T1B

Our enemies are at war with us. We really haven't truly engaged just yet...

88 wrote: This country is at war. Most of its citizens do not have a clue. But we are at war peeps.

The way you piss and moan for tax cuts, one wouldn't think so.

Martyred wrote:

88 wrote: This country is at war. Most of its citizens do not have a clue. But we are at war peeps.

The way you piss and moan for tax cuts, one wouldn't think so.

Rack the hell out of that.

88 wrote:This country is at war. Most of its citizens do not have a clue. But we are at war peeps.

Like I've been saying for 5 years, there ain't no country called 'Terrorisa'.

Nishlord wrote:

88 wrote:This country is at war. Most of its citizens do not have a clue. But we are at war peeps.

Like I've been saying for 5 years, there ain't no country called 'Terrorisa'.

~~~ phones travel agent....cancels vacation ~~~

Nishlord wrote:Like I've been saying for 5 years, there ain't no country called 'Terrorisa'.

Isn't that where Annie lives?

This piece is fucking ace, by the way.

8:37:56
WATSON: What?
DOOLEY: Whoa!
WATSON: What was that?
ROUNTREE: Is that real-world?
DOOLEY: Real-world hijack.
WATSON: Cool!

Nishlord wrote:

88 wrote:This country is at war. Most of its citizens do not have a clue. But we are at war peeps.

Like I've been saying for 5 years, there ain't no country called 'Terrorisa'.

nuke 'em anyway

Vanity Fair is such a compelling read.

Find something else to red and stop your hand wringing.

I read the entire damn article.

Reason 911 why I'll never forget.

We did get caught with out pants down, because we were so damned naive as to not imagine that anything like this could ever happen.

Nobody believed that Pearl Harbor would happen, either.

I'm also damn sure that the Japs didn't believe that Nagasaki and Hiroshima would happen.

88 wrote:The worst part, in my opinion, is that no matter how hard we try, we cannot prevent another attack similar to this one again in the future.

Bullshit.

You try getting on an airplane lately?

Getting a passport?

We may be slow to learn (and to anger), but once a lesson has been taught, we ain't forgetting it.

Derron, we have our differences, but on this we agree:

Send 'em all to hell with a slab of bacon clenched between their teeth.

War Wagon;
You wouldn't believe the number of employees at SeaTac that are from Somalia. It would suprise me not that one of them might be sleepers. We might not have another highjacking, but it wouldn't be hard to take down an airliner in a crowded area (either by planted bomb or SAM).

The ferry system in Washington is another area that's a fat plum for terrorists. They've already been observed scoping them out, & summertime provides a potential body count of close to 1,000.

Terrorists have plenty of opportunities to make a huge strike again.

88 wrote:Unquestionably, the military didn't have time or resources to do jack shit about anything.

08:37:52BOSTON CENTER: Hi. Boston Center T.M.U. [Traffic Management Unit], we have a problem here. We have a hijacked aircraft headed towards New York, and we need you guys to, we need someone to scramble some F-16s or something up there, help us out.

9:37 Pentagon explosion.

They could not fly a jet 13 miles in an hour? Landis could do it on his bike in a third the time... unjuiced.

Wakey Wake, a-holes!

The Project For The New American Century--a bizarre cabal of fanatical Israel supporters--stated clearly that what was necessary for the (current) implementation of their radical (and thoroughly illegal, immoral--hang-by-the-balls international war crime) agenda was a new "Pearl Harbor."

And they pulled it off rather easily.

Gee, a total STANDDOWN of NORAD on the one day it was necessary.

But, as 88 so earnestly implores--in the fatuous manner of a FOX News hack--..."We're At War!!!"


And this means....?...

--the immediate shredding of the constitution,

--the immediate ignoring of international law,

--the immediate attack on the Arab world,

--the immediate incurrance of unprecedented, unpayable DEBT!!!!!!!!


WELL, GUESS WHAT?

People are waking up. Fuck Rusp Limpdick and Rove's smear corps. The truth, like water, is finding its way to the surface.


Did you really think the Cheney/Rummy gang would get over?

Did you really think such pathetic phoneys as the Chimp and Condi and Bremer would get anywhere....except caught in their own vile quagmire?


It's coming down sooner than you think! :wink:

Diego in Seattle wrote:War Wagon;
You wouldn't believe the number of employees at SeaTac that are from Somalia. It would suprise me not that one of them might be sleepers. We might not have another highjacking, but it wouldn't be hard to take down an airliner in a crowded area (either by planted bomb or SAM).

The ferry system in Washington is another area that's a fat plum for terrorists. They've already been observed scoping them out, & summertime provides a potential body count of close to 1,000.

You’re saying that terrorists have been observed scoping out ferries, and nothing was done? I think you’re an idiot.

88 wrote:
Really? I'd love to see the logic on that one. Did we force Japan to wage war with Russia and China before they attacked Pearl Harbor, or was that just them fucking around until we forced them to attack us?

Put down the GI JOE dolls and read a little history on America's trade and tariff
policy towards Japan at the beginning of the 20th century.

I guess your curiosity isn't piqued until something goes "Boom!".

Nishlord wrote:

88 wrote:This country is at war. Most of its citizens do not have a clue. But we are at war peeps.

Like I've been saying for 5 years, there ain't no country called 'Terrorisa'.

right, they're Islamic facists. kill em all.

Derron, we have our differences, but on this we agree:

Send 'em all to hell with a slab of bacon clenched between their teeth.

I will rack that.

I think we need to shove a ham up their ass also, so that when they get to hell, instead of finding and fucking 72 virgins, Satan has to pull that ham out of their ass before he buttfucks them for eternity.

88 wrote: FDR was a war-monger itching for a fight?

It's called "The McCollum Memo". Read it.


"Of critical importance in this memo is the portion that reads:

9. It is not believed that in the present state of political opinion the United States government is capable of declaring war against Japan without more ado; and it is barely possible that vigorous action on our part might lead the Japanese to modify their attitude. Therefore, the following course of action is suggested:

A. Make an arrangement with Britain for the use of British bases in the Pacific, particularly Singapore.

B. Make an arrangement with Holland for the use of base facilities and acquisition of supplies in the Dutch East Indies.

C. Give all possible aid to the Chinese government of Chiang-Kai-Shek.

D. Send a division of long range heavy cruisers to the Orient, Philippines, or Singapore.

E. Send two divisions of submarines to the Orient.

F. Keep the main strength of the U.S. fleet now in the Pacific in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands.

G. Insist that the Dutch refuse to grant Japanese demands for undue economic concessions, particularly oil.

H. Completely embargo all U.S. trade with Japan, in collaboration with a similar embargo imposed by the British Empire.

10. If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better. At all events we must be fully prepared to accept the threat of war.

- H. McCollum"

88 wrote:

Martyred wrote:

88 wrote:
Really? I'd love to see the logic on that one. Did we force Japan to wage war with Russia and China before they attacked Pearl Harbor, or was that just them fucking around until we forced them to attack us?

Put down the GI JOE dolls and read a little history on America's trade and tariff
policy towards Japan at the beginning of the 20th century.

I guess your curiosity isn't piqued until something goes "Boom!".

Using that logic, the United States should have bombed about half the countries on earth. Do you have any idea how many countries have placed tarriff's on our goods and services over the years?

You are pathetic. Again. How did the United States provoke Japan to attack the United States? Why would the United States want that to happen? FDR was a war-monger itching for a fight?

Japanese occupation of northern Indochina in 1940 led to a U.S. embargo of iron and steel. Japanese occupation of southern Indochina in 1941 led FDR (Dean Acheson, actually) to freeze Japanese assets in the United States. This was essentially an oil embargo, as the U.S. collaborated with the Dutch, who controlled most of the oil shipments in that region.

Since Japan could not fight China, much less the Soviet Union, without access to oil, they prepared to fight for and secure Indonesia by attacking the U.S. fleet in the Pacific.

That FDR took an aggressive posture with Japan prior to that is undeniable.

I wouldn't go beating my chest about how you're in the minority of those who "know" we're at war when you're ignorant to much of the history that surrounds it.

titlover wrote:

Nishlord wrote:

88 wrote:This country is at war. Most of its citizens do not have a clue. But we are at war peeps.

Like I've been saying for 5 years, there ain't no country called 'Terrorisa'.

right, they're Islamic facists. kill em all.

That pathetic attitude was part of the reason why it happened in the first place, fuckwit. Did you have that all your mediocre life, or were you wringing your hands and screaming "But why do they HATE us?" on 9/11?

When I hear those women on the tapes, I can't help thinking of...

88 wrote: Japan was careening out of control long before the attack on Pearl Harbor. Read the Rape of Nanking, for a frank description of the Japanese imperial mindset in the late 1930's. The United States was not itching for a fight with Japan. Hell, the United States was already worried about losing Europe to the Axis powers.

I'm sorry. Was there someone in this thread defending Japanese Imperialism?

Any takers? No?

"Hell, the United States was already worried about losing Europe to the Axis powers."

As opposed the the "evil" Soviets that you right-whingers are always reminding us of?

Nishlord wrote:

titlover wrote:

Nishlord wrote: Like I've been saying for 5 years, there ain't no country called 'Terrorisa'.

right, they're Islamic facists. kill em all.

That pathetic attitude was part of the reason why it happened in the first place, fuckwit. Did you have that all your mediocre life, or were you wringing your hands and screaming "But why do they HATE us?" on 9/11?

When I hear those women on the tapes, I can't help thinking of...

I think he was joking Nish. You remember "jokes" right ? If you're having trouble remembering what a "joke" is, think of your knowledge of U.K. and world history. That SHOULD make YOU laugh because it makes ME laugh.

They HATE ...... US, primarily because of YOU, but since YOU were unable to keep hold of YOUR conquests and have to rely on US to protect economic interests in those regions, WE have become the focus of THEIR hate. WE tended to profit quite well from YOUR original meddlings.

Enjoy your crumpet. A lot of tough motherfuckers from the U.K. paid for it.

Nishlord wrote:

titlover wrote:

Nishlord wrote: Like I've been saying for 5 years, there ain't no country called 'Terrorisa'.

right, they're Islamic facists. kill em all.

That pathetic attitude was part of the reason why it happened in the first place, fuckwit. Did you have that all your mediocre life, or were you wringing your hands and screaming "But why do they HATE us?" on 9/11?

When I hear those women on the tapes, I can't help thinking of...

I was wondering why there was no response way before 9-11 douchefuck.

1st world trade center, USS Cole(wtf?)

I know why they hate 'us'. because we are not Islamists. nothing more.

Martyred wrote:

88 wrote: Japan was careening out of control long before the attack on Pearl Harbor. Read the Rape of Nanking, for a frank description of the Japanese imperial mindset in the late 1930's. The United States was not itching for a fight with Japan. Hell, the United States was already worried about losing Europe to the Axis powers.

I'm sorry. Was there someone in this thread defending Japanese Imperialism?

Any takers? No?

"Hell, the United States was already worried about losing Europe to the Axis powers."

As opposed the the "evil" Soviets that you right-whingers are always reminding us of?

so we should call them compassionate Commies?

Tom In VA wrote:...but since YOU were unable to keep hold of YOUR conquests.... and have to rely on US to protect economic interests in those regions...

You're not embarrassed by this? Unabashed imperialism?

But no, they hate you because you have Pier1, Denny's and 50 Cent CD's.

Martyred wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:...but since YOU were unable to keep hold of YOUR conquests.... and have to rely on US to protect economic interests in those regions...

You're not embarrassed by this? Unabashed imperialism?

There's really nothing I can do about it.

Tom In VA wrote:

Martyred wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:...but since YOU were unable to keep hold of YOUR conquests.... and have to rely on US to protect economic interests in those regions...

You're not embarrassed by this? Unabashed imperialism?

There's really nothing I can do about it.

Do you have a conscience?

You don't seem to have a problem with trampling over other people's liberty when it comes to providing you with a cushy existence.

Do you ever think about the way people live under tyrannical regimes that your country supports, as long as you have cheap imports and low wage labour?

Martyred wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:

Martyred wrote: You're not embarrassed by this? Unabashed imperialism?

There's really nothing I can do about it.

1. Do you have a conscience?

2. You don't seem to have a problem with trampling over other people's liberty when it comes to providing you with a cushy existence.

3. Do you ever think about the way people live under tyrannical regimes that your country supports, as long as you have cheap imports and low wage labour?

1. Yes I have a conscience.

2. Nothing is what it seems.

3. Yes I do.

mvscal wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:Pearl Harbor provided the persuasion needed to get the public behind it.

So we just gave the Japs a free swing at the Pacific Fleet...ie the only force we had to oppose them in order to get into a war with them.

Great "critical thinking" there, fuckwit. I'm amazed that you can actually breath unassisted.

but look how our carriers were not present at pearl.........CLEARLY a tactful bait fdr coordinated to draw the japs in and pull us into the war

Degenerate wrote: Japanese occupation of northern Indochina in 1940 led to a U.S. embargo of iron and steel. Japanese occupation of southern Indochina in 1941 led FDR (Dean Acheson, actually) to freeze Japanese assets in the United States. This was essentially an oil embargo, as the U.S. collaborated with the Dutch, who controlled most of the oil shipments in that region.

Since Japan could not fight China, much less the Soviet Union, without access to oil, they prepared to fight for and secure Indonesia by attacking the U.S. fleet in the Pacific.

That FDR took an aggressive posture with Japan prior to that is undeniable.

I wouldn't go beating my chest about how you're in the minority of those who "know" we're at war when you're ignorant to much of the history that surrounds it.

Yup.

Huge RACKS for 88, though -- in one freaking post, he made Martyred right for the first time ever...no small task.

CLEARLY i was being sarcastic

88 wrote: The NORAD tapes show that the military had less than 9 minutes to scramble two jets (out of a total of four armed jets in the entire northeastern sector) and try to go find the hijacked airliner.

Who said they didn't?

Thus, the military had absolutely no time whatsoever to intercept the second airliner.

Who said they didn't?

The military had two minutes and five seconds notice that an unknown, presumably hijacked plane was flying somewhere over Washington D.C., gimp.

They had an hour from the 1st hijack till the pentagon explosion. You might think they are too dumb to do anything in that time, but I am not. I’ve seen reports of them intercepting stray aircraft (both pre and post 911) and it didn’t take an hour.

Two planes hit buildings in NY and 30+ min later there is STILL no air support over our capital? What kind of morons are these people? Answer: They are not morons, so there must be another explanation.

Learn to read. Then learn to apply what you read into your argument. Then get back to me.

88 wrote:1. What benefit would the United States reap by having most of its Pacific Fleet sent to the bottom of Pearl Harbor?

Believe it or not, the powers-that-be at the time weren't completely stupid -- Pearl Harbor was heavily defended against any sort of naval attack, and was merely prone to air attack, which considering the level at which the Japanese "brought the noise," air defenses were pretty darn good, as well. If you know your fleet is to be attacked, you put them somewhere you can defend them, unless you want to disperse them, which probably isn't the best idea when an enemy navy is crossing the ocean to kick your ass.

2. If one buys the argument that the US provoked the Japanese to attack them at Pearl Harbor (and maybe even knew about it and let it happen anyway :meds: ), what military advantage is obtained by letting the Japanese sink the fleet?

OK...you're not catching on.

The only "argument" is inside your head...to the rest of us, it's "fact," not "argument."(Not the "let it happen part -- the "provoked the Japanese to attck" part).

And you wanna put up that link, or cite some sort of source to where the US "let the Japanese sink the fleet"?

I'll be holding my breath long and hard on that one...really.

It was pretty epic how the Japs didn't even suffer ONE casualty, nor did they lose a plane. (Yup, this is where the :rolleyes: goes)

3. If FDR set up the Navy for slaughter by the Japanese so he could get into the fight, why didn't he have the rest of the military in place to handle the
onslaught?

Same as Stupid Question #1 -- leaving the fleet scattered and out at sea would have provided easy pickens for the Japanese. Putting it in a HEAVILY DEFENDED harbor allowed them to defend them as a unit.

And the relatively low number of losses in the fleet(as compared to what might have happened if they were playing "tag" in the open ocean) is kind of the proof-of-the-pudding.

4. If what you say is true, FDR is responsible for the deaths of millions of innocent souls. In addition to the thousands killed on December 7, 1941, his policy to provoke Japan into a bloody war cost tens of thousands of US lives and more than one million on the Japanese side. Why isn't FDR considered a war criminal?

There you go with that silly "if" word again...

By limiting the flow of raw materials and fuel into Japan (which happened...see if you can follow along...happened BEFORE PEARL HARBOR), FDR saved MILLIONS AND MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of lives...many of those being Chinese(nice gratitude, bitches). The Japanese were slaughtering entire cities. By the USA limiting Japanese resources via blockade/embargo, it forced the Japanese attention to turn west, and the Pacific War became of much greater importance than their systematic slaughter of the Chinese People.

RACK FDR. Saved millions of lives in Asia, probably saved millions of lives in Europe(although he failed to ralley enough early support for France, due to politics(to an extent), which could have saved millions more...but there, of course, was a guy named Bush getting rich off it).

And quite possibly saved millions of lives right here in the USA.

RACK FDR.

RACK every last motherfucker who bravely fought the Axis.

Sudden Sam wrote: We did purposely push Japan to the point of attacking us at Pearl.

Yes and no.

We made moves that essentially gave them the option of halting the imperialist activities in SE Asia/the Pacific, or they had to step into the lion's den.

They chose poorly.

I bet FDR rode a Harley.

socal wrote:I bet FDR rode a Harley.

WHO MADE THE MOTORCYCLES THE US USED IN WW2?

HUH?

HOW YOU LIKE ME NOW, YOU UNPATRIOTIC MOTHERFUCKERS?
HUH?

That's right, bitches...if it wasn't for HARLEY FUCKING DAVIDSON, you'd all be speaking German right now...or Japanese....or some language spoken by people of bad breath.

Dinsdale wrote:

socal wrote:I bet FDR rode a Harley.

WHO MADE THE MOTORCYCLES THE US USED IN WW2?

HUH?

HOW YOU LIKE ME NOW, YOU UNPATRIOTIC MOTHERFUCKERS?
HUH?

That's right, bitches...if it wasn't for HARLEY FUCKING DAVIDSON, you'd all be speaking German right now...or Japanese....or some language spoken by people of bad breath.

Ich bin U & Ler.

88 wrote:I provided a link where you could read, in real-time, what happened.

According to your link they had 30+ min to get a plane in the air over the seat of our National Government.

But you chose not to do that because it doesn't fit within your fantasyland version of the events.

IF you could read you would see that I did no such thing. Your link says they had 30+ min to get fighters from Andrews to DC. It is 13 miles from Andrews to DC.

Why would the military send its armed jets to cover Washington D.C. when New York was being attacked?

Because it is their job to defend DC from attack and America was under attack maybe?

How would they know to do this...?

It was the first thing I thought of when I saw the second plane hit the WTC.

How would they have gotten all these fighter planes into the skies that simply didn't exist?

'All these fighters?' WTF is that? It only takes one plane to shoot a jet down (if it was a jet.) 'Simply didn't exist?' We don't have fighters to scramble? Can you even form a coherent thought on the subject?

9-11-2001
8-22-2006

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash4.htm

A datediff function returns a difference of 1807 days. Which is 1+8+0+7 = 16

1427, 1+4+2+7 = 14


2,1 =3 1,4 = 3 6,3 = 3


16-14 = 2


333 * 2 = 666

I'm worried. All my readings point to something big on the horizon.
Let's say this Twinkie



represents the normal amount of psychokinetic energy in the New York area. Based on this morning's reading, it would be a Twinkie thirty-five feet long, weighing approximately six hundred pounds.

mvscal wrote:

Dinsdale wrote:If you know your fleet is to be attacked, you put them somewhere you can defend them,

Yes, you put them out to sea where they can operate as they are intended to do rather than leave them in port where they become sitting ducks.

If you are attempting to suggest that the fleet was in a stronger defensive position in port, you are a fucking moron. Straight up.

you mean a fighter jet doesn't have the best advantage on the ground safely guarded in the hangar?

wtf?