Kerry can't win for trying


http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll.../409130360/1002

"Justice Department report puts crime at 30-year low

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The nation's crime rate last year held steady at the lowest levels since the government began surveying crime victims in 1973, the Justice Department reported Sunday.

The study was the latest contribution to a decade-long trend in which violent crime as measured by victim surveys has fallen by 55 percent and property crime by 49 percent. That has included a 14 percent drop in violent crime from 2000-2001 to 2002-2003.

"The rates are the lowest experienced in the last 30 years," Justice Department statistician Shannan Catalona said in the report. "Crime rates have stabilized."

http://www.wate.com/Global/story.asp?S=2293671

"In Kerry's words, the president "made the job of terrorists easier and made the job of America's police officers harder and that's just plain wrong."

Kerry's criticism came as he outlined a $5 billion plan to fight crime."

wow. maybe the assault weapon ban actually helped lower crime!


but hey, hunters need to have their ak-47's and uzi's in order to hunt those vicious deer and rabbits!! makes the meat taste better!

The Gov't should reinstitute the community Militia's so in the event of an attack by any enemy not only States and Towns, but Neighborhoods can protect themselves.

Huey and crew are simply living the myth of the deadly 'assault weapon'. But Thomas Wheeler in Assault-Weapons Ban, R.I.P. thinks differently.

Here are some of the rebuttals


It is all just a bit of political posturing, and it has failed to generate the desired response. Just like this newest National Guard fiasco coming up in a couple of days.

The problem for the Left is that when the emotions are spent and cannot be generated any more, logic enters the scene and sinks their ideological boat.

What I really liked was the way the hysterical assault gun banners are using Osama Bin laden as thier poster boy.

Some should let them know that an AK47 is not really the terrorists weapon of choice.
The terrorist weapon of choice is a fully fuelled Boeing 767 full of passengers!

These people who support the assault weapons ban are the same ignorant assinine imbiciles who believe the answer to terrorism is to have a little chat with them.

...with strange objects attached to their underbelly!!!!




wonder how the terrorists managed to squeek those by Logan Airport security?!


d'oh!

Yea, mm'hmm, right.
And you say you aren't a conspiracy theorist?

And if someone hadn't drawn those little lines on those pictures and shaded them in so nicely, what else might you have seen? Our Lady of Lourdes?

Zip up, Huey, your crazy is showing....

hmmm.. well lets see, Cleo..

without the outlines, are the bumps still there?



are they there in this picture?



what about this one?



and this one?




tell me Cleo, does wether u or i noticed them without having them pointed out change the fact that they're there?

go ahead and look at ANY picture of the 2nd plane that hit Tower 2 and they're there.



tell me Cleo, what exactly have i "theorized" about? what is my "theory"?

and dont tell me my "theory" is that there is something attatched to the bottom of that plane, because it's not a THEORY when u can see it with your own 2 eyes.


now WHAT they are would require a theory, and i have not stated what i think they are...

as a matter of fact, im trying to ask one of YOU fine 9/11 experts who swear u know the whole story because "the media said so" to explain it to me.. since u are so self-assured that u know everything there is to know about 9/11.

care to help out?

See what? The fuzziest pictures I have ever seen? Is it a coincidence that there are no clear pictures of them? And no, I cant see anything down there. Looks like a typical plane too me.

this is a regular plane..




the underbelly is smoother than a baby's bottom.


here is another picture from that day..





if anyone can find a picture of the underbelly of Flight 175 that hit Tower 2 that DOES NOT have these bumps, i will never mention this again.

I might say there were bumps if I could see them at all. Why do you think there are no clear pictures? Hmmmmmm? Just go away Huey. No want wants you posting on this forum.

I see a lot of light reflections Huey:

a site you might want to check out:

http://skepdic.com/pareidol.html

and this one http://www.snopes.com/rumors/wtcface.htm

have at'em

well.. good thing Spanish scientists have analyzed the photos and confirmed that it is not a reflection or camera anomaly, but actually something attached to the plane.

they themselves wont speculate on what they are, but they have confirmed they are there.


PATRONAT MUNICIPAL DE L’ESCOLA
UNIVERSITARIA POLITÉCNICA DE MATARÓ

ANALYSIS OF THE IMAGES OF 11 SEPTEMBER 2001

OBJECTIVES OF THE ANALYSIS

To verify the possible presence of objects on the underside of the fuselage of the second plane involved in the attack in New York on 11 September.

PURPOSE OF THE ANALYSIS

The images obtained in the news report on the attack show certain changes in luminance on the underside of the fuselage. Because all commercial airliners have a cylindrical fuselage, in principle, these variations in luminance make no sense.

In order to try to explain what can be seen with the naked eye, the images were digitally processed, without altering the information, to account for the changes in luminance.

ANALYSIS PROCESS

The images supplied by R R were converted to grey levels in order to process them more rapidly. The images were also cropped for greater efficiency, leaving only the area of interest (the aeroplane).

Each image was processed in the same way – contour detection – employing three standard algorithms commonly used in digital image processing:

1. Algorithms to detect the contour along the direction of the gradient, approximating the first derivative function of the image.

2. Algorithms to detect sudden changes in image intensity. The first derivative function of the image has a maximum or minimum in the contour position and the second derivative will be zero in the same position.

The applied gradient-direction-based algorithms were: SOBEL and PREWITT. While those based on the second derivative, considered Laplacian and Gaussian functions.

CONCLUSIONS

The same analysis has been performed on various images. The selected images are fragments of photographs of the attack on 11 September and a Boeing 767-300.

The studied images are taken from different angles of observation.

The detected cylindrical objects cannot be due to shadows caused by the angle of incidence of the sun on the plane, because they always appear to be the same shape and size, though with varying luminosity.

The detected objects have varying luminosity around them because they are in relief (this is the only possible explanation).

The detected objects are clearly distinct from the landing gear.


AMPARO SACRISTÁN CARRASCO
PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL

Mataró (Barcelona, Spain), 26 March 2003

http://www.amics21.com/911/report.html

if they are "reflections", how are they visible from 3 angles at the same time, maintaining the SAME SHAPE?


sunlight only shines at one angle at any given point in time.. it could not possibly reflect on three different angles, forming an image of the exact same shape to all possible viewpoints.


it's like holding a mirror to sun.. unless u are directly in the line of that reflection, u will not see a flash... in other words, it is not possible for 3 different people viewing from 3 different angles to see the same flash reflected from the sun.

its physically impossible.

huey, i haven't ever responded to you pertaining to this theory of yours but i did look at the links you posted and they do raise questions in my mind as they have in yours. What if there is more to this story than we are aware of and the Gov't is keeping it from us. Does that mean that they are necessarily covering up their own crimes or could this be a National Security issue ?

I found the Pentagon info very interesting. What if a broken arrow situation arose and a missile did get away and hit the Pentagon, we don't know the missiles nationality nor it's source. With the capabilities of the film industry to create anything the mind can concieve with digital technology we really can't even believe what our eye's see without personaly knowing the source.

If these pictures you pasted here were clear and showed foriegn objects attached could we really believe our own eye's ? You tell me. For once i'm not mocking you, i'm sincerely questioning the theory. Can we find any way to really determine if more than we know happened on 9/11 ? After all Al Quaida has accepted responsibility for the attacks on America. Please respond.

politiphile, i appreciate your researched and well thought out response..

once again i have no theory as to what happened on 9/11..

all i know is what i have seen with my own eyes (such as the bumps on that plane), and what i have read and cross-referenced between numerous different sources, some more credible than others...

what i have learned leads me to believe nothing other than there is more to the story than we know about.

in my opinion, there are too many questions about the "official" story for me to believe it whole-heartedly...

...but there is also not enough concrete proof for me to say beyond a doubt that it's a conspiracy and that the official story is wrong..


does that mean i think the government did it? not necessarily...

but it sure means i, along with an increasing number of people (including many of the 9/11 families) would like MORE questions answered..


and it seems to me, with the opposition to the 9/11 Commission at virtually every step of the procedure, that the Bush administration doesnt want to answer those questions.

does that implicate him in the crime? not necessarily.. but it raises doubts in MY mind that maybe there's something he's not telling us.


and i honestly believe there is a way to balance national security with an effective investigations that puts all these questions to rest.


the American people as a whole, regardless of party, need to know what happened that day, as it effected us all.

if u read nothing else about the 9/11 issue, print out and read this 20 page booklet..

http://www.911truth.org/media/9-11_coverup_booklet.pdf


it is not conspiracy theories about bumps on planes, or what hit the pentagon.. its simply a well researched booklet about the documented established facts as to the timeline of what happened on 9/11, who the 9/11 Commissioners were, and the Bush administration's interaction with the Commission and other 9/11 investigations.


this is the website of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee and some of the questions they feel have not been adequately answered by the 9/11 Commission and the Bush administration..

http://www.911independentcommission.org

Huey, this conspiracy theory thing is simply too much! You are obviously missing something up theer.


What A Brain!

Huey, this conspiracy theory thing is simply too much! You are obviously missing something up ther.


Where is your Brain?

u keep talking about a conspiracy theory, yet u have not cited ANY QUOTE where ive actually theorized about anything involving 9/11..

questions are not theories.


so here is my challenge to u, John:

either quote where ive stated a "theory" about 9/11, or zip your lip and play in the corner with your little soundclips like a good little boy..

got it?

I will read these links and get back to you on this huey.

Are you seriously tring to get me to believe that all this 'so called' strange evidence concerning the attack on the twin towers, and the Pentagon are not part of the Conspiracy Crowd genre?

Actually, I did forget. If you believe that explanation, to you it is both reasonable and normal. So you do not think there is any sort of Conspiracy throry. I understand this now.

However, the overwhelming majority of us cannot come up with any logic to it, so to us it is really conspiracy threory drivel.

And as for the sound clips, it is something new to me here. I will either use it all up, or grow tired, while I look for something nice and new in order to poke fun at your theories and actions.

So don't take it personal, there is not intent to belittle you; just get a good laugh. And if I must be forced to wade through your assault to my reasoning abilities, then I deserve to have the Liberty to make light of them.

it may be part of any crowd or genre or whatever u want to call it.. im not concerned with that.

im not speculating or "theorizing" what those things are.. im ASKING what they are. because there is absolutely no doubt that they are there.

u see em, i see em, and scientists have verified it.



once again, QUOTE ME theorizing or simply stop talking about it.

i have not presented ANY theory in ANY of the discussions concerning this issue.

Cue the Music to "Rocky"



Does this guy cut a ridiculous figure or what?

Usually Huey, when someone is obsessed with something, they believe in that theory. A false theory. A couple posts fine, but when you are threads and many, many posts on it. That qualifys as obsessed.

This topic was about how Kerry was going fight nonexistent crime. Huey has successfully highjacked the thread and is rehashing some patent nonsence.

Mods Is it time for a vacation?

O.K. huey, i've read the 24 page 911 truth.org pamphlet and it is raising more questions than it answers. First of all, the liberal democrats on the commission would never do anything to protect Bush. Ben Veniste, Gorelick, these people are total Partisans. Although i agree these people are corrupt they are on the other side and did everything they could to place the blame for 9/11 on the Bush administration and not Clinton's. I don't believe they would do anything to assist in a coverup in favor of George.

The 23 questions they have for the Bush administration might be valid if there were any objective way to accurately answer them. Here is my main point though, let's assume there is an actual Gov't coverup. What if the coverup is motivated by legitamate National Security issues and not to protect any wrong doings by the Bush Administration.

I heard Richard Clarke say on Tim Russerts show in his own words that it was he who approved the departure of the plane that took the Bin Ladens back to Saudi Arabia after the FBI checked out every family member on that flight. We know Clarke is not a Bush partisan and we have no reason to believe the FBI is involved in a National Coverup.

I hope this sufficiently explains my doubts about a Bush plot to justify a war on Islam by creating a tragedy of monumental proportions. The main concern i had was the hit on the Pentagon due to the reports that no remains of the fusalage were left behind and the fire should have been huge and difficult to extinguish due to the vast volume of fuel on board. Was it a missile or a Plane that hit the Pentagon ? I don't know and after living through the JFK assassination coverup i know that coverups happen but the question remains, if there is a Pentagon coverup, is it to protect criminals or for National Security issues ? This is the question that might never be answered due to War on Terror we find ourselves in today.

Also huey, if this was a plot to justify a war on Islam, the war is now on and the enemy is commited to the destruction of the West and our way of life. With that said, i would still vote for GW Bush to complete the war he is dedicated to winning and never trust kerry to do the right things neccessary to defeat this enemy.

I was also around in 71 and know the irreperable harm that kerry did the the effort to save the South Vietnamese from living under Communism which they still live under to this day. As Liberals do he successfuly changed the subject from defeating Communism to putting the American Government on the defensive in denying that we were a Nation of War Criminals. No matter how you justify it kerry betrayed his country and his fellow Comrades in uniform who fought to defend Democracy around the World.

Remember the real history huey, when Ike sent the first advisors to Vietnam in 58, he was invited by the S. Vietnamese. We were not an aggressive force, occupiers or invaders. Kerry turned us into an army on the scale and heartlessnes of Ghengis Khan. So even though i can agree that questions about the Pentagon attack exist, it would never qualify kerry to be the Commander in Chief of the USA. Nuff said for now.

Yeah, Kerry's a big crime fighter.....when he was Lt Gov under Dukakis he was for Dukykaka's Felony Furlough Program that gave convicted felons 48 hour unsupervised and unmonitored furloughs on the honor system....all they had to do was promise to behave.....Willie Horton went on his 48 vacation and killed two people...there were other cases too including one pedophile who molested another child while he was out 'behaving'...still while this apparent 'success' was going on his team managed to send out on vacation close to 500 murders, rapists and child molesters.

It's interesting to note too that while Mr. Kerry was assistant DA he was so thrilled with his inside information about planned raids and stuff that the cops hated him because Kerry would announce it on talk radio before the cops ever got to the raid. Criminals love Kerry....no wonder he's so upset that Florida purged them off the voting lists! I can just see him as president...."Psst...bin Laden....don't you know of our latest plan? I do, it's (insert plan).....haha you're not as smart as you thought...I'm smarter!"