherism to be explained. Democrat stupidity suffices just fine for that.

Bryan on November 24, 2007 at 1:22 PM

Well said and I couldn’t agree more. In addition lets not forget that not only did the Clintoon administration create the wall between intelligence agencies that prevented the sharing of critical information that would have made the picture of the pending 9-11 attack more clear but the Clintoon adminstration also gutted our military and intelligence to the point where they were only a hollow shell of their previous selves. How else do the lib-tards think Clinton was able to create such big budget surplus that and all the lib-tards are always bragging about?

Not only that but Bush was in office only 8 months when 9-11 occured and as we now know the 9-11 plot had been in the works well before Bush ever took office and 8 months in office was not enough time for Bush to get our military and intelligence agencies back on their feet and efficiently doing their jobs after Clintoon gutted them!

Also, as others have mentioned here the fact Clintoon had several opportunities to get OBL, that and he was so busy playing hide-the-cigar with Monica and covering for his many indiscretions that he failed to uphold the most important part of his oath as President, to protect the Republic and its people!

The bottom line is the Clintoon administration has much more responsibility for 9-11 happening then Bush ever will and regardless of what the lib-tard moonbats say, 9-11 happened on Clintoon’s watch, not Bush’s!

Yeah, thanks for the budget surplus Slick Willy, it was so worth it getting caught with our pants down on 9-11!!

Are you saying that some government agents had specific information? and chose not to do anything with it?

No. I was just giving an example of how inherent gov’t limits can cause (and have caused) problems. You see, I’ve actually worked for the gov’t before.

Look, I have a feeling that our difference is mostly with the threshold of specific information.

On target. I know for a fact that bad things happen in government more often due to negligence (human failings such as incompetence or failure to ask the right questions–due to lack of imagination–or failure to hire the right people) or just the simple inability to uncover all the necessary facts, rather than due to purposeful malevolence (like having all of the specific information and ignoring it in order to shape public opinion). In other words, I don’t think that any one agency in the gov’t wanted 9/11 to happen, had all the necessary pieces to the puzzle but sat back and allowed it to happen. And I definitely don’t think that our gov’t made 9/11 happen, as the Truthers believe.

Back when our gov’t failed to properly react to nineties-era Islamist terrorism, I chalked it up to that very same type incompetence. But as much as I disliked the Clinton Administration, it never would have occurred to me that any agency under its purview specifically allowed those incidents to occur.

Again, the problem with the Truthers is that they aren’t smart enough and/or they don’t have enough life experience to know that the type of conditions specified in this comment and willful malevolence often produce the same type of results: bad ones.

And one thing you should know about intel: I only know of one incident in history in which one of our intel agencies (CIA) knew in advance that something was going to happen: the Six Day War. And that’s because the Israelis told us. (Of course no one knew that it was only going to last six days.)

Dude, none of our agencies knew that the Berlin Wall was going to fall. So when the Truthers say “we knew about this” folks like me know that they’re just looking for conspiracies. I would speculate why they would think this way and why they would make up laughable scenarios to “prove” their theories, but this comment is long enough.

Nice talking to you and see ya tomorrow.

(the CIA and the FBI) were prohibited by law to exchange information with each other.

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 7:26 PM

Are you saying that some government agents had specific information? and chose not to do anything with it?

Look, I have a feeling that our difference is mostly with the threshold of specific information.
Here is my definition: Federal authorities knew that islamist would attempt to destroy the World Trade Center Towers.
Defining trutherism down is a dangerous game. Our expectation of our government should be higher, but no matter how low we set expectation, our federal government continues to underwhelm.

Count me as in the majority

sweeper on November 24, 2007 at 6:03 PM

Noted.

If employees of the government were warned about certain elements taking flight training and did not follow up and others being warned of islamist attempting to fly planes into building, and did not follow up, then ipso facto

Also, is there any evidence that some gov’t agency knew specifically that planes flying out of Boston, Newark and DC would be commandeered on the morning of 9/11/01?

If employees of the government were warned about certain elements taking flight training and did not follow up and others being warned of islamist attempting to fly planes into building, and did not follow up, then ipso facto

Not quite. Individual governmental entities do not have unlimited access to the information of all the others. In some cases, certain agencies (the CIA and the FBI) were prohibited by law to exchange information with each other.

He even showed plane contrails as proof of the “spraying” of said liquid.

William Amos on November 24, 2007 at 2:17 PM

Have you seen THIS ITEM ? It’s a “chem-buster”…to counter the effects of chemicals the government is poisoning us with (apparently).

I’m in contact with a couple of truthers…who believe in FEMA camps, chemtrails, 9/11 inside job, etc etc…but that thing in the link takes the cake.

This is what I mean about how one needs to understand what he/she reads.

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 5:50 PM

I understand quite well. If employees of the government were warned about certain elements taking flight training and did not follow up and others being warned of islamist attempting to fly planes into building, and did not follow up, then ipso facto

it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warning

Again, have all the disdain in the world for truthers but the way the question is worded: Count me as in the majority

And yet, just months ago, Zogby found that only 4% subscribed to MIHOP Trooferism, and at MOST 36% engaged in knowing or unknowing LIHOP?

Something doesn’t smell right here.

Bryan suggests that those who believe that the government’s incompetence is a major factor in not preventing 9/11 is akin to trutherism

No. He suggested that those who believe that the government’s allegedly quite competent execution of a malevolent against the American people is a major factor in not preventing 9/11 is akin to trutherism. And that’s exactly what Trutherism is.

From the article:

Nearly two-thirds of Americans think it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warnings, according to a Scripps Howard News Service/Ohio University poll

The bolded phrases do not suggest “governmental incompetence”; they suggest a government which is quite competent at willfully ignoring specific pre-9/11 warnings. Those phrases contend that that the government knew specific intelligence items about 9/11–who, what, how, when and where–and purposefully did nothing. The words ’specific’ and ‘chose’ exclude accidents, inattention and incompetence. Truthers don’t get or refuse to get this. Problem is that they aren’t the only ones.

This is what I mean about how one needs to understand what he/she reads.

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 5:10 PM

Bryan suggests that those who believe that the government’s incompetence is a major factor in not preventing 9/11 is akin to trutherism.

If this poll is accurate, two-thirds of Americans subscribe to some form of Trutherism

Is there anyone here who thinks that all the time, money and resources spent on intellligence gathering picked up nothing? Isn’t it just logical, the simplest of answers, that the government was just incompetent on almost every level.

There is a big difference between those who believe that the government brought down Tower 7 and those who think that the ‘93 attempt, the USS Cole, the African Embassies etc should have been enough to wake up this government. Apparently I ask too much.

Good job; Keep blaming truthers

sweeper on November 24, 2007 at 4:46 PM

Truthers blew up the African embassies!?!!?! All this time I thought it was Islamists. /sarc

No, Truthers aren’t to blame for the inaction and incompetent action against nineties-era Islamist terrorism. (Good thing Bryan didn’t say that.) Various levels of the government are, as any observer knows.

There is, however, a difference between incompetence and willful action, sweeper. The problem with Truthers and those who take them seriously is this: they can’t tell the difference. This goes back to my advice at 1:12PM–understand what you read.

AND BANNING DODGEBALL!! Come on you sissies! WE use to play dodgeball with BASKETBALLS because the rubber ones kept popping!

This offends me, because I was a sissy, nonathletic gay boy. However, I was so good at dodge ball that I was always the last kid to be hit. Why are the nanny staters deny kids like me the chance to excel at our one athletic skill: avoiding getting hit? (Actually, I also could do the most pull-ups due to my love for climbing trees–which explains my ecology thing.)

Democrat stupidity suffices just fine for that.

Bryan on November 24, 2007 at 1:22 PM

In this instance this gives far too much credibility to the Republicans. To equate trutherism to those who believe that the federal government is incompetent is ridiculous. There is a big difference between those who believe that the government brought down Tower 7 and those who think that the ‘93 attempt, the USS Cole, the African Embassies etc should have been enough to wake up this government. Apparently I ask too much.

Good job; Keep blaming truthers

Bottom line, I just don’t think that two-thirds of Americans have succumbed to Trutherism. Yet. Before I write off two-thirds of Americans as hopeless idiots, I’d like to learn more about the questions they were actually asked.

I suspect this reflects the acceptance of the repeated liberal line “Bush was warned and did nothing”… Even though everyone knows it wasn’t specific, etc. I don’t think this huge jump shows people are believing in some Illuminati conspiracy, I think it shows they’re critical of intelligence handling. Although the article does refer to “specific warnings:

Nearly two-thirds of Americans think it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings….

But take a look at that again:

Nearly two-thirds of Americans think it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings

There’s yer problem! Possible? So the poll question was essentially “could some people have known?” Not “Do you believe they knew?”, right? That’s why they got the unusually high number (which they likely sought).

I do still, however, maintain that within a few years will have roughly 50% of the population buying in to some form of Trutherism. I’ve literally said that in dozens of threads here, and will continue to.

That said…. RON PAUL 2008! (j/k of course)

“government’s knowledge of intelligent life from other worlds”

I happen to believe this, only because its fun to do so.

As for 9/11, well its a loaded question….clinton could have killed OBL when he had the chance, the FBI sent the memo about possible hijacking threats etc. If i were to answer absolutely truthfully (wince) i would have to say that yes it is possible that the government had warning. However hind sight is 20/20 and theres no telling how many thousands of ‘warnings’ we have right now coming in from all corners of the globe as we speak. Some of them they will stop, some of them will be determined not to be a real threat, and perhaps others will be misjudged and the attacks will come.
Do I think the government had warning? Probably. Do I think they maliciously and purposefully ignored those warnings? Absolutely not. I think mistakes were made. For us, we have to get it right 100% of the time. Terrorists only have to get it right once

As for the “warnings”, I’m sure we currently have several thousand warnings, of course when law enforcement tries to act on warnings they are accused of being facsists, taking away civil liberties, etc… Morons.

Everyone is a genius after the fact. It’s like watching The Usual Suspects when you know Verbal is really Keyser Soze.

Oh, and for the record: I believe that huge numbers of Americans are imbeciles.

Jaibones

Public education and liberal values of teaching to the bottom of the class at its best! Not to mention the new tactic of forbiding things like Valedictorian, keeping score at kids’ games, etc.

AND BANNING DODGEBALL!! Come on you sissies! WE use to play dodgeball with BASKETBALLS because the rubber ones kept popping!

School and childhood, not the workplace, is the place to learn about winning and losing and the rewards of hard work.