Wow, Connie, really interesting thoughts ... I'll have to ponder these and respond in the morning, too close to bedtime now!

Sabra, thanks for clarifying, I actually didn't understand what point you were trying to make about the genocide. Actually, I was not trying to draw a parallel between the Nazi government and our government, either before or after their respective "power-grabs." That parallel certainly WOULD be flawed by many, many things (including the focus on racial genocide, but in many other ways as well).

Rather, the parallel I was drawing was between the Nazi's method of grabbing power by means of using a fearful and threatening external crisis (the burning of the Reichstag) and then "solving" the crisis by invoking emergency war powers, suspending civil liberties and vastly expanding military action and police powers, and the current administration's use of the WTC attacks to grab power by offering as "solutions" to the terrorist threat the invocation of emergency war powers, suspending civil liberties and vastly expanding military action and police powers. THAT parallel, I believe, is not flawed but is directly comparable!

Love,
Greg

Greg -

Please remove me as a member of this website - and everything associated with membership - as soon as possible. I do not wish to be associated in any way with "Conscious Evolution".

Joyce

Hi Joyce,

This makes me very sad, but of course I'll honor your wishes.

One thought I'd like to leave you with to consider: it is wholly admirable to hold strong opinions ... it shows that you CARE. But if your beliefs preclude the possibility of even looking at alternatives, presented calmly and in goodwill, it suggests that you may not be as sure of those beliefs as you would like to be ... else why would you recoil from even being in the presence of ideas that might challenge them? Just a thought to ponder.

I'm removing your membership as requested. I will really miss your presence here, and I know a lot of other folks will, too. If you ever change your mind, please feel free to contact me to reinstate your membership, or to rejoin under another name. Lots of affection and good wishes for you and your family.

Love,
Greg

Greg,

I'm really sorry about Joyce's decision to leave Conscious Evolution. I hope she does change her mind about that.

My parish priest once told me that there are some people who can't handle questioning things because it makes them feel insecure. He said that some people need to have things neatly categorized and ordered in their minds for that reason. They need the comfort of a black and white order in their lives because the gray areas of life makes them feel insecure. He was not only referring to religion and the questioning process involved in faith growth, but he was referring to life in general.

Again, I hope Joy reconsiders this and comes back and I'm sorry it happened.

Love, Connie

Greg,
I salute your bravery in even posting this line of thought in this time we are now in. And I've always been impressed with how hard you try to only examine the facts. Or at least distinguish fact from feelings.

What really truly amazes and puzzles me about this is how divided our country is over these issues.

I know how I feel and have always felt about the whole Bush family. I have a physical stomach reaction when I see GW on tv. I wish I didn't but I do...that's a fact.

But I am also very aware that alot of my friends do not see him the way I do at all!! And these same friends and I are alike on so many other issues.

I know they sincerely believe he is doing what is best for our country when my heart and gut screams otherwise! The legislation that has been introduced during this term just screams "unconstitutional" to me and I resent to no end the big brother and Orwellian mentality that they display.

But why is that?? Why do people see things so differently?
Why is it that people don't want to examine all sides and possibilites before they take a stand? How can people watch the same news shows and read the same newspapers and come away with such different points of view??

I want to be convinced that I am wrong. I really do. I hate how I feel about this administration. I wish I could be supportive but I see nothing that convinces me I'm wrong...indeed the more I watch and read and research the more convinced I am that they are looking out for an entirely different agenda than the welfare of the American people.

There is a quote I read somewhere and I think it was attributed to Jefferson or maybe it was Lincoln but it says basically that all goverment is hostile to those governed.
I think most of us don't want to accept that. I know I don't. But I also know that the older I get the sadder I get about the state of the goverened all over this planet.

I don't have the answers...but I think there's something noble about trying to change what is obviously not working.
But before we can change we have to learn. And this is a hard time to be learning in.
But I also remind myself that I "volunteered" for this life assignment and that there are no victims...only volunteers.

And if we can exchange ideas and information in a loving supportive enviroment...well that is indeed a noble service to provide.

So thank you, for many things. But mostly for this wonderful opportunity to learn.

Joyce,
I too will miss you. We differ on many things but I too love your spirit and intelligence and you bring another side to examine. I love to look at all sides of everything so your perspective will be missed.

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not
believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your
religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority
of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because
they have been handed down for many generations. But after
observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees
with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and
all, then accept it and live up to it.
-- Buddha


A man doesn't have to say what religion he identifies himself to, I believe that we live and behave according to our religious beliefs in either case. We can seperate state and religion, but we cannot seperate man and his beliefs.

And so at the core, the very laws set in a country are based on beliefs about a way of life... religion is a way of life first and foremost. I cannot understand how one is separate form the other.


GREG, I see now how very unusual and concerning this whole issue is. Will we ever know the truth.

Joyce, I will miss you too and all your thoughts, beliefs and opinions, and I do know
that you have to do what you feel is right for you. Do take care and lots of love and
good wishes for you and your family!

~ ~ Faith ~ ~

Oh, BTW, I like President Bush and I believe he is doing the best he can for this country!
This is what I feel! So, make me change what I feel!

Hi Rachel

I agree with what you said about beliefs and religion. Our beliefs in God and how we live our lives according to those beliefs are what is the most important. It does not matter what religious group you belong to or even if you don't belong to any organized religion at all. It is how we love and care for others that matters, how we conduct ourselves in life that matters.

There are those who, because of their own need for power and control, use religion as a means of attaining that power and control over others. We have seen it happen many times in history and in our recent history there was the Jim Jones and the Ghana mass suicides among his followers and then what happened in Waco, Texas. I always hate to see those things happen because it can really turn some people completely off regarding religion and even God. We have seen how those fundamentalist extremists can influence others as is happening in the Middle East. All religions teach love and peace and you can tell by the behavior of it's followers if they are following that religion with their hearts, because if it is in the heart it will show by the actions.

Sometimes evil disguises itself as good so that is where we have to be cautious.

Love, Connie

Hi Greg!

It seems to me that you and your "gang" at Conscious Evolution are not willing to look at alternatives!

If Joy doesn't want to partecipate anymore it is not because she is unsure of her beliefs, on the contrary.

Greg, why don't you write to your local senator about your theories, maybe he might help you?

You're trying to become a "cause fighter", well, once again I'm repeating, this is not the time or the place to do it, CE was supposed to be a public forum and not your own living room .

Your followers are of course essential to you and they follow you blindly, unfortunately.

What all the Knowflakes have to keep in their minds at all times is the importance of very carefully selecting whom and what to follow.

Greg lately I also see you as a manipulator because you're constantly trying to control the forums to your advantage, it seems to me that you're becoming too self-absorbed at everyone else's expense.

Why don't you step back far enough to see the bigger picture?

Peace and Light
El

Hey -

I'm trying really hard to maintain a sense of calm and perspective on this thread, and understanding and respect for everyone's diverse beliefs and their unique perspectives. Having said that - Elonora - this comment, "Your followers are of course essential to you and they follow you blindly, unfortunately." is one that I find to be in very pooor taste. Say what you want about peoples opinions and thoughts - but I don't see anyone here who is blindly supporting anything. Even the people whose opinions I personally disagree with, I don't think they are "blindly" following anything. It's personal comments and cheap shots like that which make threads like this so difficult.

Free speech, questionning and the expectation og accountiblity from one's leaders are the foundatations of democracy, and I belive they are rights wew should never be shy of exercising. Use it, or loose it - you know?


Love,
Terri

EL!

your passion is received, just one thing if I may add... FOLLOWERS??????

Naa! you see if some people happen to agree with Greg are simply sharing an opinion that seems to be the same as Greg. This does not make them followers, it makes them individuals who are perceiving in similar manner. And should others agree with you, would that mean your a ring leader and they are followers of your point of view?

El, I would enjoy hearing your points which will surely be contrary to Greg. But that's what makes for an interesting discussing on these forums. It is intellectually stimulating too, we can't (scratch that) I'll speak for myself, I can't just go on writing love poetry... I enjoy these forums and would love to hear your points.

I feel you have a lot to say, instead of remarks toward others, let's hear about the topic. You might even turn this entire post around, I for one am open minded and curious.

Sabra, my friend... .....

Thank you for clarifying things...*sigh*....and while I'm at it...I'd like to do the same...

When you said, show me....etc...

I merely wanted to SHOW YOU that indeed, a group of people in the US Had been subjugated AND eliminated.......it was not because I thought you were attempting to overshadow other atrocities...........You seemed doubtful that such a thing could occur here...I just wanted to point out, that it had...*sigh*

...and yes, I realize that your people were actually treated far more brutal than my people were, by those who would get rid of us...........at least WE had the choice of "my way or the highway," whereas your people had no choice at all....

...and I personally, do not think Greg's comparison between the two governments, is flawed at all......I saw it as pointing out their similar methods to seize power...not the kinds of governments they are and were....and I don't see how "time" enters into it at all...if something worked once, most certainly it's going to be tried again...

There is more I want to say, but I am at work...so have to go for now....

When I get home, I'll either continue this post.....or start a new one here....

Luv,
Rainbow

Elanora,

I do respect your feelings and I admire your love of this country. We all love this country and that is why we are looking at the alternatives. Governments are not always right because they are run by men, and men are not infallible. When someone holds the position the President of the U.S. holds he is accountable to the people of this country for his actions and his decisions because we are the ones whose lives will be affected depending on those actions and decisions. We live in a democracy, we have a Constitution that says we have a voice. There are some who may follow blindly any leader without question but to do so leaves them open to losing those very freedoms we all value so highly. It is up to the American people to question the decisions and the policies of those that govern us. And when we see wrongs in those decisions and policies, it is up to us to speak out about it, protest it and do what we can. To do that means to love your country so much that you are willing to take the flack you will get from those that disagree with you. Patrick Henry said, "Give me liberty or give me death." To not do what our founding fathers died to insure us which is a nation, of the people, for the people and by the people, is to betray that sacrifice of theirs. It is to betray our country. If we follow blindly and do not question what we see as going against all this country stands for we could very easily lose our freedoms.

I feel that Greg is being judged wrongly. He made his purpose clear here when he first posted this thread and stated that those who don't like what we are discussing here should give this thread a wide berth. There is no doubt that there are questions that remain unanswered regarding the events of 9/11. Those are documented facts and a committee was assembled to address those questions. They never did. Henry Kissinger backed out of the job of sitting on that committee. He claimed a conflict of interest in backing out. People in the FBI and CIA have stepped forward and said they tried to warn the Administration of a terrorist attack but were ignored. Just as "deep throat" came forward in the Watergate scandel of the Nixon administration and told reporters what was going on in the White House these men stepped forward and told reporters and all who would listen that they tried to warn Bush yet were ignored. Now why would they be ignored? Those men stepped forward because they do love their country and were willing to take the backlash from those who thought they should just shut up and follow blindly our leader. It seems to me that we are looking at the alternatives here. Because what is the alternative to questioning our government if not following a leader blindly? There were questions and Greg is bringing those questions to our attention in the hopes we could dialog and give our thoughts on the issue. That is all he is doing. I don't see any manipulation on his part when he made it clear to us all what his intentions were and respects the feelings of those who don't want to participate.

But in his policies Bush is trampling on the Constitution that is the basis of the democracy we know. Even churches want that separation between church and state insured in the Constitution because they don't want the government dictating to them what they can and cannot do. And that is what would happen. That would not be freedom of religion.

Love, Connie

Wow, an active thread with a lot to respond to! Gues I'll take 'em bit by bit ...

Eleonora, I'm sorry that you have the misgivings that you have expressed in your posts. I am indeed fighting for a "cause" ... one which I personally believe is of critical importance to the spiritual and physical well-being of human beings around the world. This "public forum" was started originally to honor and carry forth the ideas and ideals of Linda Goodman ... who, if you'll remember from many of her works (especially Star Signs) had a LOT to say about freedom and the ideals of this country ... and the relation of freedom to spirituality ... and the crucial importance of preserving liberty and democratic ideals against the encroachment of repressive laws and powerful vested interests. So I don't think my "cause" is foreign to the ideals of this website by any means!

Of course I, like Linda, am the first to say that no one should take anything at face value just because someone else says or believes it ... and you along with all members are not only entitled to your own opinions when they are contrary to mine or anyone else's, but sharing them is a value to all, because truth is arrived at by dialog, not assertion.

In fact, when you say that "What all the Knowflakes have to keep in their minds at all times is the importance of very carefully selecting whom and what to follow," I would have to take that one step farther and say with Linda that none of us should be "following" what anyone says! We should be examining things critically and making up our own minds.


With that in mind, however, I would like to point out that at the very beginning of this thread I earnestly requested that because of the sensitive subject that folks refrain from presenting unsupported opinions and emotional appeals to disagree with each other, but instead to use factual evidence and logical reasoning; and I have to say that you have pretty much ignored that request. I presented some very concrete and specific facts to show that there was definitely dereliction and apparently deliberate dereliction in protecting this country from the attacks of 9/11. Yet your responses have not shown how these facts are mistaken or how the reasoning is flawed ... rather they have completely ignored the facts and logic, and instead complained about me personally or about the "bad timing" of questioning Bush's policies when American troops are ready to go to war! That's changing the subject and using emotional appeals rather than using this opportunity to jointly examine the issues with facts and reason.

I very much welcome your continued participation in the discussion, but I DO want to ask you to pespect the requests I made at its beginning. If you disagree with what I (or anyone) says here, show us where the errors are rather than ignoring the argument entirely and responding with emotional appeals and personal statements about the poster! I am very willing to change my mind about anything if I can be shown clearly why it is mistaken or why a different interpretation better fits the facts. Are you?

Love,
Greg

hello
Not one to usually pipe up in these political discussions...not feeling the need to contribute unless I feel I have a different perspective to share that isn't already being discussed.

I don't have a definate opinion about the subject matter here, but my beliefs tend to sway more to this theory:

That the reason W. and the administration didn't send out fighter planes to intercept the highjacked airplanes is that his decision not to act was motivated by an avoidance of responsibility. He didn't want the "blood on his hands".
Let it ALL be on the terrorist's hands.

I think that the most disturbing visions of the World Trade Center that day were the sheer number of people crowded in the windows....frozen in time with the knowledge of a tragic and painful death approaching....some leaping to their deaths.
How achingly terrifying their plight to be suspended in time merely waiting for death...so utterly hopeless...no hope in sight.
My thoughts at the time were anger....why weren't their helicopters sent out to someway save some of those poor souls??? Surely the helicopters couldn't get close enough to the building to simply pull people within it, but when you're so hopeless that the thought of leaping out thousands of feet to your death, then I'm sure you would have chanced the risk of leaping to a swaying gourney.....something!!!!

In a world where people can sue McDonalds because the coffee is too hot...or where pedophiles are never stripped of their precious rights even after conviction...
who would have risked such responsibility???
Think of the law suits of the families of loved one's who may have perished while trying to be saved.

So, possibly no covert conspiracies by our Government...in this case anyway Just the usual weasle-ish character traits.
Risk public scrutiny??? Public critisisms and investigations??? Better to do nothing.
It's all on them.

Lisa

Connie, I pondered your thoughts about theocracy a great deal, and I absolutely agree with you that a breaking down or blurring of the barriers between church and state is a grave danger to both church AND state! And I do believe that Bush is treading dangerously close to that line if not clearly overstepping it.

However, my own guess is that his ultimate goal (and when I say "his" I don't think that the rapid changes we are seeing now are really his personally ... I think he is rather the current "front man" for a powerful corporate/military/industrial clique) has anything to do with religion or the establishment of a fundamentalist theocracy. I could certainly be wrong, but my intuition is that he is simply appealing to a powerful special-interest group on terms that are attractive to them in order to enhance his own popularity and support. Moreover, the extreme fundamentalist mentality is predisopsed to seeing things in black-and-white terms, and to identifying other groups as "evil" ... the most fertile soil in which to sow the seeds of authoritarianism as folks of that mindset are often only too willing to support the intrusion of state power into personal lives if they think it is their own version of morality and behavior that will be compelled! Still, I don't think there is that big a base of support in this country for a "fundamentalist theocracy" to wash. I DO think there is enough authoritarian advantage to breaking down church-state barriers that it will be pursued and utilized as further fuel for expanding state intrusion into civil liberties ... but I'd be very surprised to see anything that looks like a real theocracy. I think it more likely that the fundamentalists will be as surprised as everyone else to wake up and find themselves in a secular totalitarianism!

But that's pure speculation of course.

There is little doubt in my own mind that the REAL aims of the authoritarian power-grab - whatever ideological, theological or defensive justifications are used - are no more complicated than they have been throughout history: wealth, power, and unchallenged domination of the "peasants" by a small group of ruling-class "elite." Same old same old.

Love,
Greg

Greg

I went to the site(s) you linked which you say is proof the Government knew we were going to be attacked, knew how we were going to be attacked and stood by and let it happen. You also attempted to prove the government has the means to take control of Boeing 757 and 767 commercial airliners from the manual control of the pilots and fly them by remote control where ever they wish.

As proof, you offer an interview of David Shippers by Alex Jones. First Greg, conspiracies aren't proven by one person, no matter who that person is.

Second, if anything, Shippers blows the theory all to hell that Iraq isn't involved with terrorist activities aimed at the US. In fact, Shippers claims Iraq was directly involved in the Oklahoma City bombing acting in concert with McVeigh and further states Iraq is again up to something in the same area. He also said 3500 to 5000 Iraqi Republican Guards are in the US and living in the area and that there is communications between them and Iraq.

Is that enough proof for you and the others who say show us the proof Iraq has been involved in terrorist activities against the US or has plans to use terrorists against the US before we go in and disarm Saddam? If not, Shippers also asserts the Iraqi's were involved in the downing of TWA flight 800 and the bombing of the WTC. Is that now enough for you to agree the US should go in and remove Saddam?

The FAA site you linked to prove the remote control capabilities of the Boeing 757 and 767 aircraft and the emergency procedures you say are in place to take these planes over in case of hijackings wasn't helpful. Nor was I able to find any reference to the plan you say was in effect to scramble US fighters to shoot airliners out of the sky if they won't divert from their flight path and land as directed. You linked the home page apparently. If that information is on that site, how about linking the actual pages. I couldn't find any reference to the information you said was there.

You are trying very hard Greg to get the idea across that President Bush is a conspirator bent on setting up an absolute tyranny in the United States. You mention people high in the US government, but no names. There isn't anyone higher in the Government than the President Greg and no conspiracy of the scope you're alleging could succeed without the President being in on it or leading it. Why don't you stop the insinuations and just say what you mean plainly that George Bush was aware of the pending attack, could have stopped it but wanted it to happen as a prelude to seizing power and turning the United States into a dictatorship? When you do that Greg, I'll tell you what I think.

jwhop

Hi Lisa

When you do "pipe up" in these discussions you make a lot of sense.

Until you brought it up here I had never thought about a helicopter rescue attempt for those people in the windows that were visible. Now that you mention it, it poses yet another question about 9/11. Why didn't they attempt a helicopter rescue? Even with my fear of heights, I know that given the alternatives, I would have more than welcomed a helicopter with a gurney or even just a ladder. Maybe they felt it was too risky under the circumstances. The first tower collapsed rather fast after the plane hit it. It had to have been some kind of call by someone in charge not to risk it. But then again, those helicopter rescue teams are used to facing danger and trained for it, so that does make you wonder.

What you said concerning the reason the military jets were halted by executive order sounds logical to me too. Those military jets would have had to shoot those planes down with American citizens onboard, including babies and small children. Those in charge would have been open to public questioning and scrunity. In other words it was a CYA choice not to send them up. A typical political call.

Greg, I also agree with you that there is not, at this time anyway, any conclusive evidence to support a theocracy in the making. I pray that never happens here either. I think that more than anything Bush is trying to appease the conservative right Christians that backed him in his election. Why Bush is treading that church and state line is beyond me because most organized religions do not want that line crossed anymore than the ACLU or American citizens do. But in my opinion it is not the only decisions he has made that pretty much ignores the Constitution. I think the others things that you cited apply here as well.

I also would like to thank you for fixing those problems I had in my post. It looks much better now.


Love, Connie ( Mom to you Lisa )

Connie..........Wow! You are Cherokee and descended from an honorable anscestor who marched on the trail of tears! ! ! Wow!!! again......yes, it's my understanding that they were a pretty advanced tribe.....

.........."During the early 1800s, the Cherokee adopted their government to a written constitution. They established their own courts and schools, and achieved a standard of living that was the envy of their white neighbors. Particularily noteworthy was the invention of written language by Sequoyah (George Gist) in 1821. Utilizing an ingenious alphabet of 86 characters, almost the entire Cherokee Nation became literate within a few years. A Cherokee newspaper, the Phoenix, began publication in the native language in February 1828."..........

The above was taken from A Cherokee History I found on the net....so they were a great nation BEFORE the sad events on the trail of tears....

Last year, I had the chance to visit one of their reservations in Cherokee North Carolina, and was very impressed....They have a great museum that depicts the struggle on the trail of tears....an elder spoke to us about what the tribe is doing today...They are located in the Great Smokey Mountains which is beautiful country...one gets a very spiritual feel there...*sigh*...

Glad you liked the picture of my dad, Connie.....

Luv,
Rainbow

(PS..Greg I realize I've moved from the main discussion, but did want to reply to connie's post...and will try not to veer from the path, anymore... )

Jwhop maybe this site will give you more information concerning the procedures. It contains the normal procedures for the FAA, NORAD etc. when planes break communication and veer off their flight courses.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/completetimeline/timelinesept11.htm

The scrambling of fighter aircraft at the first sign of trouble is a routine phenomenon. Between 9/11 and June 2002, jets were scrambled after aircraft 462 times. Obviously there was great nervousness after 9/11, but in the same time period the year before, fighters were still scrambled 67 times. [AP, 8/13/02]

"Consider that an aircraft emergency exists... when: ... There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any... aircraft." [FAA regulations]

"If... you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency." [FAA regulations]

"Pilots are supposed to hit each fix with pinpoint accuracy. If a plane deviates by 15 degrees, or two miles from that course, the flight controllers will hit the panic button. They'll call the plane, saying "American 11, you're deviating from course." It's considered a real emergency, like a police car screeching down a highway at 100 miles an hour. When golfer Payne Stewart's incapacitated Learjet missed a turn at a fix, heading north instead of west to Texas, F-16 interceptors were quickly dispatched." [MSNBC, 9/12/01]

"A NORAD spokesman says its fighters routinely intercept aircraft. When planes are intercepted, they typically are handled with a graduated response. The approaching fighter may rock its wingtips to attract the pilot's attention, or make a pass in front of the aircraft. Eventually, it can fire tracer rounds in the airplane's path, or, under certain circumstances, down it with a missile." [Boston Globe, 9/15/01]

"In October, Gen. Eberhart told Congress that 'now it takes about one minute' from the time that the FAA senses something is amiss before it notifies NORAD. And around the same time, a NORAD spokesofficer told the Associated Press that the military can now scramble fighters 'within a matter of minutes to anywhere in the United States.'" [Slate, 1/16/02]

The commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force, Anatoli Kornukov said the day after 9/11: "Generally it is impossible to carry out an act of terror on the scenario which was used in the USA yesterday... As soon as something like that happens here, I am reported about that right away and in a minute we are all up." [Pravda, 9/12/01]

Supposedly, on 9/11, there are only four fighters on ready status in the Northeastern US, and only 14 fighters on ready status in the entire US. [BBC, 8/29/02]

At FAA headquarters, "a secure Siprnet terminal and other hardware had been installed only six weeks earlier, greatly enhancing the movement of vital information." [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/10/02]

Bush's motorcade left for the school at 8:30 A.M. As it was arriving, pagers and cell phones alerted White House aides that a plane had hit the North Tower of the World Trade Center. Bush remembers senior adviser Karl Rove bringing him the news, saying it appeared to be an accident involving a small, twin-engine plane. [Washington Post, 1/27/02]

Bush: "I can remember noticing the press pool and the press corps beginning to get the calls and seeing the look on their face." [CBS, 9/11/02]

Also, the seat numbers [Sweeney] gave were different from those registered in the hijackers' names. [BBC, 9/21/01]

The jetliner was supposed to go to Los Angeles, but Alomari, Atta and three others seated in Row 8 — Waleed M. Alshehri, Wail Alshehri and Satam Al Suqami — prevented that. [Portland Press Herald, 9/16/01]

The investigators' trail to Portland began with a cell phone call by a flight attendant on American Airlines Flight 11, placed moments before the jet crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center. She told an airline worker that a group of Middle Eastern men sitting in rows 9 and 10 had taken over the plane, and were injuring hostages with knives. After the crash, FBI agents reviewed each of the names on the passenger manifest. They found that Abdulaziz Alomari and Mohamed Atta ; later identified as a chief planner in the mass murder ; had been sitting in row 8. [Portland Press Herald, 10/14/01

There is also lots more info regarding 9/11 at this site.

Love, Connie

Peggy....just wanted to respond to the part of your post where you said:

" I have a physical stomach reaction when I see GW on tv. I wish I didn't but I do...that's a fact."

Oh Peggy, do I understand! The same thing happens with me. I just get a real creepy feeling when I see him...(and this reaction was when he was still govenor of Texas..*sigh*..maybe it was because of his non-interference when all the bloody public beheadings, and drawing and quartering took place in his state [I exagerate to make a point!] )....

....call it instinct....intuition.....gut reaction...or whatever, but something about that man creeps me out big time! So I do understand.....(My apologies to those here, who like him )

Luv,
Rainbow

Hi everyone

I hope this isn't going to be construed as a personal attack - although I am going to single out three people on this thread with a question. Jwhop, Joy and Sabra (although I know Joy isn't here anymore, still I would have liked to know her answer to this) - guys - why does this line of questioning and conversation make you seem so angry? I really don't understand it. I mean I understand (and truely respect) the fact that you think differently. But I don't understand why it all seems so personal? Why do you really care what Greg and the others here think of the Bush administration or the story behind 9-11? I mean, it's great to care to a certain extent, to talk about different opinions and to question how or why others think what they do - but I feel so much anger in your posts - especially you, Jwhop, and I really don't get why it's such a personal thing for you? And why, if it pisses you off so much, that you even bother coming by? Surely there are many other forums and websites where people feel what you feel. Why do you feel the need to come here and degrade and ridicule the people who think differently than you do? Of these theories are so crackpot and mis-informed, than truely, how do they threaten you?

I would really like to diaouge about this - in the hopes of toning down the heat here, and in the hopes of understanding your viewpoints better, so that I can behave more respectfully in the future.

Love,
Terri

Moonflower

It's fine that the policy is to scramble fighters when aircraft stray off their flight path NOW but where is the mention anywhere that the same policy was in effect prior to 9/11/01?

Are you now convinced by Shippers interview that we should immediately attack Iraq, since according to him, we have been attacked at least 3 times on our soil by Iraq and more attacks are planned? And if not, why not?

If someone wishes to use Shippers assertions to prove a conspiracy within our government, you should also be willing to accept his assertions about Iraq.

jwhop

Hi jwhop,

In the very first item on the list it clearly states that in the year before 9/11 67 fighters were scrambled after off course airplanes.

I don't believe in war except as a last recourse, jwhop. I don't see war as the last recourse with Iraq. I think changing our Middle East policy would actually bring about peace in the long run. I don't see a war as a means to peace. Have you ever known of any war that brought about peace? Is revenge going to change what happened on 9/11? Revenge never works. It only creates more problems. Solves nothing. I am not sympathetic towards Hussien. I am sympathetic towards the people of Iraq under his dictatorship. It is they who will suffer the casulties, not Hussien. What happened here on 9/11 was their payback for the last war we had with Iraq. I think if we go ahead with this war 9/11 will look mild in comparison with the next payback from terrorists that another Bush brought on this country. I have not known peace in my lifetime. One war after another. I would like to see a better future for my grand kids.

I do admire your passion in what you believe, jwhop even when it may differ from mine. I also think that that where we all may differ in our opinions on issues, it's good because we are all making each other think. Thinking is a big part of learning and growing.

Love, Connie