thunder wrote:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 13:24:22 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Grateful? The conspiracy theories keep me up at night searching the
internet. I'd get a lot more sleep if he'd put those uncertainties to
rest by letting those guys speak.

It could be, potentially, embarrassing for all involved. It is illegal
for the Pentagon to spy on American citizens. Does data mining rise to
spying?

Why is it OK to publish the PDB's leading up to 9/11 in the Commission
report, but not information that may have ID'd Atta 1 1/2 years before
9/11? I hope that you now realize that the 9/11 Commission was a complete
whitewash of what really happened in the decade leading up to 9/11.

I don't see it as a whitewash, at worst, only incomplete. You make a big
deal of this Able Danger, but even if they did have Atta's name, it
doesn't make a conspiracy, it makes a typical, bumbling bureaucracy,
called government. History is full of these "what ifs". Look at Pearl
Harbor. If they had listened to the radar operator, if they had sent the
dispatch urgently, if . . . Able Danger isn't a conspiracy, it's your
government in inaction.


Even if we had Atta's name in 2000, that was long before we decided it
was OK to attack, assassinate, declare war (or make war without
declaration), or otherwise remove entities that might, maybe, could be,
someday, somehow, possibly, threaten the security of the US. There was
a time in the US when people were punished for crimes committed, not
proactively punished for crimes that they just might maybe, could be,
commit in the future.

Welcome to the realization that there isn't some binary divide of
good/evil
or patriotism/treason between the political parties. They are two
marionettes in the same show, operated by the same crew of puppeteers.
Those who blame all of our problems on party A or party B, or subscribe
with knee jerked enthusiasm to every proposal trotted out by party A or
party B have been duped very badly....and between the two major parties
that probably accounts for a majority of the electorate.