this is the thing with the 9/11 conspiracy theory ...
in isolation - all the supposed evidence pointing to a conspiracy can be dispelled or argued or rationalized but collectively ... it's a different story ...
knowing full well these facts:
* the military industrial complex is alive and well in the US
* war profiteering and economic imperialism are cornerstones to US foreign policy
* war with iraq was based on lies and manipulation
you have to look at the entire thing more critically ... yeah - i believe 9/11 was a conspiracy but it has nothing to do with building 5, pancake demolition, insurance claims, etc.. ... for me it comes down to this - without 9/11 would the war machine be able to sell 2 wars simultaneously that resulted in the following:
1. mass expenditures on arms
2. global and regional instability
3. sharp rise in the price of oil where the main benefactors are oil companies
4. strategic geopolitical presence of the US/Britain in the middle east
all things that have dominated US foreign policy for a long time ...
so, it isn't about believing in a conspiracy ... it's believing that there wasn't ...
this is the thing with the 9/11 conspiracy theory ...
in isolation - all the supposed evidence pointing to a conspiracy can be dispelled or argued or rationalized but collectively ... it's a different story ...
knowing full well these facts:
* the military industrial complex is alive and well in the US
* war profiteering and economic imperialism are cornerstones to US foreign policy
* war with iraq was based on lies and manipulation
you have to look at the entire thing more critically ... yeah - i believe 9/11 was a conspiracy but it has nothing to do with building 5, pancake demolition, insurance claims, etc.. ... for me it comes down to this - without 9/11 would the war machine be able to sell 2 wars simultaneously that resulted in the following:
1. mass expenditures on arms
2. global and regional instability
3. sharp rise in the price of oil where the main benefactors are oil companies
4. strategic geopolitical presence of the US/Britain in the middle east
all things that have dominated US foreign policy for a long time ...
so, it isn't about believing in a conspiracy ... it's believing that there wasn't ...
...
My belief... these attacks were symbolic in nature... strike at America's military might (Penatagon), economic empire (World Trade Centers) and Government (Capitol Building or White House) by fundamentalists who were infuriated by U.S. presence in the Middle East and our unshakeable defense of everything Israel does in that region.
The Bush Administration saw this as a grand opportunity to to take advantage of the events and spin them into a big win... politically, economically, militarily and globally. If anything, The Bush Administration was more of a seedy, carpetbagging opportunist, than brilliant, Bond villian-like evil mastermind.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
...
My belief... these attacks were symbolic in nature... strike at America's military might (Penatagon), economic empire (World Trade Centers) and Government (Capitol Building or White House) by fundamentalists who were infuriated by U.S. presence in the Middle East and our unshakeable defense of everything Israel does in that region.
The Bush Administration saw this as a grand opportunity to to take advantage of the events and spin them into a big win... politically, economically, militarily and globally. If anything, The Bush Administration was more of a seedy, carpetbagging opportunist, than brilliant, Bond villian-like evil mastermind.
that makes no sense to me ...
you kill what 3,000 people (please no one try and insinuate that they are meaningless)!? ... and in return you lose your sovereignty as a nation, you get invaded and millions of your people die!? ...
that doesn't add up at all ... it doesn't take too much intelligence to realize that the there would be payback from a strike like that ... you want to strike at america's wealth - you destroy their oil refineries, you want to attack america's military - you attack the bases closest to your location ...
...
My belief... these attacks were symbolic in nature... strike at America's military might (Penatagon), economic empire (World Trade Centers) and Government (Capitol Building or White House) by fundamentalists who were infuriated by U.S. presence in the Middle East and our unshakeable defense of everything Israel does in that region.
The Bush Administration saw this as a grand opportunity to to take advantage of the events and spin them into a big win... politically, economically, militarily and globally. If anything, The Bush Administration was more of a seedy, carpetbagging opportunist, than brilliant, Bond villian-like evil mastermind.
that makes no sense to me ...
you kill what 3,000 people (please no one try and insinuate that they are meaningless)!? ... and in return you lose your sovereignty as a nation, you get invaded and millions of your people die!? ...
that doesn't add up at all ... it doesn't take too much intelligence to realize that the there would be payback from a strike like that ... you want to strike at america's wealth - you destroy their oil refineries, you want to attack america's military - you attack the bases closest to your location ...
Al Qaeda wanted to show that they could strike on American soil. If there was a symbolism to the attacks it was that.
you kill what 3,000 people (please no one try and insinuate that they are meaningless)!? ... and in return you lose your sovereignty as a nation, you get invaded and millions of your people die!? ...
that doesn't add up at all ... it doesn't take too much intelligence to realize that the there would be payback from a strike like that ... you want to strike at america's wealth - you destroy their oil refineries, you want to attack america's military - you attack the bases closest to your location ...
...
Who.. huh... WHAT???
Who killed 3,000 people? Iraq? Afghanistan?
NO. It was al Qaeda. And last time I checked, al Qaeda was never a nation nor did it have any soverignty... or have 1,000,000 people.
Also, al Qaeda, not being a nation, does not possess the resources to wage a conventional war on anyone. They use a simple strategy of asymetrical tactics to strike once and make it count (just the way the Americans taught them to do against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s). It takes them a long time to plan an attack and a much longer time to reload quickly enough to maintain a steady assault. They are basically a musket firing rifle... takes a long time to load and only fires one bullet. So, the shots have to count.
...
i don't know what military strategies you study... but, if you were trying to strike America using your strategies and tactics.. you would not have lasted one week.
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
If you want insight into Usama bin Laden, al Qaeda and the attacks on September 11, 2001... read the books, 'Ghost Wars', 'The bin Laden's' and 'The Looming Towers'. They describe bin Laden and how he got there... from his early life, to is rebellion with his family, their wealth and relationship with America, his conversion to radical religious exstremist and his hatred for American influence in his homeland and on his religion.
There is a reason why the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the Capitol Building were targets. Symbols that the world recognizes as America's power and influence.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
..
Who.. huh... WHAT???
Who killed 3,000 people? Iraq? Afghanistan?
NO. It was al Qaeda. And last time I checked, al Qaeda was never a nation nor did it have any soverignty... or have 1,000,000 people.
Also, al Qaeda, not being a nation, does not possess the resources to wage a conventional war on anyone. They use a simple strategy of asymetrical tactics to strike once and make it count (just the way the Americans taught them to do against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s). It takes them a long time to plan an attack and a much longer time to reload quickly enough to maintain a steady assault. They are basically a musket firing rifle... takes a long time to load and only fires one bullet. So, the shots have to count.
...
i don't know what military strategies you study... but, if you were trying to strike America using your strategies and tactics.. you would not have lasted one week.
sure ... al qaeda but we all know where they were based and who supported them ...
and no - i'm not a military strategist but can you honestly say that where they DID strike did anything!? ... it didn't cause any real damage ...
But you are not a fanatic engaged in jihad against what you believe to be Satan incarnate. That is the difference.
i think it's easy to paint al qaeda and OBL as such ... it makes for great theatre but it doesn't nearly cut to the reality ...
it's like how the west has painted Ahmadinejad ... wants to wipe israel off the map ... crazy ... meanwhile when he visits the UN in NYC he has meetings with local rabbis ...
But you are not a fanatic engaged in jihad against what you believe to be Satan incarnate. That is the difference.
i think it's easy to paint al qaeda and OBL as such ... it makes for great theatre but it doesn't nearly cut to the reality ...
it's like how the west has painted Ahmadinejad ... wants to wipe israel off the map ... crazy ... meanwhile when he visits the UN in NYC he has meetings with local rabbis ...
I think in the case of OBL and his lieutenants it is quite accurate.
sure ... al qaeda but we all know where they were based and who supported them ...
and no - i'm not a military strategist but can you honestly say that where they DID strike did anything!? ... it didn't cause any real damage ...
...
Yes, we do. Taliban authorities set up by Pakistani ISI in Afghanistan allowed al Qaeda command in operate openly and freely there. But, there was no national objective of war with the U.S.
And the September 11th attack DID lead to something. A long, protracted war/occupation in a foriegn land that costs billions... trillions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. al Qaeda knows the U.S. won't be there forever. They don't have to win a single battle. All they have to do is survive.
Remember, Afghanistan has outlasted every empire that tried to take it. and defeated some of the greatest military strategists in human history. They beat out Ghengis Khan, Alexander the Great, Rome, The British Empire and the Soviet Union... and now, The United States.
Read up on bin Laden... he knew this to be true. That the Americans would not last for decades. They would get worn down and eventually leave... just like evey other empire before them.
bin Laden wanted to send a message... we (The U.S.) are not untouchable. Bush/Cheney Inc., took advantage of these events in order to fuel their lust for power and money.
...
Iraq is totally Bush's gig. He seized the opportunity to use the September 11th attacks to drum up a war of his choosing. Opportunist... yes. Genius mastermind... Bush? Really?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
As two more Afghan children are liberated (from their lives) by NATO this weekend, a new film examines the effects of endless US aggression
Glenn Greenwald
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 31 March 2013
Yesterday I had the privilege to watch Dirty Wars, an upcoming film directed by Richard Rowley that chronicles the investigations of journalist Jeremy Scahill into America's global covert war under President Obama and specifically his ever-growing kill lists. I will write comprehensively about this film closer to the date when it and the book by the same name will be released. For now, it will suffice to say that the film is one of the most important I've seen in years: gripping and emotionally affecting in the extreme, with remarkable, news-breaking revelations even for those of us who have intensely followed these issues. The film won awards at Sundance and rave reviews in unlikely places such as Variety and the Hollywood Reporter. But for now, I want to focus on just one small aspect of what makes the film so crucial.
The most propagandistic aspect of the US War on Terror has been, and remains, that its victims are rendered invisible and voiceless. They are almost never named by newspapers. They and their surviving family members are virtually never heard from on television. The Bush and Obama DOJs have collaborated with federal judges to ensure that even those who everyone admits are completely innocent have no access to American courts and thus no means of having their stories heard or their rights vindicated. Radical secrecy theories and escalating attacks on whistleblowers push these victims further into the dark.
It is the ultimate tactic of Othering: concealing their humanity, enabling their dehumanization, by simply relegating them to nonexistence. As Ashleigh Banfield put it her 2003 speech http://digbysblog.blogspot.com.br/2007/ ... since.html denouncing US media coverage of the Iraq war just months before she was demoted and then fired by MSNBC: US media reports systematically exclude both the perspectives of "the other side" and the victims of American violence. Media outlets in predominantly Muslim countries certainly report on their plight, but US media outlets simply do not, which is one major reason for the disparity in worldviews between the two populations. They know what the US does in their part of the world, but Americans are kept deliberately ignorant of it...
The evidence has long been compelling that the primary fuel of what the US calls terrorism are the very policies of aggression justified in the name of stopping terrorism. The vast bulk of those who have been caught in recent years attempting attacks on the US have emphatically cited US militarism and drone killings in their part of the world as their motive. Evidence is overwhelming that what has radicalized huge numbers of previously peaceful and moderate Muslims is growing rage at seeing a continuous stream of innocent victims, including children, at the hands of the seemingly endless US commitment to violence.
...if Americans are going to support or even tolerate endless militarism, as they have been doing, then they should at least have to be confronted with their victims - if not on moral grounds then on pragmatic ones, to understand the effects of these policies. Based on the out-of-sight-out-of-mind reality, the US government and media have been incredibly successful in rendering those victims silent and invisible. Dirty Wars is a truly crucial tonic to that propaganda. At the very least, nobody who sees it and hears from the victims of US aggression will ever again wonder why there are so many people in the world who believe in the justifiability or even necessity of violence against the US.
And before anyone questions whether these people are real:
"Barbara Olson, 45, was a prominent lawyer and frequent political pundit on CNN and other TV channels. She was half of one of Washington's most influential power couples. Her husband, Theodore Olson, is the U.S. Solicitor General. She called her husband twice as the plane was being hijacked and described some details, including that the attackers were using knife-like instruments. Barbara Olson was a chief investigator for the House Government Reform Committee in the mid-1990s. She later became a lawyer on the staff of Senate Minority Whip Don Nickles, before branching out on her own as a TV commentator and private lawyer. Olson was scheduled to fly out of town on Monday but stayed until Tuesday morning to have breakfast with her husband. Tuesday was his birthday."
This the same Theodore Olson who argued before the Supreme Court last week in favor of gay marriage.
Yes, we do. Taliban authorities set up by Pakistani ISI in Afghanistan allowed al Qaeda command in operate openly and freely there. But, there was no national objective of war with the U.S.
And the September 11th attack DID lead to something. A long, protracted war/occupation in a foriegn land that costs billions... trillions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. al Qaeda knows the U.S. won't be there forever. They don't have to win a single battle. All they have to do is survive.
Remember, Afghanistan has outlasted every empire that tried to take it. and defeated some of the greatest military strategists in human history. They beat out Ghengis Khan, Alexander the Great, Rome, The British Empire and the Soviet Union... and now, The United States.
Read up on bin Laden... he knew this to be true. That the Americans would not last for decades. They would get worn down and eventually leave... just like evey other empire before them.
bin Laden wanted to send a message... we (The U.S.) are not untouchable. Bush/Cheney Inc., took advantage of these events in order to fuel their lust for power and money.
...
Iraq is totally Bush's gig. He seized the opportunity to use the September 11th attacks to drum up a war of his choosing. Opportunist... yes. Genius mastermind... Bush? Really?
soo ...what it comes down to is that you believe that al qaeda wanted the US to spend trillions of dollars on war and that's why they attacked you ... whereas I believe that war profiteering is a cornerstone to US foreign policy ...
i still don't see how if Bin Laden wanted to send a message - it would do it through a complicated plan that exacted relatively small damage as far as casualties ... factor in everything else and it just doesn't add up to me ...
Yes, we do. Taliban authorities set up by Pakistani ISI in Afghanistan allowed al Qaeda command in operate openly and freely there. But, there was no national objective of war with the U.S.
And the September 11th attack DID lead to something. A long, protracted war/occupation in a foriegn land that costs billions... trillions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. al Qaeda knows the U.S. won't be there forever. They don't have to win a single battle. All they have to do is survive.
Remember, Afghanistan has outlasted every empire that tried to take it. and defeated some of the greatest military strategists in human history. They beat out Ghengis Khan, Alexander the Great, Rome, The British Empire and the Soviet Union... and now, The United States.
Read up on bin Laden... he knew this to be true. That the Americans would not last for decades. They would get worn down and eventually leave... just like evey other empire before them.
bin Laden wanted to send a message... we (The U.S.) are not untouchable. Bush/Cheney Inc., took advantage of these events in order to fuel their lust for power and money.
...
Iraq is totally Bush's gig. He seized the opportunity to use the September 11th attacks to drum up a war of his choosing. Opportunist... yes. Genius mastermind... Bush? Really?
soo ...what it comes down to is that you believe that al qaeda wanted the US to spend trillions of dollars on war and that's why they attacked you ... whereas I believe that war profiteering is a cornerstone to US foreign policy ...
i still don't see how if Bin Laden wanted to send a message - it would do it through a complicated plan that exacted relatively small damage as far as casualties ... factor in everything else and it just doesn't add up to me ...
Psychological damage is just as much a goal to terrorists as is physical damage. Causing fear is a success. This is true for all acts of terrorism, regardless of who perpetrates them or where. In this Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were indeed successful.
Psychological damage is just as much a goal to terrorists as is physical damage. Causing fear is a success. This is true for all acts of terrorism, regardless of who perpetrates them or where. In this Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were indeed successful.
agreed. i think bin laden won, because this psychological damage has made us give up many of our freedoms and has made us paranoid and suspect of everything and everyone. this fear influences our foreign and domestic policies to this day.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
obama had the opportunity to have bush and cheney tried. he could have had them arrested and handed over to the hague, but he didn't. he felt it would be unproductive. if he had, it would have gone a long way to prove to the rest of the world that we hold our own people to the same standard and that nobody is above international law. but he let them go. pelosi could have had bush impeached in the house for the iraq war, but "impeachment is off the table" is what she always said. the dems are just as complicit in bushco's immunity from prosecution, and are just as guilty as those in the bush administration.
Obama is Bush 2.0
Why would he hand him over to the hague when he would suffer the same fate?
Comments
I think the Pentagon part is the weakest link.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
The Pentagon is HUGE and
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICL ... esses.html
Remember, even if there was a conspiracy, crashing the planes is probably the easiest part.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
My belief... these attacks were symbolic in nature... strike at America's military might (Penatagon), economic empire (World Trade Centers) and Government (Capitol Building or White House) by fundamentalists who were infuriated by U.S. presence in the Middle East and our unshakeable defense of everything Israel does in that region.
The Bush Administration saw this as a grand opportunity to to take advantage of the events and spin them into a big win... politically, economically, militarily and globally. If anything, The Bush Administration was more of a seedy, carpetbagging opportunist, than brilliant, Bond villian-like evil mastermind.
Hail, Hail!!!
that makes no sense to me ...
you kill what 3,000 people (please no one try and insinuate that they are meaningless)!? ... and in return you lose your sovereignty as a nation, you get invaded and millions of your people die!? ...
that doesn't add up at all ... it doesn't take too much intelligence to realize that the there would be payback from a strike like that ... you want to strike at america's wealth - you destroy their oil refineries, you want to attack america's military - you attack the bases closest to your location ...
Al Qaeda wanted to show that they could strike on American soil. If there was a symbolism to the attacks it was that.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
again ... understanding the consequences - what good did that do? ... just doesn't add up for me ...
Who.. huh... WHAT???
Who killed 3,000 people? Iraq? Afghanistan?
NO. It was al Qaeda. And last time I checked, al Qaeda was never a nation nor did it have any soverignty... or have 1,000,000 people.
Also, al Qaeda, not being a nation, does not possess the resources to wage a conventional war on anyone. They use a simple strategy of asymetrical tactics to strike once and make it count (just the way the Americans taught them to do against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s). It takes them a long time to plan an attack and a much longer time to reload quickly enough to maintain a steady assault. They are basically a musket firing rifle... takes a long time to load and only fires one bullet. So, the shots have to count.
...
i don't know what military strategies you study... but, if you were trying to strike America using your strategies and tactics.. you would not have lasted one week.
Hail, Hail!!!
But you are not a fanatic engaged in jihad against what you believe to be Satan incarnate. That is the difference.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
There is a reason why the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the Capitol Building were targets. Symbols that the world recognizes as America's power and influence.
Hail, Hail!!!
sure ... al qaeda but we all know where they were based and who supported them ...
and no - i'm not a military strategist but can you honestly say that where they DID strike did anything!? ... it didn't cause any real damage ...
i think it's easy to paint al qaeda and OBL as such ... it makes for great theatre but it doesn't nearly cut to the reality ...
it's like how the west has painted Ahmadinejad ... wants to wipe israel off the map ... crazy ... meanwhile when he visits the UN in NYC he has meetings with local rabbis ...
I think in the case of OBL and his lieutenants it is quite accurate.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Yes, we do. Taliban authorities set up by Pakistani ISI in Afghanistan allowed al Qaeda command in operate openly and freely there. But, there was no national objective of war with the U.S.
And the September 11th attack DID lead to something. A long, protracted war/occupation in a foriegn land that costs billions... trillions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. al Qaeda knows the U.S. won't be there forever. They don't have to win a single battle. All they have to do is survive.
Remember, Afghanistan has outlasted every empire that tried to take it. and defeated some of the greatest military strategists in human history. They beat out Ghengis Khan, Alexander the Great, Rome, The British Empire and the Soviet Union... and now, The United States.
Read up on bin Laden... he knew this to be true. That the Americans would not last for decades. They would get worn down and eventually leave... just like evey other empire before them.
bin Laden wanted to send a message... we (The U.S.) are not untouchable. Bush/Cheney Inc., took advantage of these events in order to fuel their lust for power and money.
...
Iraq is totally Bush's gig. He seized the opportunity to use the September 11th attacks to drum up a war of his choosing. Opportunist... yes. Genius mastermind... Bush? Really?
Hail, Hail!!!
jesse ventura's conspiracy theory on the pentagon 9/11
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
the bilderberg group
wtf?
:evil: looks like im gonna go get me some aspartame in some baby food :twisted:
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
I guarantee a boeing 757 did not fly into the pentagon. where the fuck is the debris? stinks to high heaven of a government cover up type deal.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Really? A plane crashing into a reinforced building at 500mph will leave little to no debris. What wasn't incinerated was pulverized by the impact.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... sm-victims
The message sent by America's invisible victims
As two more Afghan children are liberated (from their lives) by NATO this weekend, a new film examines the effects of endless US aggression
Glenn Greenwald
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 31 March 2013
Yesterday I had the privilege to watch Dirty Wars, an upcoming film directed by Richard Rowley that chronicles the investigations of journalist Jeremy Scahill into America's global covert war under President Obama and specifically his ever-growing kill lists. I will write comprehensively about this film closer to the date when it and the book by the same name will be released. For now, it will suffice to say that the film is one of the most important I've seen in years: gripping and emotionally affecting in the extreme, with remarkable, news-breaking revelations even for those of us who have intensely followed these issues. The film won awards at Sundance and rave reviews in unlikely places such as Variety and the Hollywood Reporter. But for now, I want to focus on just one small aspect of what makes the film so crucial.
The most propagandistic aspect of the US War on Terror has been, and remains, that its victims are rendered invisible and voiceless. They are almost never named by newspapers. They and their surviving family members are virtually never heard from on television. The Bush and Obama DOJs have collaborated with federal judges to ensure that even those who everyone admits are completely innocent have no access to American courts and thus no means of having their stories heard or their rights vindicated. Radical secrecy theories and escalating attacks on whistleblowers push these victims further into the dark.
It is the ultimate tactic of Othering: concealing their humanity, enabling their dehumanization, by simply relegating them to nonexistence. As Ashleigh Banfield put it her 2003 speech http://digbysblog.blogspot.com.br/2007/ ... since.html denouncing US media coverage of the Iraq war just months before she was demoted and then fired by MSNBC: US media reports systematically exclude both the perspectives of "the other side" and the victims of American violence. Media outlets in predominantly Muslim countries certainly report on their plight, but US media outlets simply do not, which is one major reason for the disparity in worldviews between the two populations. They know what the US does in their part of the world, but Americans are kept deliberately ignorant of it...
The evidence has long been compelling that the primary fuel of what the US calls terrorism are the very policies of aggression justified in the name of stopping terrorism. The vast bulk of those who have been caught in recent years attempting attacks on the US have emphatically cited US militarism and drone killings in their part of the world as their motive. Evidence is overwhelming that what has radicalized huge numbers of previously peaceful and moderate Muslims is growing rage at seeing a continuous stream of innocent victims, including children, at the hands of the seemingly endless US commitment to violence.
...if Americans are going to support or even tolerate endless militarism, as they have been doing, then they should at least have to be confronted with their victims - if not on moral grounds then on pragmatic ones, to understand the effects of these policies. Based on the out-of-sight-out-of-mind reality, the US government and media have been incredibly successful in rendering those victims silent and invisible. Dirty Wars is a truly crucial tonic to that propaganda. At the very least, nobody who sees it and hears from the victims of US aggression will ever again wonder why there are so many people in the world who believe in the justifiability or even necessity of violence against the US.
Passenger list of Flight 77. What happened to these people if there was no plane crash?
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nat ... ight77.htm
If you believe this stuff, and I DO NOT but if you do, crashing the plane would be the easiest part.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"Barbara Olson, 45, was a prominent lawyer and frequent political pundit on CNN and other TV channels. She was half of one of Washington's most influential power couples. Her husband, Theodore Olson, is the U.S. Solicitor General. She called her husband twice as the plane was being hijacked and described some details, including that the attackers were using knife-like instruments. Barbara Olson was a chief investigator for the House Government Reform Committee in the mid-1990s. She later became a lawyer on the staff of Senate Minority Whip Don Nickles, before branching out on her own as a TV commentator and private lawyer. Olson was scheduled to fly out of town on Monday but stayed until Tuesday morning to have breakfast with her husband. Tuesday was his birthday."
This the same Theodore Olson who argued before the Supreme Court last week in favor of gay marriage.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
soo ...what it comes down to is that you believe that al qaeda wanted the US to spend trillions of dollars on war and that's why they attacked you ... whereas I believe that war profiteering is a cornerstone to US foreign policy ...
i still don't see how if Bin Laden wanted to send a message - it would do it through a complicated plan that exacted relatively small damage as far as casualties ... factor in everything else and it just doesn't add up to me ...
Psychological damage is just as much a goal to terrorists as is physical damage. Causing fear is a success. This is true for all acts of terrorism, regardless of who perpetrates them or where. In this Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were indeed successful.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Why would he hand him over to the hague when he would suffer the same fate?
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Please pm me with your response because I've read some of the conspiracy theories and IMO, they hold no water.