Reply #53: You Are Re-Framing My Post

[Yavin4]

You are in a sense re-creating my post in order to disprove my argument. IOW, you are re-framing ,y argument and then arguing against your re-created frame instead of looking at the argument itself.

First, I'm not comparing the actual events of 9/11 to Katrina, like you're doing in your re-frame.

Second, I'm comparing the fact that it's difficult to suppress information about cataclysmic events without the truth slipping out either intentionally or unintentionally. I never said that it was impossible to construct a conspiracy which was how you re-framed my post.

My overall point is that suppression of the truth around great events is nearly impossible. We found out that Vietnam was based on a lie. We found out that Nixon covered-up the break-in. We found out that Roosevelt knew about the concentration camps.

We found out that there were no WMDs in Iraq. We found out that Bush and Cheney pressured the intelligence community to falsify the facts. We found out that Bush knew about the Katrina hurricane devastation before the hurricane hit.

We found out about these enormous events, yet somehow, someway, this administration was able to coordinate the hijacking of four American passenger planes and fly them into buildings without anyone, any where coming forth with the truth, even though we've seen high ranking members of the intelligence community come out with the truth about WMDs in Iraq.

Supression of truth, whether intentional or unintentional, is far more difficult than what you are willing to admit.