Home | Community | Message Board


FreeSpores.com
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 1 year, 29 days
Conspiaracy theory that you can actually credit
    #4523046 - 08/11/05 06:53 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

From my own personal observation earlier
Quote:


Zappaisgod said

Actually some interesting news coming out today that the Pentagon knew of Atta and some of his buddies in 1999 but was prevented from telling the FBI because of the Jamie Gorelick led policies within the Clinton Justice Department about separating intelligence agencies. Also big stink about why this wasn't mentioned in the 9/11 Commission report, on which she sat. This is starting to stink like Sandy Berger's sock full of documents. Gotta go back to work but Wheldon might be a good google search for breaking news.




Well it seems I'm not alone in thinking that perhaps these particular findings may have been squelched by the Gorelimafia that was largely in charge of the commission. I heard on the radio that only two people on the commission had total access to the White House documents from the time in question and one was Gorelick. Why they thought they should put a major target of the investigation on the panel is beyond me but I sure know why she wanted to be on it. Just in case something like this came up. And Sandy Berger, you ask. Well, here's an interesting take.
Actually some interesting news coming out today that the Pentagon knew of Atta and some of his buddies in 1999 but was prevented from telling the FBI because of the Jamie Gorelick led policies within the Clinton Justice Department about separating intelligence agencies. Also big stink about why this wasn't mentioned in the 9/11 Commission report, on which she sat. This is starting to stink like Sandy Berger's sock full of documents. Gotta go back to work but Wheldon might be a good google search for breaking news.
http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2005/08/motive-for-bergers-bizarre-behavior.html
Wednesday, August 10, 2005

A Motive For Berger's Bizarre Behavior?
This is a stunning revelation about the Clinton administration's role in preventing intelligence from passing from the military to law enforcement concerning the 9/11 hijackers:

"The Sept. 11 commission (search) did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohammed Atta or of his cell," said Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman from Indiana. "Had we learned of it obviously it would've been a major focus of our investigation."

Hamilton's remarks Tuesday followed findings by Rep. Curt Weldon (search), R-Pa., vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees, that made front-page news.

In June, Weldon displayed charts on the floor of the U.S. Senate showing that Able Danger identified the suspected terrorists in 1999. The unit repeatedly asked for the information to be forwarded to the FBI but apparently to no avail. Various news outlets picked up on the story this week.

Weldon told FOX News on Wednesday that staff members of the Sept. 11 commission were briefed at least once by officials on Able Danger, but that he does not believe the message was sent to the panel members themselves. He also said some phone calls made by military officials with Able Danger to the commission staff went unreturned.

"Why weren't they briefed? Was there some deliberate attempt at the staff level of the 9/11 commission to steer the commissioners away from Able Danger because of where it might lead?" Weldon asked. "Why was there no mention of Able Danger?"

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the Sept. 11 commission looked into the matter during its investigation of government missteps leading to the attacks and chose not to include it in the final report.
{....]
According to Weldon, Able Danger identified Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi (search), Khalid al-Mihdar (search) and Nawaf al-Hazmi (search) as members of a cell Able Danger code-named "Brooklyn" because of some loose connections to New York City.
Weldon said that in September 2000, the unit recommended on three separate occasions that its information on the hijackers be given to the FBI "so they could bring that cell in and take out the terrorists." However, Weldon said Pentagon lawyers rejected the recommendation, arguing that Atta and the others were in the country legally so information on them could not be shared with law enforcement.

"Lawyers within the administration ? and we're talking about the Clinton administration, not the Bush administration ? said 'you can't do it,'" and put post-its over Atta's face, Weldon said. "They said they were concerned about the political fallout that occurred after Waco ... and the Branch Davidians."


Of course, the first thing that lept to my mind was that, if true, this could possibly have been the motive behind former Clinton National Security Advisor Sandy "docs in his socks" Berger's inexplicable actions in removing classified documents at the National Archives at about the same time as the 9/11 Commission was reviewing documents associated with terrorism.

I know this is a loose association on my part, but it seems to me that if anyone in the Clinton adminsitration knew about Able Danger, it would have been Mr. Berger as National Security Advisor. A revelation that he was behind the decision not to allow military intelligence to pass on information to law enforcement officials about a terror cell that included Atta and other 9/11 murderers provides the first, possibly significant motive for Berger's bizarre behavior in spring of 2004. It would have to be something sensational like this to have made the Clinton official do something that egregiously antithetical to his professional reputation. His actions in stuffing documents into his clothing were those of a person in a state of panic, or high emotion (e.g. fear).

One other point. Berger's sentencing after he pleaded guilty was postponed from this July to September. Isn't it interesting that this new information is coming out in August?

I, for one, would like a lot more information about precisely what Berger was up to when he was caught removing documents from the Archive, particularly in light of this new information.

Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I would really like to know what Berger knew about Able Danger; and if he wrote a memo, or signed off on one, that specifically related to Able Danger; and that prevented the dissemination of information that might have led to the arrest of the 9/11 hijackers before they could carry out their plans. And, could that memo--or copies--have been in the National Archives?

It is, of course, unlikely in the extreme that it still exists after his foray into the archives.

UPDATE: Here is a timeline that I have quickly put together:

2002 - 9/11 Commission set up by Congress

March, 2003 - 9/11 Commission begins first hearings. One of its members is Jamie Gorelick, the person most responsible for the legal firewall between FBI/CIA and sharing intelligence information

Fall, 2003 - Briefing given to four 9/11 staff members by defense intelligence officials during an overseas trip to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia

Oct, 2003 - Sandy Berger observed by Archives staff removing documents

March, 2004 -Madeleine Albright testifies before 9/11 Commission, and defends the Clinton administration's handling of Al-Qaeda and terrorism

April, 2004 - Condi Rice testifies before 9/11 Commission; states that there was serious problem in sharing intelligence information prior to 9/11

May, 2004 - Berger testifies before the 9/11 Commission; completely overshadowed by the fact that Richard Clark and George Tenet also testified on the same day (testimony is here)

July, 2004 - Berger steps down as an advisor to the Kerry campaign after it is revealed that he was being investigated for removing classified documents from the National Archive

July, 2004 - 9/11 Commission report issued without any mention of the Able Danger information

April, 2005 - Berger pleads guilty to removing classified documents

July, 2005 - Berger's sentencing is delayed to September, 2005.

August, 2005 -News breaks about the existence of Able Danger and its ID of 9/11 hijackers in 1999 and attempts to pass this information to law enforcement

UPDATE II: The Strata-Sphere has a good post about Able Danger, Jamie Gorelick and 9/11

UPDATE III: I was interested to discover that Jamie Gorelick was not only deputy attorney general of the United States under Clinton, a position she assumed in March 1994 and held until 1997; but from May 1993 until she joined the Justice Department, Gorelick also served as general counsel of the Department of Defense. These dates are not relevant except possibly to point out that Gorelick was familiar with and worked in the DoD. She is someone else that I have wished the press were more curious about.

UPDATE IV: The Jawa Report has more information to consider. Also, a commentor at Roger Simon's blog asks, what's the point if Berger has destroyed all evidence? Well, we don't know that is the case. There may be evidence to disprove my theory; and there may still be documentation out there to prove it--if anyone is willing to look. (10:30 pm)

UPDATE V: I notice that the first report I cited from Fox states that DoD personnel briefed 9/11 staffers in the "fall of 2003" on Able Danger. However, in the NY Times this AM (here) there was a second briefing given to 9/11 staffers on July 12, 2004. That should be added to the timeline.(9:59 am, 8/11/05)

- Diagnosed by Dr. Sanity @ 3:14 PM
Comments (26) | Trackbacks (14)

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

More when I can find out who the other guy with total access was. This is not going away and there are some 9/11 families that are screaming that the commission fucked up in not slamming the Clinton's and one of their own members (SURPRISE). Questions that remain are who was briefed, who decided not to send the info about Able Baker to the full commission, who was/were the attorney/s that told Able Baker they couldn't share. You get the gist. Have fun. As Drudge would say, "Breaking", as in balls. What fun.

To paraphrase Bowie, "I love the sound of breaking balls"


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinelonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Conspiaracy theory that you can actually credit [Re: zappaisgod]
    #4523076 - 08/11/05 06:59 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

all i can say is "WTF"?


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 1 year, 29 days
Re: Conspiaracy theory that you can actually credit [Re: lonestar2004]
    #4523663 - 08/11/05 09:32 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

It's getting smellier

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005188.php#comments
August 11, 2005
9/11 Commission Changes Its Story -- Again (Updates And Bump To Top)

Another day, another story seems to be the containment strategy for the defunct and now discredited 9/11 Commission. The AP reports that the Commission's spokesperson, Al Felzenberg, now admits that the Commission knew full well that the secret Army program Able Danger had identified Mohammed Atta as an al-Qaeda operative along with three other men in Brooklyn, but left it out of their final report:

The Sept. 11 commission knew military intelligence officials had identified lead hijacker Mohamed Atta as a member of al-Qaida who might be part of U.S.-based terror cell more than a year before the terror attacks but decided not to include that in its final report, a spokesman acknowledged Thursday.

Al Felzenberg, who had been the commission's chief spokesman, said Tuesday the panel was unaware of intelligence specifically naming Atta. But he said subsequent information provided Wednesday confirmed that the commission had been aware of the intelligence. ...

Felzenberg said an unidentified person working with Weldon came forward Wednesday and described a meeting 10 days before the panel's report was issued last July. During it, a military official urged commission staffers to include a reference to the intelligence on Atta in the final report.

Felzenberg said checks were made and the details of the July 12, 2004, meeting were confirmed. Previous to that, Felzenberg said it was believed commission staffers knew about Able Danger from a meeting with military officials in
Afghanistan during which no mention was made of Atta or the other three hijackers.

Staff members now are searching documents in the National Archives to look for notes from the meeting in Afghanistan and any other possible references to Atta and Able Danger, Felzenberg said.

And so now we come back to the National Archives -- and October 2003. One of Sandy Berger's last visits to the Archives where he took highly classified material out the door with him was in October 2003, around the time that the Commission first heard about Able Danger. Does this start to sound just a little too convenient and coincidental?

Even without the possible Berger theft as part of the story, this constant shifting of the story underscores the massive credibility deficit that the Commission has now earned. First they never heard of Able Danger. Then, maybe a low-level staffer told them about the program but not the Atta identification. Next, the military met with the Commissioners but didn't specify the Atta identification. Now, we finally have confirmation that the Commission itself -- not just its low-level staff -- knew that military intelligence had identified Mohammed Atta as an al-Qaeda operative a year before 9/11. Instead of reporting it, the Commission buried it.

This points to some disturbing questions. It looks like the Commission decided early to pin blame on the intelligence community rather than the bureaucracy which stripped it of its ability to act in the interests of our security. Who benefited from that? Commissioner Jamie S. Gorelick. Who else stood to lose if the real story came out? The answer to that may well be the National Security Advisor who conducted a clumsy raid on the National Archives in the middle of the investigation.

Congress needs to take this up immediately.

Addendum: And Congress needs to get the Commission staffers the hell out of the National Archives until after Congress investigates this themselves. See The Anchoress for more thoughts and links surrounding Sandy Berger.

And please, let's remember what Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton had to say about this less than 48 hours ago:

"The Sept. 11 commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohammed Atta or of his cell," said Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman from Indiana. "Had we learned of it obviously it would've been a major focus of our investigation."

This man and his fellow Commissioners have completely destroyed their credibility and that of their investigation.

UPDATE: Had some problems with "Able Danger", which came out Able Baker and Able Data. Must have been the lunchtime burger. Thanks to CQ reader New England Devil for the heads-up.

UPDATE II: Weldon sent a letter expressing his unhappiness with the earlier denials coming from the Commission, and he released it to the media:

Weldon said he was upset by suggestions earlier Wednesday by 9/11 panel members that it had been not been given critical information on Able Danger's capabilities and findings.

"The impetus for this letter is my extreme disappointment in the recent, and false, claim of the 9/11 commission staff that the commission was never given access to any information on Able Danger," Weldon wrote to former Chairman Gov. Thomas Kean and Vice-Chairman Rep. Lee Hamilton. "The 9/11 commission staff received not one but two briefings on Able Danger from former team members, yet did not pursue the matter.

"The commission's refusal to investigate Able Danger after being notified of its existence, and its recent efforts to feign ignorance of the project while blaming others for supposedly withholding information on it, brings shame on the commissioners, and is evocative of the worst tendencies in the federal government that the commission worked to expose," Weldon added.

Fox News Channel reported earlier that Weldon says the intelligence officers who conducted these briefings have expressed willingness and enthusiasm for testifying under oath and on the record about the information given to Commission staffers on both occasions. Also, they spoke to the officer involved in the October 2003 briefing who insists that Atta's name was brought to the Commission on that occasion.

This looks more and more like a political disaster for the Commission and those who sought to blame the intelligence community to save the bureaucracy, especially the administration that bottled up the Able Danger project in 2000.

UPDATE III AND BUMP: Tom Maguire sent me a note referencing a Redstate post that should get everyone's attention:

The Commission?s objection to Able Danger?s Mohammed Atta datapoint was:

"There was no way that Atta could have been in the United States at that time, which is why the staff didn't give this tremendous weight when they were writing the report," Mr. Felzenberg said. "This information was not meshing with the other information that we had."

There is always the distinct possibility that the other information is wrong and it certainly begs the question of how Able Danger was able to identify Mohammed Atta and ask to turn their evidence over to the FBI if he was not in the country.

But this is the second occasion in which the 9-11 Commission has pooh-poohed other evidence concerning Atta that didn?t ?mesh? with their desired storyline.

The elephant in the corner of the 9-11 Commission?s report has always been the perfunctory way in which they dismiss the allegation that Atta met with the intelligence chief at Iraq?s Prague embassy, Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, on April 8-9, 2001. This meeting was discounted on the strength of Atta?s cell phone being used on April 6, 9, 10, and 11 and an ATM photo on April 11? and the fact that they can?t find a record that Atta bought plane tickets with presumably any of the 63 drivers licenses the hijackers possessed.

The Prague story would not fit the preconception that the operation was carried out strictly by al-Qaeda without assistance of any other government. The dismissal of the Able Danger information is inexplicable without assuming that the Commission had decided in advance who was to blame.

The consistent denial of Atta meeting in Prague with Iraqi intelligence always stuck in the craw of those who followed the case closely. Czech intelligence insists to this day that Atta met with the IIS in Prague on those dates. However, the Commission finally decided not to endorse it (Chapter 7 of their report). Why? Because it would have implicated Saddam Hussein in the 9/11 attacks -- and provided another, more immediate reason to invade Iraq, just when half of the committee wanted to avoid any such conclusions.

With that in mind, the correlation between the deliberate dumping of the Able Danger data from the report makes more sense. If Able Danger identified Atta correctly, it could have corroborated the timeline that fits with Czech intelligence on Atta's visit. That meant that the Iraqis at least had contact with the local 9/11 mastermind, if not actively supported it.

Now, speculating a bit, who was it that cleaned out the National Archive along the same time frame as the first briefing of the Commission about Able Danger? Which campaign did he advise at the time of his mission to inspect the records? And on whose behalf did he ostensibly perform that mission?

This may cause a political meltdown the likes of which have never been seen before. If intelligence officers appear before Congress and name names, the domino effect could change Washington DC forever. Congress needs to act fast to ensure that no further damage occurs to the records.

UPDATE IV: John Podhoretz reaches the same conclusions at The Corner.
Posted by Captain Ed at August 11, 2005 07:50 PM

Between Sandy Berger's socks and Jamie Gorelick's....I don't even know what to call this.....we should probably renovate Alcatraz. Gorelick and Berger make Nixon look positively straightforward if this is anywhere near what I think it is. Don't forget, Nixon was impeached for lying about a coverup of a small time burglary that had absolutely zero influence on an election. Rosemary Woods has nothing on Berger and Haldeman and Erlichman are fucking amateurs next to Jamie. They didn't get themselves appointed to the commission investigating them. This has an historic stench of a coverup by White House officials (not current, fuckheads) of an incompetence and assinine policy that led to many thousands dead, both here and abroad.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineJesusChrist
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
Re: Conspiaracy theory that you can actually credit [Re: zappaisgod]
    #4525813 - 08/12/05 10:29 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

wow.

That is a lot to take in.

That Sandy Berger shit never made sense. You don't just raid the national archives for no reason. And then when he is caught, people say "That's just Sandy!" I have always been uncomfortable with that event.

This would go a long way to explain it.


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 5 months, 20 days
Re: Conspiaracy theory that you can actually credit [Re: zappaisgod]
    #4525821 - 08/12/05 10:35 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

> Conspiaracy theory that you can actually credit

... but what about the aliens and cattle multilations? j/k Actually, you make some rather interesting connections. I will have to read this much more slowly before I can digest everything presented.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Conspiaracy theory that you can actually credit [Re: Seuss]
    #4530527 - 08/13/05 05:03 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

it should come as no surprise that even the right-wing nutcakes will start to believe bullshit about UFOs..aliens..etc when they involve liberals...

but to get back on topic..nothing demonstrates the mendacity of the far right more than this recent attempt to pin the LIHOP blame on clinton..while dismissing any notion that bush had also received the same warnings and failed to act..and much more to his political advantage than clintons...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineJesusChrist
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
Re: Conspiaracy theory that you can actually credit [Re: Annapurna1]
    #4531740 - 08/14/05 12:57 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

No man should ever have had to even wonder about what lies in Sandy's pants.

A salient point that I picked up on was that the Presidential briefing by the CIA to George W Bush was declassified and put on a pedestal for all to see. The 9-11 commission grilled the administration on how they responded to the information. Information about this instance of the Clinton administration didn't even make the report.

Tell me Anna, you sexy thing, do you believe that this information should have made the report? We had discovered an active terrorist cell, and that cell held the mastermind of the 9-11 attacks.

Play it straight on this Mz. Purna. Do you think that little tidbit might have been relevant to the report?


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineJesusChrist
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
Re: Conspiaracy theory that you can actually credit [Re: zappaisgod]
    #4533117 - 08/14/05 10:04 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Jack Kelly: Able Danger -- now they tell us

The 9/11 commission report, once much lauded, now has an awfully big hole
Sunday, August 14, 2005

The report of the 9/11 commission, once a best seller and hailed by the news media as the definitive word on the subject, must now be moved to the fiction shelves.


Jack Kelly is national security writer for the Post-Gazette and The Blade of Toledo, Ohio (jkelly@post-gazette.com, 412-263-1476).

The commission concluded, you'll recall, that the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon couldn't have been prevented, and that if there was negligence, it was as much the fault of the Bush administration (for moving slowly on the recommendations of Clinton counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke) as of the Clinton administration.

Able Danger has changed all of that.

Able Danger was a military intelligence unit set up by Special Operations Command in 1999. A year before the 9/11 attacks, Able Danger identified hijack leader Mohamed Atta and the other members of his cell. But Clinton administration officials stopped them -- three times -- from sharing this information with the FBI.

The problem was the order Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick made forbidding intelligence operatives from sharing information with criminal investigators. (Gorelick later served as a 9/11 commission member.)

"They were stopped because the lawyers at that time in 2000 told them Mohamed Atta had a green card" -- he didn't -- "and they could not go after someone with a green card," said Rep. Curt Weldon, the Pennsylvania Republican who brought the existence of Able Danger to light.

The military spooks knew only that Atta and his confederates had links to al-Qaida. They hadn't unearthed their mission. But if the FBI had kept tabs on them (a big if, given the nature of the FBI at the time), 9/11 almost certainly could have been prevented.

What may be a bigger scandal is that the staff of the 9/11 commission knew of Able Danger and what it had found, but made no mention of it in its report. This is as if the commission which investigated the attack on Pearl Harbor had written its final report without mentioning the Japanese.

Weldon unveiled Able Danger in a speech on the House floor June 27, but his remarks didn't attract attention until The New York Times reported on them Tuesday.

When the story broke, former Rep. Lee Hamilton, a Democrat from Indiana, co-chairman of the 9/11 commission, at first denied the commission had ever been informed of what Able Danger had found, and took a swipe at Weldon's credibility:

"The Sept. 11th commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of the surveillance of Mohamed Atta or his cell," Hamilton said. "Had we learned of it obviously it would have been a major focus of our investigation."

Hamilton changed his tune after The New York Times reported Thursday, and The Associated Press confirmed, that commission staff had been briefed on Able Danger in October 2003 and again in July 2004.

It was in October 2003 that Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger stole classified documents from the National Archives and destroyed some. Berger allegedly was studying documents in the archives to help prepare Clinton officials to testify before the 9/11 commission. Was he removing references to Able Danger? Someone should ask him before he is sentenced next month.

After having first denied that staff had been briefed on Able Danger, commission spokesman Al Felzenberg said no reference was made to it in the final report because "it was not consistent with what the commission knew about Atta's whereabouts before the attacks," the AP reported.

The only dispute over Atta's whereabouts is whether he was in Prague on April 9, 2001, to meet with Samir al Ani, an Iraqi intelligence officer. Czech intelligence insists he was. Able Danger, apparently, had information supporting the Czechs.

The CIA, and the 9/11 commission, say Atta wasn't in Prague April 9, 2001, because his cell phone was used in Florida that day. But there is no evidence of who used the phone. Atta could have lent it to a confederate. (It wouldn't have worked in Europe anyway.)

But acknowledging that possibility would leave open the likelihood that Saddam's regime was involved in, or at least had foreknowledge of, the 9/11 attacks. And that would have been as uncomfortable for Democrats as the revelation that 9/11 could have been prevented if it hadn't been for the Clinton administration's wall of separation.

The 9/11 commission wrote history as it wanted it to be, not as it was. The real history of what happened that terrible September day has yet to be written.


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineJesusChrist
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
Re: Conspiaracy theory that you can actually credit [Re: JesusChrist]
    #4547010 - 08/17/05 04:23 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

I am surprised that this story is getting little attention on this forum.


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Conspiaracy theory that you can actually credit [Re: JesusChrist]
    #4547129 - 08/17/05 04:55 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

JesusChrist said:
I am surprised that this story is getting little attention on this forum.




The plot thickens.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Pop goes the Bush mythology bubble - Part 1: The 9-11 Commission usefulidiot 894 4 12/18/04 01:43 PM
by usefulidiot
* 9/11 commission told of Atta cover-up Learyfan 2,169 18 08/20/05 09:17 PM
by zappaisgod
* McCain: Bush 'Stonewalling' 9/11 Commission Learyfan 810 13 07/11/03 12:03 PM
by Learyfan
* Uncommon Sense: Conspiracy and other theories ekomstop 588 4 09/29/04 10:17 PM
by Phluck
* Conspiracy Theories: JFK vs. 9/11
( 1 2 all )
Annapurna1
2,703 30 11/25/03 05:37 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* poll ..9/11 conspiracy theories...
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
Annapurna1
8,332 147 07/04/06 12:05 AM
by David_vs_Goliath
* Conspiracy theories
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Learyfan 3,572 60 02/17/04 04:53 PM
by TheOneYouKnow
* Commission singles out "lack of imagination"
( 1 2 3 all )
Phred 3,607 57 10/06/04 02:10 AM
by Xlea321

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil
951 topic views. 0 members, 1 guests and 2 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
MRCA Tyroler Gluckspilze
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.042 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 19 queries.