BoatBanter.com - LIES I SAW IN MOORES 9/11

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)

- - LIES I SAW IN MOORES 9/11 (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/22184-lies-i-saw-moores-9-11-a.html)

I don't think that was, or is, the problem Harry. There was simply a policy
position that the crew cooperated. The security of the door was immaterial.
Simply stick a knife at the throat of a flight attendant and they would open
up.

If militants with real arms can penetrate an airplane the bullet proof
doors are not a significant factor. Opening locked doors is known art.

Simply changing to a policy of resisting at all cost combined with a little
bit of entry security really stops hi-jacking. There is no way that
passengers will cooperate with hijackers at this point.

The airport security stuff is all window dressing so the gov. can claim they
are doing something. What they are doing is screwing up a reasonably good
system to pander to the publics fear.

Check the Russian problems. We going to put armed marshalls in all the
schools and entertainment halls? The Chechen have perfectly well
demonstrated how to turn the most simple institutions of our society into
terror objects.

Nahh the whole thing is silly. You kill them were they live. You
infiltrate and counter. All the other stuff suppresses freedom not terror.

Jim

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
WaIIy wrote:
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:44:45 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Paul Schilter wrote:
dixon,
Well true enough, before 9/11 a highjacking meant you had to
detour to
Cuba, nothing to get too excited about.
Paul

In the early 1970's, some fool hijacked a Fairchild-Hiller prop jet from
White Plains, NY, and demanded to be flown to somewhere out on Long
Island.

At least one aspect of the ease of airliner hijackings should have been
resolved years ago...the cockpit door and the bulkhead between the
cockpit and cabins should have been burst-proof and bullet-proof long
before 9-11, and the door should remain closed during the flight.

I agree with you on this one. It's shame on all administrations for not
getting this done.

It's more than just a political problem that our Executive or
legislative branches should have addressed. After the first few
hijackings decades ago, it should have occurred to the airlines and
their suppliers that serious security reinforcement was needed between
the cockpit and the cabin. Building in such security during the design
phase is simple and cheap; retrofitting is expensive.

--
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
And don't forget to pay your taxes so the rich don't have to!

Clams Canino wrote:

Further Chris, the whole concept of the killfile is the wrong approach
here - because except for less than a handfull of people, the ones that post
OT are also some of the more informed boaters, they just seem to enjoy
killing each other over politics for amusement.

There are no "informed boaters" in my bozo bin, just, at the moment,
Comcast News, John Smith, Cleesturtle, Jim-, Dan S. P. Fritz, Bomar, and
John S. I cannot recall a single boating-related post from these bozos
that I found informative, interesting, or even entertaining. In fact,
most of them don't put up any posts that are really boating-related.
I probably ought to add John H and one or two others...the boating posts
they occasionally put up here are devoid of useful or interesting
information.

--
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
And don't forget to pay your taxes so the rich don't have to!

Another example of Basskissers FAS and excessive drug use.

"NOYB" wrote in message
k.net...

"basskisser" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...
"jps" wrote in message
...

BTW--She's a registered Democrat who voted for Gore in 2000.

She's an idiot

Why? Because she's a registered Democrat? Or because she voted for
Gore in
2000?

You have GOT to be the most narrow minded human on earth.

Hey, I didn't say it...jps did.

Harry don't you hate having to pretend you don't read my posts?

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Clams Canino wrote:

Netsock is that same Chris idiot that used to come in here and post his
killfile list like he thought anyone really cared. He's the one that has
that turbune powered boat built with daddys money.
I think he uses the boat to get laid - or try to impress us - or
something.
All he ever talks about in here is his killfile.

-W

Aka John Smith and Comcast?
You decide.

--
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
And don't forget to pay your taxes so the rich don't have to!

Harry,
You don't come to rec.boats to read boating posts, you come here to hurl
insults.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Clams Canino wrote:

Further Chris, the whole concept of the killfile is the wrong approach
here - because except for less than a handfull of people, the ones that
post
OT are also some of the more informed boaters, they just seem to enjoy
killing each other over politics for amusement.

There are no "informed boaters" in my bozo bin, just, at the moment,
Comcast News, John Smith, Cleesturtle, Jim-, Dan S. P. Fritz, Bomar, and
John S. I cannot recall a single boating-related post from these bozos
that I found informative, interesting, or even entertaining. In fact,
most of them don't put up any posts that are really boating-related.
I probably ought to add John H and one or two others...the boating posts
they occasionally put up here are devoid of useful or interesting
information.

--
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
And don't forget to pay your taxes so the rich don't have to!

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"NOYB" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote in message
ink.net...

dixon wrote:

After seeing the movie 9/11, I saw some very obvious lies on
moores
part.
The part is surely trick photography where bush sits in a class
of
kids
with
a deer in the headlights look on his face for seven minutes
after
hearing
the country is being attacked. No world leader, in this nuclear
age
would
ever do anything that stupid. Is moore seriously trying to make
us
believe
that with jet pilots working like a nascar pit crew to practice
getting
airborne quickly, the president would be such an idiot to do
nothing
while
planes were on thier way to the pentagon? Other than this
everything
else
seemed believable in the movie.

--

--
Dixon

This is very interesting, and a view that is common with our
conservative friends.

Dixon says "some very obvious lies", then points out one thing
that's
undeniably true, then says "Other than this everything else seemed
believable in the movie."

Where are the obvious lies?

There are a number of them. One of them, for instance, is the claim
that
Bush was responsible for members of the Saudi family leaving the US
2
days
after 9/11.

He was! His administration made the damned arrangements.

Actually, it was just one seedy, partisan, and underhanded individual
named
Richard Clarke who made the arrangements. Go check your facts!

Are you REALLY, HONESTLY saying that Richard Clarke did so without ANY
input from Bush? Really, now, tell me the truth, do you actually
believe that??? If so, I've got some land I'd like to sell you...

"It didn't get any higher than me," Clarke said. "On 9-11, 9-12 and 9-13,
many things didn't get any higher than me. I decided it in consultation with
the FBI."

Hamilton said in an interview Friday that when he told Democratic senators
that the commission did not know who authorized the Saudi flights, he was
not fully informed.

"They asked the question 'Who authorized the flight?' and I said I did not
know and I'd try to find out," Hamilton said. "I learned subsequently from
talking to the staff that we thought Clarke authorized the flight and it did
not go higher."

http://www.hillnews.com/news/052604/clarke.aspx

"NOYB" wrote in message nk.net...
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"NOYB" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote in message
ink.net...

dixon wrote:

After seeing the movie 9/11, I saw some very obvious lies on moores
part.
The part is surely trick photography where bush sits in a class of
kids
with
a deer in the headlights look on his face for seven minutes after
hearing
the country is being attacked. No world leader, in this nuclear age
would
ever do anything that stupid. Is moore seriously trying to make us
believe
that with jet pilots working like a nascar pit crew to practice
getting
airborne quickly, the president would be such an idiot to do nothing
while
planes were on thier way to the pentagon? Other than this everything
else
seemed believable in the movie.

--

--
Dixon

This is very interesting, and a view that is common with our
conservative friends.

Dixon says "some very obvious lies", then points out one thing that's
undeniably true, then says "Other than this everything else seemed
believable in the movie."

Where are the obvious lies?

There are a number of them. One of them, for instance, is the claim that
Bush was responsible for members of the Saudi family leaving the US 2
days
after 9/11.

He was! His administration made the damned arrangements.

Actually, it was just one seedy, partisan, and underhanded individual named
Richard Clarke who made the arrangements. Go check your facts!

Hmm, okay....

First:
1. THE FLIGHTS - WHO GOT OUT WHEN

The facts stated in Fahrenheit 9/11 are well documented and are based
entirely on the findings contained in the 9/11 commission draft
report, which states, "After the airspace reopened, six chartered
flights with 142 people, mostly Saudi Arabian nationals, departed from
the United States between September 14 and 24. One flight, the
so-called Bin Ladin flight, departed the United States on September 20
with 26 passengers, most of them relatives of Usama Bin Ladin."
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States,
Threats and Responses in 2001, Staff Statement No. 10, The Saudi
Flights, p. 12

Unfortunately, some news organizations have misinterpreted what the
film says. Some have said Fahrenheit 9/11 alleges that these flights
out of the country took place when commercial airplanes were still
grounded. The film does not say this. The film states clearly that
these flights left after September 13 (the day the FAA began to slowly
lift the ban on air traffic).

2. WHO APPROVED THESE FLIGHTS AND WHY

We really do not know why it was so necessary for the White House to
allow the quick exodus of these Saudi and bin Ladens out of the
country, and "the White House still refuses to document fully how the
flights were arranged," according to a June 20, 2004, article by Phil
Shenon in the New York Times .

We do know who asked for help in getting Saudis out of the country -
the Saudi government. National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon
the United States, Threats and Responses in 2001, Staff Statement No.
10, The Saudi Flights, p. 12 The film also includes a television
interview with Saudi Prince Bandar, confirming this as well.

Former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke has testified that he
approved these flights, stating that "it was a conscious decision with
complete review at the highest levels of the State Department and the
FBI and the White House." Testimony of Richard Clarke, Former
Counterterrorism Chief, National Security Council, before The Senate
Judiciary Committee, September 3, 2003.

3. DID THESE INDIVIDUALS GET SPECIAL TREATMENT BY LAW ENFORCEMENT?

Yes, according to Jack Cloonan, a former senior agent on the joint
FBI-CIA Al-Qaeda task force, who is interviewed in Fahrenheit 9/11.
Cloonan raises questions about the type of investigation to which
these individuals were subjected, finding it highly unusual that in
light of the seriousness of the attack on 9/11, bin Laden family
members were allowed to leave the country and escape without anyone
getting their statements on record in any kind of formal proceeding,
and with little more than a brief interview.

Most Saudis who left were not interviewed at all by the FBI. In fact,
of the 142 Saudis on these flights, only 30 were interviewed. National
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Threats and
Responses in 2001, Staff Statement No. 10, The Saudi Flights, p. 12

The film puts this in perspective. Imagine President Clinton
facilitating the exit of members of the McVeigh family out of the
country following the Oklahoma City bombing. Or compare this treatment
to the hundreds of people detained following the 9/11 attacks who were
held without charges for months on end, who had no relationship to
Osama bin Laden.

The question, which has never been answered, is what was the rush in
getting these individuals out of the country? As Cloonan says, ""If I
had to inconvenience a member of the bin Laden family with a subpoena
or a Grand Jury, do you think I'd lose any sleep over it? Not for a
minute Mike... [Y]ou got a lawyer? Fine. Counselor? Fine. Mr. Bin
Laden, this is why I'm asking you, it's not because I think that
you're anything. I just want to ask you the questions that I would
anybody."

4. ADDITIONAL FACTS NOT REPORTED IN FAHRENHEIT 9/11 THAT SUPPORT THE
FILM'S THESIS

First, the US Customs and Border Protection document released by the
Department of Homeland Security under the FOIA, Feb 24, 2004 lists 162
Saudi Nationals who flew out of the country between 9.11.2001 and
9.15.2001 .

Second, even though Fahrenheit does not make the allegation, on June
9, 2004, news reports confirmed that, "Two days after the Sept. 11
attacks, with most of the nation's air traffic still grounded, a small
jet landed at Tampa International Airport, picked up three young Saudi
men and left. The men, one of them thought to be a member of the Saudi
royal family, were accompanied by a former FBI agent and a former
Tampa police officer on the flight to Lexington, Ky. The Saudis then
took another flight out of the country."

Moreover, "For nearly three years, White House, aviation and law
enforcement officials have insisted the flight never took place and
have denied published reports and widespread Internet speculation
about its purpose... The terrorism panel, better known as the 9/11
Commission, said in April that it knew of six chartered flights with
142 people aboard, mostly Saudis, that left the United States between
Sept. 14 and 24, 2001. But it has said nothing about the Tampa flight…
The 9/11 Commission, which has said the flights out of the United
States were handled appropriately by the FBI, appears concerned with
the handling of the Tampa flight.

"Most of the aircraft allowed to fly in U.S. airspace on Sept. 13 were
empty airliners being ferried from the airports where they made quick
landings on Sept. 11. The reopening of the airspace included paid
charter flights, but not private, nonrevenue flights." Jean Heller,
TIA now verifies flight of Saudis; The government has long denied that
two days after the 9/11 attacks, the three were allowed to fly.
St. Petersburg Times, June 9, 2004

Hey Netsock, are you a member of S&F? Great group for performance boaters.

--
Bill
Chesapeake, Va

"Netsock" wrote in message
...

"Clams Canino" wrote in message
k.net...
Netsock is that same Chris idiot that used to come in here and post his
killfile list like he thought anyone really cared. He's the one that
has
that turbune powered boat built with daddys money.
I think he uses the boat to get laid - or try to impress us - or
something.
All he ever talks about in here is his killfile.

-W

LOL! I have never tried to hide my identity...my boat is listed under my
name at Lea's site.

And yes...I have posted my kill file list...so what? There are more people
here than you know, that don't want to wad through all the OT bullcrap
that
is here.

And where on earth did you get the idea that my boat was "built with
daddys
money"? Have you resorted to pure fabrication? I built, own, paid for, and
hold title to my Rogers turbine powered boat...along with two other boats
if
you must know.

My father is 69 years old, and aside from doing some leg work (during the
day, while I was at my day job), and helping a little in the construction,
he had little to do with it. My brother also helped...as did some of my
friends, but that doesn't mean the boat doesn't belong to me.

And getting laid? LOL! I don't need a boat to do that. In fact, I rarely
take it out during "peak" hours...the Rogers is more for R&D than
anything...it seems to get too much attention when the lake is busy.

You see my challenged friend, boaters...especially performance
boaters...build their boats with friends and family...its a social agenda,
that all enjoy. Simply because somebody gives somebody a hand, doesn't
mean
the boat doesn't "belong" to the owner. The friendship, the fun, and the
comradery, are all about such a project...obviously three things you know
nothing about...

Of course, you are probably another one of those political trolls, who
doesn't even have a boat, so it doesnt really matter..

BTW, if I could figure out how to post my kill file from Outlook...I
would.

Good luck in life. :)

--
-Netsock

"It's just about going fast...that's all..."
http://home.insight.rr.com/cgreen/

Clarke admitted that he *alone* approved the flights. Why would he protect
the Bush administration after his scathing attack book against Bush?