Alliedassault - View Single Post

TGB! · 07-01-2004, 10:04 PM

Short Hand your flaming notwithstanding - you do very little to answer points, or back up your "claims" with any real source. Saying that 9/11 is unadulterated truth is probably one of the most ignorant things I've ever had the misfortune of seeing you type, since information released pretty much proves that no, the movie isnt a factual piece.

But please explain to me this:

Why the 9/11 commission has come out and said the Bin Ladens had nothing to do with the WTC attacks, yet folks seem intent on still connecting them to their brother and therefore villifying President Bush.

Why Moore insists that Bush "stole" the election when the vote had not been certified by the Senate and a comprehensive report that said under official rules Bush would have won, but in varying degrees of rules either would have won.

Why Moore insists that the order to get over a hundred Saudis out of the country came from someone in the White House, yet Richard Clarke has come out and said otherwise.

Why Moore chooses to portray Iraq as a sovreign nation that has never authorized or engaged in aggression against the United States, yet has sponsored and given asylum to terrorist who have committed crimes against us.

Oh, and for you to dismiss FACTCHECK.org, not FACTCHECKSPONSEREDBYREPUBLICANS.org or FACTCHECKTHATMOOREISAFATSLOB.org - as "just another useless link" really shows your inability for critical thinking and objective reasoning.

	(#39)
TGB! is Offline Command Sergeant Major Posts: 2,644 Join Date: Dec 2003	07-01-2004, 10:04 PM Short Hand your flaming notwithstanding - you do very little to answer points, or back up your "claims" with any real source. Saying that 9/11 is unadulterated truth is probably one of the most ignorant things I've ever had the misfortune of seeing you type, since information released pretty much proves that no, the movie isnt a factual piece. But please explain to me this: Why the 9/11 commission has come out and said the Bin Ladens had nothing to do with the WTC attacks, yet folks seem intent on still connecting them to their brother and therefore villifying President Bush. Why Moore insists that Bush "stole" the election when the vote had not been certified by the Senate and a comprehensive report that said under official rules Bush would have won, but in varying degrees of rules either would have won. Why Moore insists that the order to get over a hundred Saudis out of the country came from someone in the White House, yet Richard Clarke has come out and said otherwise. Why Moore chooses to portray Iraq as a sovreign nation that has never authorized or engaged in aggression against the United States, yet has sponsored and given asylum to terrorist who have committed crimes against us. Oh, and for you to dismiss FACTCHECK.org, not FACTCHECKSPONSEREDBYREPUBLICANS.org or FACTCHECKTHATMOOREISAFATSLOB.org - as "just another useless link" really shows your inability for critical thinking and objective reasoning.