General Discussion

denbot

(9,898 posts)

4. You don't have to hire someone to steal your car..

Tue May 22, 2012, 01:55 AM

May 2012

Just leave the keys in the ignition, the doors open, and walk away.

Bush, and all those New American Century signers walked away from their responsibilities in the months leading up to 9/11

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

100 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Truthers and birthers are two sides of the same coin [View all] RZM May 2012 OP

It's always hard to know what a person means by "truther". Marr May 2012 #1

I can't argue with that RZM May 2012 #3

American intelligence was warning the white house. denbot May 2012 #7

The Chimp and Darth simply didn't give a shit. hifiguy May 2012 #53

re: Bush had some sort of prior knowledge Electric Monk May 2012 #8

Post removed Post removed May 2012 #11

Wow, you're a judgmental little DUer, aren't you? Skip Intro May 2012 #14

We'd both agree that 9/11 is a pretty serious issue, right? RZM May 2012 #19

Which side won? EOTE May 2012 #47

When I think of "truthers" I think of those trying to argue no plane hit the Pentagon or Electric Monk May 2012 #18

Your 'point' is a logical fallacy called "appealing to the consequences of a belief" Electric Monk May 2012 #20

Let's not get objective fact in the way of bashing people who think rationally. EOTE May 2012 #48

This message was self-deleted by its author Electric Monk May 2012 #10

Fail. Hissyspit May 2012 #41

So your argument is that the Bush administration was incredibly negligent... EOTE May 2012 #44

Not necessarily-- that's my point. Marr May 2012 #50

You might want to check out David Ray Griffin's "The New Pearl Harbor." coalition_unwilling May 2012 #100

You don't have to hire someone to steal your car.. denbot May 2012 #4

Exactly. EOTE May 2012 #45

No they are not. Bonobo May 2012 #2

If you want to argue failure, you better bring the argument RZM May 2012 #5

Your argument doesn't even demand a counter argument Bonobo May 2012 #13

I made the argument in the OP RZM May 2012 #15

I just disagree that that is the motivation. Bonobo May 2012 #23

However, one could indeed use fish and banana's of examples of foods that are long and thin LanternWaste May 2012 #75

No, you didn't make any argument at all. EOTE May 2012 #46

So does Obama know the truth of 9/11, in your estimation? jberryhill May 2012 #26

Beats me. nt Bonobo May 2012 #29

He seems to have a definite opinion jberryhill May 2012 #52

I wouldn't confuse that message with what he really knows or doesn't know. Bonobo May 2012 #65

There is a huge difference... jberryhill May 2012 #67

So you do at least agree that he does not tell all he knows -in principle. Bonobo May 2012 #69

"Does that mean I think that a missile hit the towers or that it was MIHOP?" jberryhill May 2012 #70

I agree with your thinking generally on the broad issue of thinking patterns. nt Bonobo May 2012 #72

So... not taking Dick Cheney at his word is the same as imagining Obama wasn't born in the U.S.? villager May 2012 #6

Nobody's arguing Dick Cheney is a saint RZM May 2012 #8

Your high opinion of Dick Cheney, and giving him the benefit of the doubt villager May 2012 #28

Your post proves his point. eom boppers May 2012 #61

?? villager May 2012 #74

Here you go: boppers May 2012 #83

Well, if you're ascribing more genteel motives to Cheney, Bush, et al villager May 2012 #85

I imagine we should apply healthy skepticism to all of our views LanternWaste May 2012 #77

Well said. Nor are these skepticisms all equivalent, yes? villager May 2012 #79

No, as soon as being skeptical about a "side" is not equal, intellectual honesty ends. boppers May 2012 #84

While I am skeptical of "both" parties, their actions manifest differently villager May 2012 #86

Anything glib, witty, or that fits on bumper-sticker, is almost surely a crock. boppers May 2012 #89

Well put. The OP is exactly that, and you have acutely discerned its weakness. villager May 2012 #90

Game, Set, Match. boppers May 2012 #91

Yes --if you're referring to the overly-simplistic nature of the OP and its false equivalency villager May 2012 #92

Two opposing bumper stickers does not create wisdom. boppers May 2012 #94

Exactly! So in specific contrast to the OP, it's wise to be skeptical of "official explanations..." villager May 2012 #98

I'm not entirely sure about his perpetrating or allowing an attack treestar May 2012 #87

bullshit. Skip Intro May 2012 #12

Why is that? n/t RZM May 2012 #16

Because I don't like pompass asses who think their opinions Skip Intro May 2012 #17

Except this isn't 'opinion' RZM May 2012 #22

Well, he ignored all the credible evidence given to him that an attack was likely. EOTE May 2012 #60

You think there is some truth to the "9/11 was an inside job" theory? UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #30

It's a defensive peculiarity of the human mind. boppers May 2012 #21

Wow, we actually agree on something. UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #34

Not all ducks are "plants". boppers May 2012 #35

+1 Exactly. nt zappaman May 2012 #55

No sale. Old and In the Way May 2012 #24

Is that sarcasm? UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #31

Obama is covering up both jberryhill May 2012 #25

Is that sarcasm? UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #32

Yes jberryhill May 2012 #51

I disagree. I don't believe the official 9/11 story. MrSlayer May 2012 #27

Is that sarcasm? UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #33

Is that? MrSlayer May 2012 #62

Yep--that's what the hard right wants everybody to believe librechik May 2012 #63

Bush would need plausible deniability. MrSlayer May 2012 #68

why does he always look so guilty then? librechik May 2012 #81

It's easier to buy the story. MrSlayer May 2012 #82

The illogic of this comparison is breathtaking. Prometheus Bound May 2012 #36

No, they're not. MadHound May 2012 #37

Is that sarcasm? UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #38

Are you spamming? MadHound May 2012 #39

You must know this subject isn't allowed in GD. UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #40

None of the "three" collapsed "precisely into their own footprint", any more than the BC is fake. boppers May 2012 #73

No they didn't collapse into their own footprints. JohnyCanuck May 2012 #93

"7 or 8 seconds" destroys all credibility in your post. boppers May 2012 #95

The word 'all' in your post title Mc Mike May 2012 #96

Somewhat agree with your title. Mc Mike May 2012 #42

Not sa much. helderheid May 2012 #43

Brilliant! whatchamacallit May 2012 #49

Did ya look into BushCo's heart? That is the argued difference between negligence and treason TheKentuckian May 2012 #54

Two sidss of the crazy coin... SidDithers May 2012 #56

looking through your replies, it's pretty evident that you don't know fuckall.. frylock May 2012 #57

Some people love to entertain themselves with the idea of vast conspiracy treestar May 2012 #58

Not even close Cali_Democrat May 2012 #59

Obama's dad did not have an advance report titled "Mrs. Obama Determined to Give Birth in Kenya". KamaAina May 2012 #64

Spit-take! Yeah, that just about sums it up. EOTE May 2012 #76

BS--birthers are a deliberate campaign distraction invented by the right. librechik May 2012 #88

Not Really Amster Dan May 2012 #66

Ah, yes. Of course they are. Cerridwen May 2012 #71

But can a birther be a truther and vice versa? yellowcanine May 2012 #78

First of all, is "illegitimate" a real verb or are you just kree-a-tuv? trolling4dollaz May 2012 #80

that's some really interesting false equivalence... ibegurpard May 2012 #97

Philip Berg. Nuff said. nt hack89 May 2012 #99