Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   9/11 Loose change 2nd edition
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 46 of 60 (319315)
06-08-2006 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by crashfrog
06-08-2006 9:27 PM


Relevel of evidence
Oh, right. I mean, how unreasonable of me. Presumably, when you encounter a woman standing over a dead man with two holes in his chest, a smoking gun in one of her hands and pictures of the dead man and his mistress in the other, you don't know what to think, right? Surely the facts that he's been shot and she's holding the smoking gun are just coincidences, right? I mean, god forbid you come to the conclusion that you've just stumbled on a murder motivated by jealousy, because that would be "reading the minds and motives of people based on time-proximate events", right?
Of course that's what I'm doing. That's how we know what people's minds and motives are - by what they do and when they do it. How else would we arrive at the truth about what people do?
If you have that level of fact you should call the police.
If you can really read minds you have a million dollar talent.
Edited by ts, : changed title

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by crashfrog, posted 06-08-2006 9:27 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by crashfrog, posted 06-08-2006 10:17 PM tsig has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 47 of 60 (319346)
06-08-2006 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by tsig
06-08-2006 9:43 PM


Re: Relevel of evidence
If you have that level of fact you should call the police.
Oh, so now time-proximate coincidences do have some significance?
When one person is murdered by a citizen, you call the police. Who do you call when the man who may have murdered 3000 people is the man every police officer works for?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by tsig, posted 06-08-2006 9:43 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by tsig, posted 06-08-2006 10:51 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 60 (319347)
06-08-2006 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by crashfrog
06-06-2006 11:53 PM


Re: Conspiracies
Crashfrog writes:
I don't think the WTC was leveled by explosives. I think it was leveled by terrorists on airplanes - with the full foreknowledge of top government officials. Somebody, after all, called San Francisco mayor Willie Brown and told him not to fly on that day, eight hours before the first plane hit. Somebody applied the pressure that meant that warning after warning about the attacks was ignored and dismissed. Somebody made $5 million dollars betting against United and American airlines on September 10th.
Somebody scheduled four seperate wargames on the very same day, including one that simulated airplanes crashing into an NRO office. Somebody decided not to scramble interceptors for the subsequent hijacked airplanes. Somebody - Bush - made it absolutely clear that, given a tragedy to rally America around, he'd spend that capital on an invasion of Iraq. In the subsequent days Cheney told intelligence staff to search for any possible connection between Iraq and 9/11, even implying they should fabricate some.
Those are the facts that I'm aware of, and an explanation that our government was unprepared and incompetent seems to me to be the explanation that multiplies complexites - they say that "9/11 changed everything", well, apparently it changed government officials who were such idiots that they couldn't see it coming into geniuses who were able to take advantage of the tragedy in almost every concievable way.
'
This all brings to mind all the conspiracies of Slick Willie such as the Vince Foster mystries, the Ron Brown death mystery, as well as about 20 more mysterious deaths of Clinton associated folks, Waco stuff, et al, et al.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by crashfrog, posted 06-06-2006 11:53 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by crashfrog, posted 06-08-2006 10:29 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 49 of 60 (319352)
06-08-2006 10:29 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Buzsaw
06-08-2006 10:18 PM


Re: Conspiracies
This all brings to mind all the conspiracies of Slick Willie such as the Vince Foster mystries, the Ron Brown death mystery, as well as about 20 more mysterious deaths of Clinton associated folks, Waco stuff, et al, et al.
Sure. On the other hand, a lot of this stuff was invented out of whole cloth by a nationwide organization dedicated to the destruction of the Clinton presidency at all costs. Kenneth Starr investigated the Foster death, and if that guy concluded that it was a suicide, wouldn't he be the first person to sieze on any credible evidence that the official story was a cover-up?
Ron Brown? Died in a plane crash during a difficult instrument landing in inclement weather. If that was murder, then Paul Wellstone was murdered, too. Waco? If you're talking about the flame-throwing tanks, that's not a jet of flame - that's a piece of sheetrock falling off the front of the APC.
I'm no Clinton defender - in fact I wish I hadn't been such a Clinton foe, because it carried over to voting against Gore in 2000 - but most of these theories don't seem to hold any water. There's not a very compelling interest for the Clintons in most of them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Buzsaw, posted 06-08-2006 10:18 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Buzsaw, posted 06-09-2006 8:31 PM crashfrog has replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 50 of 60 (319373)
06-08-2006 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by crashfrog
06-08-2006 10:17 PM


Re: ReWho do you call?
Oh, so now time-proximate coincidences do have some significance?
When one person is murdered by a citizen, you call the police. Who do you call when the man who may have murdered 3000 people is the man every police officer works for?
I did not know that the columbia Police Department was under direct federal control.
If you have the evidence you say a simple phone call should be enough.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by crashfrog, posted 06-08-2006 10:17 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by crashfrog, posted 06-08-2006 11:32 PM tsig has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 51 of 60 (319391)
06-08-2006 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by tsig
06-08-2006 10:51 PM


Re: ReWho do you call?
I did not know that the columbia Police Department was under direct federal control.
Are you under the mistaken impression that they have the Constitutional authority to arrest, detain, and investigate the president?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by tsig, posted 06-08-2006 10:51 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by tsig, posted 06-09-2006 7:11 PM crashfrog has replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 52 of 60 (319662)
06-09-2006 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by crashfrog
06-08-2006 11:32 PM


Re: ReAuthoritah
Are you under the mistaken impression that they have the Constitutional authority to arrest, detain, and investigate the president?
Crash, you said that all police officers worked for Bush, I asked when this happened and you seemed to think I had asked the police to arrest the president.
They would be fuly empowered to arrest him if he committed a crime in their juristiction.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by crashfrog, posted 06-08-2006 11:32 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by crashfrog, posted 06-09-2006 11:26 PM tsig has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 53 of 60 (319708)
06-09-2006 8:31 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by crashfrog
06-08-2006 10:29 PM


Re: Conspiracies
There's a lot more to some of the Clinton mysteries than what you've mentioned and cattlegate has the smoking gun. My point was that I see your conspiracy stuff as no more verifiable.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by crashfrog, posted 06-08-2006 10:29 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by crashfrog, posted 06-10-2006 12:45 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 54 of 60 (319814)
06-09-2006 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by tsig
06-09-2006 7:11 PM


Re: ReAuthoritah
Crash, you said that all police officers worked for Bush
Nominally. The police are an arm of the executive branch; the President is the Chief Executive.
They would be fuly empowered to arrest him if he committed a crime in their juristiction.
I'm pretty sure that's not the case. Moreover, they don't possess the legal tools to circumvent the President's determination of which of his actions are state secrets, so they wouldn't even be able to begin an investigation of his activites, legal or not.
But maybe you can advance a legal theory that contradicts me? What presidents have ever been arrested by capitol police?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by tsig, posted 06-09-2006 7:11 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by tsig, posted 06-10-2006 12:20 PM crashfrog has replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 55 of 60 (319931)
06-10-2006 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by crashfrog
06-09-2006 11:26 PM


Re: ReAuthoritah
OFF TOPIC
Nominally. The police are an arm of the executive branch; the President is the Chief Executive.
They would be fuly empowered to arrest him if he committed a crime in their juristiction.
I'm pretty sure that's not the case. Moreover, they don't possess the legal tools to circumvent the President's determination of which of his actions are state secrets, so they wouldn't even be able to begin an investigation of his activites, legal or not.
But maybe you can advance a legal theory that contradicts me? What presidents have ever been arrested by capitol police?
It would be an interesting argument but it is far off topic here and I think we better cease lest we stir the MODS.
However if you want to start a topic about whether the pres is subject to the law I think you will find it most lively.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by crashfrog, posted 06-09-2006 11:26 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 06-10-2006 12:48 PM tsig has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 56 of 60 (319934)
06-10-2006 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Buzsaw
06-09-2006 8:31 PM


Re: Conspiracies
There's a lot more to some of the Clinton mysteries than what you've mentioned
Not really. Most of the "unanswered questions" involved in the "Clinton Mysteries" (lol) are just falsehood promulgated by the Arkansas Project.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Buzsaw, posted 06-09-2006 8:31 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 57 of 60 (319935)
06-10-2006 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by tsig
06-10-2006 12:20 PM


Re: ReAuthoritah
However if you want to start a topic about whether the pres is subject to the law I think you will find it most lively.
Er, I think you misunderstood something. Where have I impled that the President is not subject to the law?
The problem is, he's in the unique position of being able to determine what information the police are allowed to have. It's certainly possible for the President to commit a crime. But how would the police investigate such a crime when the President can simply not allow them to do so? How would a case against the President be made when the President can, by himself, effectively quash any search warrant or subpoena?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by tsig, posted 06-10-2006 12:20 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by tsig, posted 06-10-2006 4:31 PM crashfrog has replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 58 of 60 (320038)
06-10-2006 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by crashfrog
06-10-2006 12:48 PM


Re: ReAuthoritah
Er, I think you misunderstood something. Where have I impled that the President is not subject to the law?
The problem is, he's in the unique position of being able to determine what information the police are allowed to have. It's certainly possible for the President to commit a crime. But how would the police investigate such a crime when the President can simply not allow them to do so? How would a case against the President be made when the President can, by himself, effectively quash any search warrant or subpoena?
You have a rather Royal view of presidential authority, but this is not only off topic on this thread but maybe even the forum. It is EvC.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 06-10-2006 12:48 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by crashfrog, posted 06-10-2006 4:34 PM tsig has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 59 of 60 (320040)
06-10-2006 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by tsig
06-10-2006 4:31 PM


Re: ReAuthoritah
You have a rather Royal view of presidential authority
Not royal, realistic. Your average beat cop, or even your average district attourney, doesn't have the authority to, say, subpoena classified documents, or compel the testimony of the President.
And it's probably good that they don't. Can you imagine how our government would be paralyzed if they did? Could the president ever get anything done if his testimony was being subpoenaed in every court in the country?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by tsig, posted 06-10-2006 4:31 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by tsig, posted 06-11-2006 10:51 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 60 of 60 (320463)
06-11-2006 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by crashfrog
06-10-2006 4:34 PM


Re: ReAuthoritah
Not royal, realistic. Your average beat cop, or even your average district attourney, doesn't have the authority to, say, subpoena classified documents, or compel the testimony of the President.
And it's probably good that they don't. Can you imagine how our government would be paralyzed if they did? Could the president ever get anything done if his testimony was being subpoenaed in every court in the country?
OFF TOPIC are you trying on the MODs? do it with someone else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by crashfrog, posted 06-10-2006 4:34 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024