should we still anticipate something for 9/11 anniversary?

Thumper · #1 09-10-2005, 05:33 PM

and by the way, does anyone know where I can d/l some Stan Monteith lectures?

#2 09-10-2005, 05:40 PM

I really, truly wish we would cease and desist from referring to tragic event dates as ANNIVERSARYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

An anniversary is a GOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, Thumper. Couldn't resist.

Don't know about the lectures. I checked out iidb and registered, but they wouldn't let me use BlueAngel.

Thumper · #3 09-10-2005, 05:42 PM

try putting a space in it :-)

#4 09-10-2005, 06:45 PM

As for your question, "should we anticipate?" Would they dare?

As for your suggestion, I'll try the space; however, it just doesn't feel right any other way.

"NO SPACE!" I'm just following past instructions.

:lol: 8-) :lol: 8-) :lol: 8-)

nohope187 · #5 09-10-2005, 07:11 PM

Well, lets look at this numeralogically shall we:
9/11/2005>>>>> 9 + 11 + 2 + 5 = 27, 2 + 7 = 9. So is that significant? :-P

freeman · #6 09-10-2005, 08:06 PM

I think we've had our next act of terror: Hurricane Katrina.
When you stop to think about it, the pieces start to fit:

1)The rumors about the military leaves being cancelled -- they knew they were going to need all of the manpower available for the occupation and seizure of the city.

2)The rumors about General Kevin Byrnes being dismissed because he was attempting a coup (reported in the lamestream media as punishment for "adultery") -- maybe the general was closing in on this pending operation, and they needed him out of the way. Or maybe he was someone in the chain of command that they didn't trust to take their "stand down" orders until the situation turned into a full-blown crisis.

3)They know after the London bombings that no one is buying into their fabricated acts of terrorism anymore -- so they needed to give it a new and unique twist: make the next event look like a natural disaster.

4)Katrina serves the same purpose as another 9/11 -- It weakens the country further, heightens internal conflict and provides the government with more excuses to impose additional martial law-type restrictions and infringement of civil liberties.

5)Even without a bin Laden or Saddam to scapegoat, the New Orleans Holocaust may still provide the neocons with the necessary incentives for further military aggression in the Middle East -- to divert public attention and to lower runaway energy prices by seizing more oil-rich real estate.

nohope187 · #7 09-10-2005, 08:17 PM

Yeah, I doubt anything will happen tomorrow other than more NOLA coverup.

Thumper · #8 09-10-2005, 08:44 PM

Now that I think about it, the NO disaster makes sense. The goal is to have a police state. Whether it's terrorism or natural disasters and by with holding help onto the point of social turmoil they've acheived the same net result :-P :-P :-P

freeman · #9 09-10-2005, 09:23 PM

...then again, what do I know?
:-P ;-) :lol:

#10 09-11-2005, 06:42 AM

FEMA's director was a pawn, no?

No experience.

Sent packing.

Made to look like he failed, but he played his role.

Doesn't matter.

There was still a four day STANDDOWN and it wasn't due to his inexperience or mishandling.

What? Bush doesn't watch TV? Doesn't keep up with impending Category 5 Hurricanes? FEMA doesn't receive briefings?

Any person in their "right" mind without political stature could see HELP was needed desperately.

Are we suppose to believe the President and his men are this DUMB???? or this calculating?

We all witnessed people dying and suffering as the calvary stood still.

WHY?

Simple questions deserve simple answers without years of investigations.

Why the STAND DOWN?

Several reasons, but most important was an attempt to take control of Lousianna's National Guard.

Two millitary failures within four years!

And, they want to Federalize the National Guard?????

Their plan is advancing at lightening speed.

I'm gettin' out of DODGE!!!