Re: WTC attack forewarned 2 hours early?... and very interesting

edited September 2001 in General Discussion

Comments

  • edited December 1969

    Both.
    I don't know the significance of it not being reported in the
    major media- ie- network TV , Fox, CNN, etc, just that it hasn't
    been. a blurb on a .com does not count.
    It just seems that if someone had advanced knowledge and warned
    a group of people, they are a direct link to who did it and
    there is a good place to start.
    I am just doing my best to not remain ignorant in the light of
    what's being fed to us in the mainstream media and continuing to
    question...

    Well, perhaps it's not been getting major airplay because, as every story about it says, the FBI is still investigating it. It may turn out to be nothing. It may turn out to be a huge deal. We'll find out, and if it is a significant story, we will see it. (Given the fact that the Internet is rapidly becoming a major source of news and information, I also disagree with your view that a Washington Post and an ABC News website "don't count" as media outlets.)

    Also, there is a difference between questioning and insinuating, and your lead-in, which started with the bullshit story about 4000 Israelis being forewarned not to come to work in the WTC, seems a lot more like the latter. It's a good idea to question, but it is important to know the source of the "information" that forms the basis of your questions -- and in this case, the "4000 Israelis forewarned" story came from a pro-Palestinian news agency and Pravda. Maybe someone finds those sources more credible than the mainstream U.S. media, but I do not.
  • edited December 1969
    Re: WTC attack forewarned 2 hours early?... and very interesting

    > -- and in this case, the "4000 Israelis forewarned"

    story came from a pro-Palestinian news agency and Pravda. Maybe
    someone finds those sources more credible than the mainstream
    U.S. media, but I do not.

    Yeah I guess here's where a big issue comes up.
    I have no reason to believe their news media is for any reason less credible than our media, unless someone has some proof to dispute what they report.

    And if you look at my post I say that if indeed the 2 hour forewarning is a fact, which it appears to be, that that may preclude the "possibility" of the rumor. A simple "Don't go to wherever you work today, cause we have a serios warning" is enough to be warranted a very important piece of info, imo.

    I'd rather hear details of real investigative reporting and evidence instead of the "spaghetti-western, lowest common denomonator" speak spewed at us by our leadership. This isn't a 50's movie and John Wayne sure isn't gonna ride into Afghanistan and round up those "evil folks".

    "In separateness lies the world's great misery; in compassion lies the world's true strength."

    ~Buddha

    "Youth is the first victim of war; the first fruit of peace. It takes 20 years or more of peace to make a man; it takes only 20 seconds of war to destroy him."

    ~King Baudouin I, King of Belgium

    "Non-violence is not inaction. It is not discussion. It is not for the timid or weak...Non-violence is hard work. It is the willingness to sacrifice. It is the patience to win."

    ~Cesar Chavez

    Off to look at images of peace drawn by children...


  • edited December 1969
    Re: WTC attack forewarned 2 hours early?... and very interesting

    Yeah I guess here's where a big issue comes up.
    I have no reason to believe their news media is for any reason
    less credible than our media, unless someone has some proof to
    dispute what they report.

    Isn't that backwards? If they are making the allegation ("Israel is responsible for this attack") shouldn't they have the burden of coming up with the proof? Just as the US government has a burden to prove that Osama bin Laden was involved?

    I guess I tend to discount stories blaming Israel that are reported in outlets that have (or have demonstrated) a propensity to want to blame Israel for just about every ill in the world.

    After the OKC bombing, there were conspiracy theories about how the FBI warned its agents not to go to work in the building. I'm sure if you look at any significant terrorist attack, you can find somebody afterwards trying to point the finger at the victims or someone associated with them. You have to be careful not to leave your mind so open that anything can crawl in.

    And if you look at my post I say that if indeed the 2 hour
    forewarning is a fact, which it appears to be, that that may
    preclude the "possibility" of the rumor. A simple
    "Don't go to wherever you work today, cause we have a
    serios warning" is enough to be warranted a very important
    piece of info, imo.

    Sure, if it were specific enough to be taken as a "serious warning" and to identify a place where people shouldn't go to work -- surely a message that says "Something bad is going to happen in two hours" isn't enough to shut down every workplace in the country?

    I'd rather hear details of real investigative reporting and
    evidence instead of the "spaghetti-western, lowest common
    denomonator" speak spewed at us by our leadership. This
    isn't a 50's movie and John Wayne sure isn't gonna ride into
    Afghanistan and round up those "evil folks".

    I agree with you on the last point, but I wonder how you distinguish "real" investigative reporting from any other kind. Is it only "real" if it contradicts what the mainstream media are saying?

    On a related note, do you believe that the public has a right to know every detail of the investigation as it develops, or is the government justified in withholding some stories until a later point (say, until evidence is fully understood or to avoid tipping its hand)?
  • edited December 1969
    Re: WTC attack forewarned 2 hours early?... and very interesting

    Isn't that backwards? If they are making the allegation
    ("Israel is responsible for this attack") shouldn't
    they have the burden of coming up with the proof? Just as the US
    government has a burden to prove that Osama bin Laden was
    involved?

    I was not pointing to any specific story they have run - as I have not read any, and I have no basis nor in the position to determine whether what they report is true or false. I was saying just because they are a Palestinian news organization, I attempt to not fall into the simple trap to believe they are not credible.

    I guess I tend to discount stories blaming Israel that are
    reported in outlets that have (or have demonstrated) a
    propensity to want to blame Israel for just about every ill in
    the world.

    After the OKC bombing, there were conspiracy theories about how
    the FBI warned its agents not to go to work in the building. I'm
    sure if you look at any significant terrorist attack, you can
    find somebody afterwards trying to point the finger at the
    victims or someone associated with them. You have to be careful
    not to leave your mind so open that anything can crawl in.

    True, just as were conspiracy theories that this was a middle east terrorist act initially, all avenues have to be looked at.
    Leaving one's mind open so that anything can crawl is a problem of everyday life, it's what we do with what comes in that matters.

    Sure, if it were specific enough to be taken as a "serious
    warning" and to identify a place where people shouldn't go
    to work -- surely a message that says "Something bad is
    going to happen in two hours" isn't enough to shut down
    every workplace in the country?

    Well, we don't really know what was said yet do we?

    I agree with you on the last point, but I wonder how you
    distinguish "real" investigative reporting from any
    other kind. Is it only "real" if it contradicts what
    the mainstream media are saying?

    Simple difference to me is when questions are being asked...so far very few questions are being asked overall and the answers are..well...turn on Fox News or CNN and there ya go...

    On a related note, do you believe that the public has a right to
    know every detail of the investigation as it develops, or is the
    government justified in withholding some stories until a later
    point (say, until evidence is fully understood or to avoid
    tipping its hand)?

    Well of course not the general public shouldn't know every detail while the investigation develops...but what you have developing is a situation where we are being prepped by the current administration to accept details never being revealed and the whole operation to continue to move on indefinitly without answers ever directly being given.

    I would be comfortable even knowing that some trusted public reporter was being detailed(while maintaining secrecy and security) of everything along the way, ensuring to then at some point reveal it to the public. Perhaps that is happening, but I do not know of it.

    As a side, do you know anything about International Treaty Laws BR? :)
    I'd love to at sometime discuss the US Gov'ts violation of over 300 of em with sovereign nations. Trust is such a delicate thing.

    "Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all."

    ~George Washington


  • edited December 1969
    Re: WTC attack forewarned 2 hours early?... and very interesting

    I was not pointing to any specific story they have run - as I
    have not read any, and I have no basis nor in the position to
    determine whether what they report is true or false. I was
    saying just because they are a Palestinian news organization, I
    attempt to not fall into the simple trap to believe they are not
    credible.

    Ah. I was looking at the original report of the "4000 Israelis were forewarned," and not taking it very seriously because of the source's clear bias.

    True, just as were conspiracy theories that this was a middle
    east terrorist act initially, all avenues have to be looked at.
    Leaving one's mind open so that anything can crawl is a problem
    of everyday life, it's what we do with what comes in that
    matters.

    Well, there's healthy skepticism and then there's sheer contrarianism. You have to be careful not to let the one shade over into the other, else you come off looking like a crank. (That's the generic "you," not the personal "you.")

    Well, we don't really know what was said yet do we?

    One of the reports quoted the Odigo VP as saying the messages were non-specific, and that it was the timing, not the content, that made the messages interesting.

    Well of course not the general public shouldn't know every
    detail while the investigation develops...but what you have
    developing is a situation where we are being prepped by the
    current administration to accept details never being revealed
    and the whole operation to continue to move on indefinitly
    without answers ever directly being given.

    And...? Look, I agree that the US government shouldn't be out there doing whatever the hell it wants without accountability to the people, and that

    I would be comfortable even knowing that some trusted public
    reporter was being detailed(while maintaining secrecy and
    security) of everything along the way, ensuring to then at some
    point reveal it to the public. Perhaps that is happening, but I
    do not know of it.

    Who is that "trusted public reporter"? Who do you trust? Sounds like you don't trust anyone in the mainstream media, so who does that suggest? Matt Drudge? Art Bell? Jon Stewart? (Actually, I would trust Jon Stewart.)

    And of course, if that were happening, you wouldn't know about it, pretty much by definition, until the reporter was free to tell about it.

    As a side, do you know anything about International Treaty Laws
    BR? :)

    Not much. Theoretically, once Congress ratifies a treaty the President has signed, it's supposed to be the law of the land, on a par with any other federal law.

    I'd love to at sometime discuss the US Gov'ts violation of over
    300 of em with sovereign nations. Trust is such a delicate
    thing.

    The problem with international treaties is that we don't have an effective enforcement mechanism. The whole scheme pretty much runs like the Prisoner's Dilemma, in which each player's incentive to cooperate rather than betray/compete is largely dictated by perceived self-interest, including whether the two players will ever have to play each other again (i.e., whether it matters if the other guy trusts you). With the US, there is also the weighting factor that the US is such a big gorilla that most nations have to play with us, even if we've screwed them in the past. It's not pleasant to think about, perhaps, but it's not difficult to understand, and unless and until there is someplace where aggrieved nations can enforce treaty obligations against each other, it's going to continue that way.

  • edited December 1969
    news media

    well considering that the National Enquierer is now considered news...

    dunno which program i was watching, but it was after the election reporting errors. they were talking to reporters and one of them said "It is not my job to tell the news, it is my job to tell a story." which means that they don't care about telling you what happens, they want to get ratings so they will omit and slant stories so they are more sensational.

    Personally i tend to believe the BBC more than any station around here. They tend to give more facts instead of trying to make it a better story.

    "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's rainin" - The Outlaw Josey Wales

    image
  • edited December 1969
    Re: WTC attack forewarned 2 hours early?... and very interesting

    just a quick thanks for the discussion.

    It's apathy, ignorance, the low level of discussion and debate, and the lack of vision for changing the future and trying to move on as global race which frighten me most in these times.

    VJ

    "The Art of Peace begins with you. Work on yourself and your appointed task in the Art of Peace. Everyone has a spirit that can be refined, a body that can be trained in some manner, a suitable path to follow. You are here for no other purpose than to realize your inner divinity and manifest your innate enlightenment. Foster peace in your own life and then apply the Art to all that you encounter."

    ~ Morihei Ueshiba

  • edited December 1969
    Thanks as well.

    When I see a long thread of new messages between 2 folks here about the topic at hand, I half expect it to be filled with vitriol. Good to see it kept friendly and civil. AND demonstrating 2 views that I also share, often in conflict with each other.

    It's tough tough going nowadays for some of us. We wake up in the middle of the night, scared about the future.

    Anyway, I'm rambling...

    - Miguel

    Bungie Sightings
  • edited December 1969
    Re: WTC attack forewarned 2 hours early?... and very interesting

    just a quick thanks for the discussion.

    Likewise.

    It's apathy, ignorance, the low level of discussion and debate,
    and the lack of vision for changing the future and trying to
    move on as global race which frighten me most in these times.

    Yep. It's refreshing to have a civil debate about something, even when it appears we won't ever see eye-to-eye 100% on the subject. 8-)
  • edited December 1969
    ::Hugs Free:: (nt)

    When I see a long thread of new messages between 2 folks here
    about the topic at hand, I half expect it to be filled with
    vitriol. Good to see it kept friendly and civil. AND
    demonstrating 2 views that I also share, often in conflict with
    each other.

    It's tough tough going nowadays for some of us. We wake up in
    the middle of the night, scared about the future.

    Anyway, I'm rambling...

    - Miguel
    woo. (Not an HEC, btw).
Sign In or Register to comment.