That footage was not released until later in the day, and you know that. So...again, he was either just making stuff up, or, he had access to footage we've likely never seen.
Or he was simply misquoted. Drop the word "had" into that sentence and it makes perfect sense. A lot more sense than some grand conspiracy.
OK, at this point I can't tell if you're just playing games or you are seriously this (*)(*)(*)(*)ing stupid. BUSH HEARD THAT A PLANE HIT THE TOWER FROM THE NEWS! He didn't have to actually SEE the plane hit the building before making that statement as I already demonstrated and which you couldn't refute. Are you done playing games now? Yes, I am giving you the benefit of the doubt.
Why are you guys making things up to deflect away from what President Bush clearly said? He said this: "I saw an airplane hit the tower - the TV was obviously on - and I used to fly myself, and I said, 'There's one terrible pilot.' And I said, 'It must have been a horrible accident.'" I mean, did anyone in his cabinet, let alone himself, correct those statements post saying them?
This is what you base your questions on? Seriously? Re-read Patriot's answer to your question. He's got it nailed.
"Anyway, I was sitting there, and my Chief of Staff -- well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake. And something was wrong with the plane, or -- anyway, I'm sitting there, listening to the briefing, and Andy Card came and said, "America is under attack."
He said the same exact thing, did he not? So why wouldn't I base my questions off what my former Commander and Chief said? Why the seriously? He said it, and on several occasions that he witnessed the first plane impact on television.
... And we know that the first impact wasn't on television. So he's wrong: embellishing the story for the children and the cameras.
Because we all know not everything needs to be taken so literally. We're not so absorbed in perpetuating the lie that we don't look at things objectively. That is what you are doing. You're making excuses even when you know what people are saying is true. When the excuses don't work, you blatantly lie to try and cover the fact your claims are nothing but (*)(*)(*)(*). Were have we made ANYTHING up or deflecting? We are directly addressing what he wrote and trying to show you how what he said can absolutely be true. But you want to play games and pretend to be so completely ignorant that the only way to take his words are absolutely literally. Was Bush ever known for his flawless use of the English language? Give it up, Jango. You got your ass handed to you on a silver platter. Whining about it isn't going to convince anyone that you are right.
Well, he also says "I used to fly myself". Does that mean he thinks he's Peter Pan or Superman? He doesn't actually say he was in a plane... See how ridiculous you are being?
So, you didn't like this post, Jango? Gee. I wonder why not. Is it because it shows the utter ignorance of your beliefs or is it some deep seeded resentment towards your claims being exposed as baseless? The least you can do is actually RESPOND to the post instead of just hitting dislike. That is the coward's way out.
Thanks for all the dislikes, Jango! What you don't realize is that a dislike from someone like you is like a like from anyone else. Truthers are dishonest, disgusting liars who wish to destroy this great nation of ours. Any efforts made to expose their treasonous actions is a good thing and when one recognizes my efforts as a thing truthers don't like, it makes me all warm and fuzzy inside. Funny how you can't actually respond to the truth, but you can still show everyone your true heart. Instead of throwing the truther version of a temper tantrum, how about addressing the fact it wasn't a failure by Bush to tell the intelligence community how to do their jobs that allowed 9/11 to happen? You also asked me to respond to your other posts, which I did. Why have you not responded to those? Thanks for all the likes, Jango! You're my biggest fan!
You're welcome, Patriot! Sure it is, that's why you're indirectly whining about it. No one else really complains about getting dislikes. You sure do though. Translation = "Jango, I think you're dishonest, disgusting liar who wishes to destory this great nation of ours." More hate speech out of you, which is based off your paranoid delusions. Your ignorance is treasonous, you fool. That's the point, wake up. Look around you. The house is crumbling. Sequestration. Debt crisis. How many Wars now? With who knows how many upcoming? Result of 9/11. When I do respond, I get this, "That's not evidence, I want real evidence." It's like, nothing will satisfy the evidence marker for you. Nothing will. Period. That's what I've learned about you. Even if President Bush said, "Yeah, we let it happen," that still wouldn't be enough for you. You are in a world of denial. You will naturally deny that you are in a world of denial, but everyone that reads your posts can see it clearly, man. You're in denial. So is Hannibal and Fangbeer and Dave. You guys are all in denial. You systematically refute every single piece of information that is presented on this message board, even when that information comes from the New York Times, the Washington Post, or other credible sources of the ilk. You guys are simply incredulous to reality and I think some might be because of Machiavellian reasons and others because of simple natural shillness...but the point remains, 9/11 is a conspiracy for a reason. There are a tremendous amount of anomalies, which, I have found that many are guarded by a barrier of classification or state secret. Yet, no matter what, "there's nothing to see here...move along now folks!" It's nonsense the games that your crew plays. If anything, you're the criminal for abetting. "All right. You've covered your ass now." What type of command, from the Commander in Chief, should have followed that briefing, on August 6th? He is playing the role of 'Daddy' for the entire country, Patriot. Uh, there should have been something coming out of his mouth. But there was zlitch. Nothing. And that is not odd to you. Why? Is it because you're conservative and he's conservative? Nothings odd to you. That's the problem. To you, 9/11 shouldn't be a conspiracy to begin with. When I get some extra time, I will try to respond to those posts, okay? We do have something of a love-hate relationship.
So everyone who doesn't agree with you on 9/11 is in denial? How arrogant can you possibly be? When did you post something from the New York Times or the Washington Post?
There is absolutely no evidence to support that accusation but plenty to say there should be a real investigation. Personally, I think you'll find it was rogue elements and Israeli agents. I don't think Bush was involved as such, just so stupid as to believe anything and everything he was told. I mean, who really wants to be as thick as Bush? Open your eyes and look at the evidence. It's very clear there are massive holes in the official story.
In all seriousness, LOL. How, after eleven years, can you possibly say such a thing? So basically, what you're saying is that the official story is 100% airtight?
So everyone who doesn't agree with you on 9/11 is stupid? How hypocritical can you possibly be? In this very thread no less. It was the NYT and USA Today, before you come back going "Aha!" My point remains the same though. Even credible sources are wiped away casually by the gang here. See, I'm ahead of the curve. I don't use the conspiracy websites as proof for my claims. I let primary sources do my talking. It lends credibility, correct? But apparently not in this neck of the woods it doesn't, not when it conflicts with the worldview or whatnot of the people arguing against me.
