.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to brodown.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="brodown:1153387"] [QUOTE] While it certainly is interesting to speculate about what effects a Coleen Rowley or John O'Neill might have had through a leak to the media, the best case scenario I can imagine is that they would expose a handful of the potential patsies. But if Moussaoui was an alleged "20th hijacker", it's hard not to imagine that there were other patsies already in the US and ready to step in if needed. Just as the co-conspirators could not legitimately expect the patsies to have the skills to fly into the selected targets (and thus resorted to ROV/UAV technology), so would it have been foolish to gamble such a crucial operation on the presence of 19 alleged jihadists, any of whom could have been arrested or deported before the operation commenced. [/QUOTE] I'm always 50/50 on Mike Moore--he's got some valid points, but he's such a douche that I find him hard to back sometimes...but that's neither here nor there... Did you happen to read the Rowley & O'Neill article that Moore linked to? Its one thing for Moore to speculate, but they both seem to think that if a WikiLeaks-like option would have existed, they may have been able to affect the 9/11 plot in a significant way.[/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.003 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][