9-11 Coverup?
 

Here is an article that implies something of the sort. Could the election have something to do with it?

Coverup??

Ya know, there are just some things the general public doesn't need to know. I am so sick of the media citing acts of non-delcasification a cover up it's not even funny.

This could contain unfixed security holes that if released would put the public in danger. Then again, it could just put people's jobs on the line. You never know with politics. It will be released eventually.

You know what I'm sick of? I'm sick of people thinking its ok for the government to lie to us, decieve us, and hide from us. Sure, its important for the government to withhold information that could compromise our ability to fight terrorism. But we should not let them use that as an excuse to protect their own political interests in the name of the victims of 9-11.

The thing I am noticing most is how people from one side of this use nothing but MSNBC as a source and those of us who look at it from the other side seem to use nothing but Fox. Maybe we should eliminate those two as sources - and see what's left? Maybe we should take a poll thingy - What are ya'lls thougts?

Maximus, that sounds more like a conspiracy theory than actual sound reasoning. The government has NEVER told us everything, because the public SHOULDN'T know everything. It's only know, when the only thing that holds our attention is the latest scandal, that the news is making this such a big deal.

I agree with you except for the interesting point that earlier the LA Times and NY Times were equated to the journalistic standards of FOX. At times, the integrity of the Washington Post and the channel I watch most--C-SPAN--have been impugned. I don't know what to say about that except for the fact that the three papers I listed are three of the primary news sources in the U.S. (The Wall Street Journal and Christian Science Monitor are the remaing two of our country's five primary news sources in case anybody cares) and C-SPAN broadcasts live, call-ins, and various countries' newsfeeds. But I'm with you, lets try holding standards of integrity to both sides of the debate.

good idea, Fox News is very Conservitive

(i dont know much about MSNBC but i would assume they are very liberal)

as such you cant trust either as a fair and balanced info source,


how is CNN, ive found them to be generaly fair and unbiased how do you guys read them


http://a799.g.akamai.net/3/799/388/d...ws/1812205.jpg

So are we at war with Eurasia or Eastasia this week?

I don't really think declassication of an investigation on the events of 9/11 are going to produce any security leaks that terrorist don't already know about. We as citizens of the U.S. should be able to know why our own government was unable to protect us from Al Caeda. I mean come on, the CIA, FBI, NSA, INS and airport security allowed these dickheads to kill U.S. civilians with our own planes, and I'd kind of like to know how the fuck that could happen.

One of you guys wanna' tell him or should I?

its not a coverup, its a major embaressment of the people in charge of stopping this kind of thing.

And in the case 0f 9/11 I agree. Unless of course there are things that have not yet been fixed. My original statement was a general statement not citing a specific case. It just seems that if the press doesn't get the info they want in a short period of time then there must be a scandel coverup going on somewhere.

I remember the bombing in Oklahoma. Before all the bodies were identified and families noted, some journalists snuck into the makeshift morgue and were filming it. This is one example of things I think the general population does not need to know.

I would say I'm 100% for releasing this, but I worry that it will reveal something that shouldn't be let out, like the time we had to let bin Laden know that we were tapping his "100% secure" satellite phones. I think there was a coverup of inteligence failures, but some parts of this document will definitely need to get the magic marker.

LD, you can tell him, I hate bursting bubbles.

great book

forget the files being open to everyday citizens like you and me, we are talking about the government not giving it to independent investigators. That means that they have something to hide...
right

Bush was able to buy the Presidency in 2000, he'll be able to do it again in 2004.(unless the economy really bottoms out)

Your Truely
A McCain Supporter

Use as many different sources as possible and attempt to find common denominators. Then because none of us were there or privy to what may be the truth it boils down to critical thinking and major opinion.

It's my opinion that if the truth were laid out as it was created martial law would have to be invoked; I can’t see how that would be good for everyone. That’s only my opinion. That’s for the hookup Label; my hat fits nice and snug for my melon head.

Does anyone know the difference of security detachment between Payne Stewarts accident and 4 jetliners going off course? Im just curious.

He said he understood the need to classify certain things. Personally I don't give a damn about scandals like Bush's daughters drinking or doing coke, just like I didn't give a damn about Clinton getting head. I care about the government being in bed with corporations. I care about the reasons behind going to war. I care about Bush's plan to fix the economy. I don't trust the government to run things correctly sight unseen. We need to keep the politicians as honest as possible.

Honestly, when you guys want failures in the intelligence business before 9/11 look no farther than un-needed cuts and rollbacks of the intel world. The Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency, all experienced rollbacks because they "weren't needed in this brave new world". And we went along with it, hey, the USSR was gone, who needs 'em any more? Well, apparently this was the philosphy of Slick Willy, and the fact that we can just observe people with satellites and make everything better. Clinton made one of the largest mistakes of any head-of-state, and that mistake is to cut off your information supply and to ignore what little you have left of those suppliers. Remember back in '98 when we lobbed cruise missiles into Afghanistan to "get" Osama bin Laden? Well, Clinton had the chance to push the button a little earlier and actually nab the guy, not just kill him, arrest him, but they all just had a two hour window. Willy being the military genius that he is decides to ponder over the question for an hour. Then for the rest of the two hour window, Clinton was "unavailable". Now tell me this, the President of the United States is never "unavailable" for matters in taking out a guy who had already tried to bring the WTC toppling down already. But for some reason we missed the two hour window and bin Laden would later come back to grab us by the balls. Now I believe that there was an intelligence briefing for the POTUS (President of the United States) about terrorist cells such as Al-Qaeda. But this was in JULY of 2001, a mere two months before 9/11, an apprehension of a man who can disappear faster than your mom's best chicken can not be done in a mere two months. It takes years of timing, preparation, and good old fashioned intel gathering to nab a guy like bin Laden. I mean, we've all seen how long it took for us just to get some of his lieutenants, almost a year and a half, and these guys aren't even as smart as bin Laden is. Sure security at airports was probably stepped up, but airport security is a joke, because it's not federally ran, and not professional enough, half of those guys probably coulnd't get a job at a McDonalds! So I merely advise that you look at the failure and arrogance of previous administrations for failures, not to an administration that only got such information two months before those horrendous attacks occured.

archer you are completly correct, but what you have to understand is that for one, all of those mutherfuckas are kurrupt, republican and democrat, and two it is not only the information gathering that went during clintons administration that is in question, it is the intelligence gathering, 9-11 day response, and shady actions and dealings that occurred during the bush administration that are a problem too.

Thank you, I could not have said it better myself! We, as a tabloid reading, reality tv watching nation, spend more time and, more importantly(?), money trying to uncover political scandal than fixing what is wrong with the country. Clinton got a hummer...who cares!? Jenna Bush was caught drinking underage...big hairy deal, who's daughter/son doesn't. I could not possibly care less. What I care about is whether my job is going to be here next week and can I make my mortgage payment. Maybe we've had it to good, to long.

Afro and Bill I agree with you, there are some corrupt people in the Government as a whole, and we need to stop giving a shit about the private lives of our President and their families, do I like what Slick Willy or Jenna did? No, but it's a personal problem that doesn't need our attention. Yeah, I also realize that the CIA and other organizations stumbled around, they got caught with their pants down. I mean, when you're gettin laid by this hot girl and her boyfriend walks in, you don't exactly come up with a logical response do you? Nah, you try to get the fuck out of there as quickly as possible and hope to God he doesn't have a gun while screaming "I didn't know!" repeatedly. Oversimplification I know, but hey, it works. And all of the government aren't completely corrupt, obviously you get sucked in by the system due to the reality that you have to play the game a different way to get ahead on the Hill, but hey, we're all only human and none of us is perfect, until next time mi amigos.

That isn't accurate. Fox News isn't "very conservative" by any means, they just aren't as blatantly liberally biased as the other large networks.

If you compare everything to black and white, then would the color red be black because it isn't white? Of course not.

I appreciate your intelligent comments Archer.

acording to mspaint, it would be a black with a hint of grey

Care to elaborate on the map there Dilbert?

it is not even though general public that needs to know
what about an independent committee

The Administration should be accountable. Period.

I'd like answers to the following questions:

Why did the United States Air Force fail to scramble interceptor jets — in defiance of all long-standing rules and well-established practice — for almost two hours after it was known that an unprecedented four planes had been hijacked?

How could the world's most powerful military fail to react throughout a prolonged, horrifying attack on the financial and political capitals of the nation?

How did the FBI know the exact identities of the hijackers within 24 hours of the attacks? If their files were so readily to hand, why hadn't they been apprehended earlier? After all, several conscientious FBI agents had raised the alarm about a number of known Al Qaeda sympathizers at U.S. flight schools, and had been ignored.

Why did Donald Rumsfeld call for a war on Iraq (not Afghanistan) the morning after the Saudi hijackers had accomplished their attack?

Why did the two squadrons of fighter jets at Andrews Air Force base, 19 kilometres from Washington, not zoom into action to defend the White House, one of their primary tasks?

Why did George Bush sit for half an hour in a Florida classroom, listening to a girl talk about her pet goat, after his chief of staff told him about the second plane? For that matter, why did he pretend that he first learned of the attacks in that classroom, when he had actually been briefed as he left his hotel that morning?

Why has there been no public investigation into the billions of dollars "earned" by insider trading of United and American Airlines stock before 9/11?

I can answer why 9/11 was such a big screw up and so can most of you if you would just take a minute to think abt it. It is because nobody in this country ever thought something like that could happen. Not the government not the CIA not the FBI not the man or woman on the street. And when it did happen there is that period of dazed confusion followed by gross over reaction.

Regarding CNN...

Me and a friend back in Sweden, both interested in politics in history, used to watch CNN because it's funny.

It's kind of like TIME magazine. They tell you that they're unbiased, but after a while it really stinks.

Most Americans I've known that have travelled abroad, have really gotten a wake-up call when it comes to the US media.

and the amazing thing is that the CNN you get in Europe is actually less US centric than what is broadcast on the homefront...

He turned Afghanistan into Eurasia. A little Orwell joke, ya know?


As for the topic, I definitely think the government knew much more than it has let on. Charlatan, I applaud your questions, and think that more Americans need to be asking them.

Also, all mainstream American media is very biased. If you don't think so, just get out of the country and see the difference for yourself.

Let's get this straight, all media is biased, whether it originates from New York City or Timbuktu, you will have a bias from the media. Don't disillusion yourself by saying that only American media is biased, sure world media may be differently opinionated on issues, but they're no more unbiased than any other news station.