Yes the document you speak of published by the Project for The New American Century does mention an attack on American soil in order to kick start this movement to Americanize the Middle East but I think that is mere coincidence.
how many coincidences can you explain though... there seem to be far too many invloving that terrible day
Alerts must have been heightened?? Were you around that morning? Were you watching it as it was happening? No one automatically assumed that it was a terrorist attack. And it wasn't even officially thought to be a terrorist attack until 'Holy cow, it happened again. And next door even.'
Did you see the way the PRESIDENT of the US was told what was going on?
I mean, who hasn't at this point. He sat there with that assinine look on his face. You couldn't tell if he was trying to figure out what the words meant in the children's book he was reading or if he was deciding what to do.
Even that small lapse in time is enough to make a plan fall off course. I just think you maybe a little unrealistic about the timeframe, is all.
i sure as hell would expect that alerts were heightened. the first plane veered off course and stopped responding to air traffic controllers well before it crashed. from that moment, protective measures should have been rolling. what, were these guys sitting around playing freecell when the first plane changed course and stopped responding? maybe they were, but i doubt that they would just look at each other and say, "huh, that's weird... oh well, i'm sure it's nothing serious.. pilots stop turn their transponders off and deviate from their flight paths all the time". they jumped right into action in the case of payne stewart's plane when it stopped responding, and intercepted it in 20 minutes. and that wasn't a part of any assumed terrorist attack. air traffic controllers don't just sit back and wait for terrorist attacks - they make sure planes fly where they're supposed to. as soon as that first plane make a left down the hudson river and wouldn't answer, it should have been intercepted. that it wasn't, is very troubling.. and then it happened 3 more times.
i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
inevitable maybe, but what a coincidence that it happens when all these money and power hungry people who for decades had openly wished to basically take over the world militarily were in highly influential positions in the gov't.
hitler burned down the reichstag, blamed it on 'terrorists', and used it to scare people into supporting imperial war. why couldn't it happen here? because we're the "good ol' u.s. of a"?
false flag attacks are as old as war itself...
its in the history books, if anyone reads them anymore?
how many coincidences can you explain though... there seem to be far too many invloving that terrible day
Yes there are a lot of coincidences but what there is not is one shred of evidence that points to our government's evolvement in the attack. In 6 years not one single person, not one single leaked memo, absolutely nothing has surfaced to indicate that the Bush administration had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks. Furthermore from the evidence gathered the plans for this attack where set in motion before the Bush administration took office so the conspiracy theorists should be looking at the Clinton administration as the culprit.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
just because it could happen doesnt mean it did. All evidence points to an outside attacker. That has also happened many times in the past, and far more often that some "false flag attack".
i sure as hell would expect that alerts were heightened. the first plane veered off course and stopped responding to air traffic controllers well before it crashed. from that moment, protective measures should have been rolling. what, were these guys sitting around playing freecell when the first plane changed course and stopped responding? maybe they were, but i doubt that they would just look at each other and say, "huh, that's weird... oh well, i'm sure it's nothing serious.. pilots stop turn their transponders off and deviate from their flight paths all the time". they jumped right into action in the case of payne stewart's plane when it stopped responding, and intercepted it in 20 minutes. and that wasn't a part of any assumed terrorist attack. air traffic controllers don't just sit back and wait for terrorist attacks - they make sure planes fly where they're supposed to. as soon as that first plane make a left down the hudson river and wouldn't answer, it should have been intercepted. that it wasn't, is very troubling.. and then it happened 3 more times.
Now you are saying the first one should have been intercepted?
Oh my.
So now, who was behind the first bombing? Clinton? Or was this an overflow plan from Daddy Bush? Why the hell was that amount of explosives let into the WTC? We can start arguing that now.
But the truth is, you just said it took 20 minutes to intercept Stewart's plane.
Cause I'm broken when I'm lonesome
And I don't feel right when you're gone away
the military/norad/faa have thorough plans for these events and prepare for them all the time, and run drills all the time... fighters across the country are on alert and ready to takeoff at a moments notice... we are talking about the finest military in the world with wall to wall radar and tracking on every single commercial airliner that takes off in the country
the whole incompetant act/argument does not work for me.. that is always the excuse with this administration... you dont get to that positiion of extreme power by being incompetant
the military/norad/faa have thorough plans for these events and prepare for them all the time, and run drills all the time... fighters across the country are on alert and ready to takeoff at a moments notice... we are talking about the finest military in the world with wall to wall radar and tracking on every single commercial airliner that takes off in the country
the whole incompetant act/argument does not work for me.. that is always the excuse with this administration... you dont get to that positiion of extreme power by being incompetant
Yes someone fucked up and the administration is guilty of not being honest with the public about this. Someone also dropped the ball leading up to the attacks and again the administration is guilty of not being honest with the public about this as well. What the administration is not guilty of is orchestrating or playing an active hand in the attacks. This was the end result of an intelligence and national security failure that started back in the Clinton administration. Mohammed Atta was under CIA survellience from the start on 2000, but once he entered the US in June of 2000 our internal agencies dropped the ball and did not continue tracking his movements and activities. This tragedy was the result of failures across several government agencies under two different administrations not some diabolical plan to rule the world.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
the military/norad/faa have thorough plans for these events and prepare for them all the time, and run drills all the time... fighters across the country are on alert and ready to takeoff at a moments notice... we are talking about the finest military in the world with wall to wall radar and tracking on every single commercial airliner that takes off in the country
the whole incompetant act/argument does not work for me.. that is always the excuse with this administration... you dont get to that positiion of extreme power by being incompetant
Believe it or not, I would tend to agree with you, that these planes would have been intercepted. Then again, I can also see where something just went terribly wrong somewhere to prevent that from happening.
As ludacris as it sounds for a plane to be able to hit the Pentagon, there are other things out there that you wouldn't imagine possible either.
For instance, when you fly out of Reagan, planes bank hard left right after take-off to basically dodge the Washington monument. Doesn't that sound stupid? I mean, really... if some pilot wants to commit Harry Cary or something he could easily just fly right over to any building in downtown DC and crash his plane in under a minute. Nobody would get to them in time to shoot them down.
And now that I think about it, some pyscho did crash his plane into the fucking white house during the clinton presidency. Some nut job also pulled out an AK right in front of the WH too and shot the place up. And that is with dozens of secret service patrolling with binoculars, cameras, dogs, snipers on the roof - the whole thing. So could it happen.... yeah, I'm sad to say we fucked up that day.
Now you are saying the first one should have been intercepted?
intercepted doesn't mean shot down - just sent up to investigate.. there should have been jets up there, as was/is standard operating procedure. after the first plane, almost an hour and a half passed and not one plane was intercepted. well, except for flight 93. ("let's roll"? sorry uncle neil, that was all b.s.)
So now, who was behind the first bombing? Clinton? Or was this an overflow plan from Daddy Bush?
you give the president - either one - too much credit. but since you mention the first bombing.. the person who supplied the bomb to the 'terrorists' was an FBI informant, who was told he was delivering a fake bomb as part of a sting (according to the ny times).
As someone already posted. If the US did orchestrate the 9/11 attacks or have a hand in orchestrating don't you think they would have placed the blame squarely on Iraq or Iran. Why place blame on some fanatic hiding out in some no man's land in Afghanistan. Placing blame on Iran or Iraq would have helped their cause even more.
why limit themselves? why not leave it open-ended? the element of mystery that comes with "al qaeda" serves to scare people more. and it leaves the door open to invade other countries when you can say "they" are being or have been harbored here, financed from here, etc.. [/quote]
Yes the document you speak of published by the Project for The New American Century does mention an attack on American soil in order to kick start this movement to Americanize the Middle East but I think that is mere coincidence. As I stated above if this was orchestrated by our own government you can be sure that the "evidence" would have lead directly to Baghdad or Tehran.
their ambitions don't end in baghdad and tehran.
i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
why limit themselves? why not leave it open-ended? the element of mystery that comes with "al qaeda" serves to scare people more. and it leaves the door open to invade other countries when you can say "they" are being or have been harbored here, financed from here, etc..
their ambitions don't end in baghdad and tehran.[/quote]
For discussions sake let's say the US planned it. Why would we say that 15 of the 19 hijackers where Saudi's. Why would we say that Bin Laden was responsible why not a Iran, Iraq, Syria, or even that the hijackers obtained significant help from the government's of these countries and that the government's had advanced knowledge of the attack. That would provide the administration with an air tight case to unleash hell on all three countries plus garner the support of the UN, NATO, and the EU. If the attack was planned by the US for the purpose of jump starting some world domination plan then they did an awefully bad job of it. Had it been I, I would have difinitely produced "evidence" that would have led back to those three troublesome nations. That way our military conquest of those countries, and the region, would have been legitamate (in the public eye) and it would not have been a unilateral exercise.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
For discussions sake let's say the US planned it. Why would we say that 15 of the 19 hijackers where Saudi's. Why would we say that Bin Laden was responsible why not a Iran, Iraq, Syria, or even that the hijackers obtained significant help from the government's of these countries and that the government's had advanced knowledge of the attack. That would provide the administration with an air tight case to unleash hell on all three countries plus garner the support of the UN, NATO, and the EU. If the attack was planned by the US for the purpose of jump starting some world domination plan then they did an awefully bad job of it. Had it been I, I would have difinitely produced "evidence" that would have led back to those three troublesome nations. That way our military conquest of those countries, and the region, would have been legitamate (in the public eye) and it would not have been a unilateral exercise.
I think the point that negates that argument is the fact that they didn't need to in order to muster enough population support to invade Iraq. As in: even though they said 15/19 were Saudi people didn't care and still supported the war on Iraq. Therefore, there was no need.
I believe there were reports about top US officials stating going to the UN was just an act and that they were already planning a war with Iraq before discussing this with the UN. That negates the UN support argument.
The point thickens with the fact that after the support for the Iraq war declined immensely, they realised they needed a new reason to muster enough support to attack Iran. And so the show begins again...
In the end I think it doesn't really matter what happened that day because there's no way of changing what happened next.
I think the point that negates that argument is the fact that they didn't need to in order to muster enough population support to invade Iraq. As in: even though they said 15/19 were Saudi people didn't care and still supported the war on Iraq. Therefore, there was no need.
The point thickens with the fact that after the support for the Iraq war declined immensely, they realised they needed a new reason to muster enough support to attack Iran. And so the show begins again...
In the end I think it doesn't really matter what happened that day because there's no way of changing what happened next.
True they didn't need the attacks to be orchestrated by Iraq or the hijackers even being Iraqi citizens to get the necessary support from the public to invade, but there was no way to know this prior to the attacks. Hypothetically speaking if I was the president I would make sure that all the "evidence" produced would point dirrectly to my intended target(s).
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
True they didn't need the attacks to be orchestrated by Iraq or the hijackers even being Iraqi citizens to get the necessary support from the public to invade, but there was no way to know this prior to the attacks. Hypothetically speaking if I was the president I would make sure that all the "evidence" produced would point dirrectly to my intended target(s).
Maybe thats where they erred
I don't believe they did it but I feel they knew it was coming and opened the doors to it. That is what all the evidence points towards IN MY OPINION.
I don't believe they did it but I feel they knew it was coming and opened the doors to it. That is what all the evidence points towards IN MY OPINION.
I think that they knew that an attack was immenant and they failed to heed all the warning signs. In a way they are responsible because of their incompidence and that applies to the Clinton administration as well.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
I think that they knew that an attack was immenant and they failed to heed all the warning signs. In a way they are responsible because of their incompidence and that applies to the Clinton administration as well.
This is the logical conclusion which requires no visits to fantasy island.
The last two administrations totally fucked up in intelligence capabilities and response. They are certainly culpable. That doesn't mean they planned and executed it.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Blaming one or two country for this kind of attack is just not logical when you can use the global terrorism argument to invade any country that you can. And you don't need hard evidence anyway. Look at Iraq.
Don't forget that USA is playing for the world leadership and there are a lot of thorns on the rose that can give a headache so you just say "terrorism has no boundaries" and get a chance to bully any country you can.
and binding everything to this or that administration does not sound correct to me. administrations come and go but the main policies remain the same because main beneficiaries from the government policy always remain the same (I mean the big boys who are really running the show). Who are funding the multi-million campaigns for the office?
"when one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion." Robert Pirsig
"... Altered by a fallen eagle, a warning sign..."
I can't help but weigh in on such an intriguing and dark subject although as much as we'd like to debate and question and bitch, as ordinary citizens we will never be privy to all the information pertaining to 9/11 and specifically the American 77 and the Pentagon.
I have a hard time swallowing explicit participation by our government in the 9/11 attacks, but a great many questions do exist. One concept, for me, which is extremely perplexing is the video from the Pentagon. Think about how many times in the days after 9/11 you saw those images of the planes hitting the WTC. Shortly after the Pentagon was hit, the FBI confiscated surveillance tapes from every business that would have showed the explosion at the Pentagon. It wasn't until many months after that the FBI released the tape that doesn't seem to show much of anything other than a few empty frames then an explosion. Why would the FBI confiscate the tapes of the Pentagon when the WTC tapes were showed so frivilously? That's a fishy motherfucker, in my opinion.
Some of you who've responded have cited a shortage of time in terms of the second plane hitting the WTC and the Pentagon attack. Thirty plus minutes is plenty of time. The FAA tracks every commercial flight in the country; the confusion on part of the air traffic controllers occurred when the WTC flights initially went off path. They were unsure of whether it was part of the exercise (very questionable timing) or real world events but confirmed it ina fairly quick manner. Planes are scrambled when commercial airlines go off course and after the first plane hit the WTC and others were known to be off course and weren't responding, our military, as with the Payne Stewart flight, would've been dispatched. Keep in mind a plane had crashed into the WTC and others were KNOWN to be off course. Why would our military be conditioned to respond to commercial airliners that went off course then not be able to intercept American 77 before it hit the Pentagon after pulling a 180 over Western Kentucky. I'd say flying back clear across West Virgina would have given ample time for a response considering that the hijacking took place between 8:51 and 8:54 a.m. in lieu of the events in New York.
A truly informative site I stumbled upon concerning this incident is http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pentagon.html . There is a section of three videos enitiled: Analysis of Flight Path Animation Provided by NTSB. Watch the middle video which provides the recording of two separate phone calls between a gentleman seeking information and the NTSB. Fucking interesting to say the least. What about the countless pilots who've stated that the turnaround performed by American 77 could not have transpired in a commercial airline with a poorly skilled pilot at the helm?
Lastly, why is is that a fair number of the 9/11 hijackers have supposedly been seen alive?
All roads do seem to lead to Israel in case anyone is wondering. Look into Zionism, and many pieces fall right into place as to what happened and what happened after. In fact essentially every war to date was started on a false flag op. People often dismiss it, but I think that's a big mistake....history paints a very different picture.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
five dancing israelis were picked up by the cops in NJ on 9/11, after being seen celebrating and videotaping the burning twin towers. they were riding in a van that contained: box cutters, arab clothing, $5000 in cash, and traces of explosives. they were held by the fbi for 10 weeks, then deported back to israel. later, appearing on an israeli talk show to discuss what happened, they said they had nothing to do with the attack, and they were only there to document the event.
they working for a moving company, whose headquarters were completely abandoned after their arrest.
another very curious happening on 9/11..
i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
again... i am not saying this is concrete proof for me at all...
i am just saying it is VERY strange to say the least
running identical drills that day? your kidding right? (think about that for a second) something is fucked up somewhere
The very same thing happened here on the 7/7 attacks.
That to me says something is up.
Two attacks and they just happen to be running drills at the same time.
Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
The very same thing happened here on the 7/7 attacks.
That to me says something is up.
Two attacks and they just happen to be running drills at the same time.
The 93 WTC attack also happened under the guise of an an "exercise"
If you ask me, it's corrupt as all get out...
That's probably how they get so many people to casually go along with the program....then all the sudden it's "oops" I guess the bad guys somehow slipped in...
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
The 93 WTC attack also happened under the guise of an an "exercise"
I didn't know this. That's too much of a coincidence to me, but i'm sure some on here has a rational explanation for this too.
I'm guessing the pesky terists had inside info each time.
Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
There are probably always exercises going on. So anytime anything happens there will be some exercise somewhere to point to. Does it get sweaty under all of that tinfoil?
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
There are probably always exercises going on. So anytime anything happens there will be some exercise somewhere to point to. Does it get sweaty under all of that tinfoil?
oh yeah 24/7 exercises ...you got it they never stop running them.
now that's some funny shit right there.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
There are probably always exercises going on. So anytime anything happens there will be some exercise somewhere to point to. Does it get sweaty under all of that tinfoil?
Ok well i can tell you now, that they do not hold training exercises every day on the tube over here. I know a fair few people who work on the underground.
Do you have no questions about anything that happens in the world at all, or do you really think it is exactly as the media tells it?
False flag ops do happen, that is a fact but that doesn't mean that every single one is known about.
Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
Can't wait till Al-Qaida get's pissed off enough at CT'ers for trying to steal the thunder from thier (perceived) greatest victory, that they start slaughtering the nutty fuckers!
Bin Laden: Europeans Should End US Help
By MAAMOUN YOUSSEF – 17 hours ago
CAIRO, Egypt (AP) — Al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden called on Europeans to stop helping the United States in the war in Afghanistan, according to excerpts of a new audiotape broadcast Thursday on Al-Jazeera television.
Bin Laden said it was unjust for the United States to have invaded Afghanistan for sheltering him after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, saying he was the "only one responsible" for the deadly assaults on New York and Washington.
"The events of Manhattan were retaliation against the American-Israeli alliance's aggression against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, and I am the only one responsible for it. The Afghan people and government knew nothing about it. America knows that," the al-Qaida leader said in the five-minute tape.
The message appeared to be another attempt by bin Laden to influence public opinion in the West. In 2004, he offered Europeans a truce if they stopped attacking Muslims, then later spoke of a truce with the U.S. In both cases, al-Qaida then denounced those areas for not accepting its offer.
The terror leader said Afghans have been caught up in decades of struggle, first "at the hands of the Russians ... and before their wounds had healed and their grief had ended, they were invaded without right by your unjust governments."
He said that two separate injustices were visited upon Afghanistan as the Taliban was toppled in 2001: First, the war was "waged against the Afghans without right", and second coalition troops have not followed the "protocol of warfare," with the result that most bomb victims have been women and children.
"I have personally witnessed incidents like these, and the matter continues on an almost daily basis," he said.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack dismissed the new tape as typical of bin Laden's tactics and expressed faith in the European allies.
"I think our NATO allies understand quite clearly what is at stake in Afghanistan as well as elsewhere around the world in fighting the war on terror," he told reporters. "It's going to require a sustained commitment over a period of time and we have seen that kind of commitment from our European allies."
FBI analysts were reviewing the tape but were not immediately able to say how long it was or when it might have been recorded nor could they provide other details. Spokesman Richard Kolko said it was being examined "to determine if it is authentic and for any intelligence value."
"As the FBI has said since 9/11, bin Laden was responsible for the attack," Kolko said in a statement. "In this latest tape, he again acknowledged his responsibility. This should help to clarify for all the conspiracy theorists, again — the 9/11 attack was done by bin Laden and al-Qaida."
This has been the deadliest year in Afghanistan since the U.S.-led invasion in late 2001, with more than 6,100 people killed — including more than 800 civilians — in militant attacks and military operations, according to an Associated Press tally of figures from Afghan and Western officials.
In the new tape, bin Laden said European nations joined the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan "because they had no other alternative, only to be a follower."
"The American tide is ebbing, with God's help, and they will go back to their countries," he said, speaking of Europeans.
Bin Laden urged Europeans to pull away from the fight.
"It is better for you to stand against your leaders who are dropping in on the White House, and to work seriously to lift the injustice against the believers," he said, accusing U.S. forces and their allies of intentionally killing women and children in Afghanistan.
Al-Jazeera aired two brief excerpts of the audiotape, titled "Message to the European Peoples," which al-Qaida had announced Mondday that it would release soon.
Bin Laden issued four public statements earlier this year — on Sept. 7, Sept. 11, Sept. 20 and Oct. 22. The Sept. 7 video was his first in three years and was issued to mark the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.
Al-Qaida has dramatically stepped up its messages — a pace seen as a sign of its increasing technical sophistication and the relative security felt by its leadership. Bin Laden is believed to be hiding along the Afghan-Pakistan frontier.
Bin Laden's message was the 89th this year by Al-Qaida's media wing, Al-Sahab, an average of one every three days, double the rate in 2006, according to IntelCenter, a U.S. counterterrorism group that monitors militant messaging.
Comments
how many coincidences can you explain though... there seem to be far too many invloving that terrible day
i sure as hell would expect that alerts were heightened. the first plane veered off course and stopped responding to air traffic controllers well before it crashed. from that moment, protective measures should have been rolling. what, were these guys sitting around playing freecell when the first plane changed course and stopped responding? maybe they were, but i doubt that they would just look at each other and say, "huh, that's weird... oh well, i'm sure it's nothing serious.. pilots stop turn their transponders off and deviate from their flight paths all the time". they jumped right into action in the case of payne stewart's plane when it stopped responding, and intercepted it in 20 minutes. and that wasn't a part of any assumed terrorist attack. air traffic controllers don't just sit back and wait for terrorist attacks - they make sure planes fly where they're supposed to. as soon as that first plane make a left down the hudson river and wouldn't answer, it should have been intercepted. that it wasn't, is very troubling.. and then it happened 3 more times.
false flag attacks are as old as war itself...
its in the history books, if anyone reads them anymore?
Yes there are a lot of coincidences but what there is not is one shred of evidence that points to our government's evolvement in the attack. In 6 years not one single person, not one single leaked memo, absolutely nothing has surfaced to indicate that the Bush administration had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks. Furthermore from the evidence gathered the plans for this attack where set in motion before the Bush administration took office so the conspiracy theorists should be looking at the Clinton administration as the culprit.
Oh my.
So now, who was behind the first bombing? Clinton? Or was this an overflow plan from Daddy Bush? Why the hell was that amount of explosives let into the WTC? We can start arguing that now.
But the truth is, you just said it took 20 minutes to intercept Stewart's plane.
And I don't feel right when you're gone away
there is no way that plane doesnt get intercepted
the military/norad/faa have thorough plans for these events and prepare for them all the time, and run drills all the time... fighters across the country are on alert and ready to takeoff at a moments notice... we are talking about the finest military in the world with wall to wall radar and tracking on every single commercial airliner that takes off in the country
the whole incompetant act/argument does not work for me.. that is always the excuse with this administration... you dont get to that positiion of extreme power by being incompetant
i am just saying it is VERY strange to say the least
running identical drills that day? your kidding right? (think about that for a second) something is fucked up somewhere
Yes someone fucked up and the administration is guilty of not being honest with the public about this. Someone also dropped the ball leading up to the attacks and again the administration is guilty of not being honest with the public about this as well. What the administration is not guilty of is orchestrating or playing an active hand in the attacks. This was the end result of an intelligence and national security failure that started back in the Clinton administration. Mohammed Atta was under CIA survellience from the start on 2000, but once he entered the US in June of 2000 our internal agencies dropped the ball and did not continue tracking his movements and activities. This tragedy was the result of failures across several government agencies under two different administrations not some diabolical plan to rule the world.
Believe it or not, I would tend to agree with you, that these planes would have been intercepted. Then again, I can also see where something just went terribly wrong somewhere to prevent that from happening.
As ludacris as it sounds for a plane to be able to hit the Pentagon, there are other things out there that you wouldn't imagine possible either.
For instance, when you fly out of Reagan, planes bank hard left right after take-off to basically dodge the Washington monument. Doesn't that sound stupid? I mean, really... if some pilot wants to commit Harry Cary or something he could easily just fly right over to any building in downtown DC and crash his plane in under a minute. Nobody would get to them in time to shoot them down.
And now that I think about it, some pyscho did crash his plane into the fucking white house during the clinton presidency. Some nut job also pulled out an AK right in front of the WH too and shot the place up. And that is with dozens of secret service patrolling with binoculars, cameras, dogs, snipers on the roof - the whole thing. So could it happen.... yeah, I'm sad to say we fucked up that day.
intercepted doesn't mean shot down - just sent up to investigate.. there should have been jets up there, as was/is standard operating procedure. after the first plane, almost an hour and a half passed and not one plane was intercepted. well, except for flight 93. ("let's roll"? sorry uncle neil, that was all b.s.)
you give the president - either one - too much credit. but since you mention the first bombing.. the person who supplied the bomb to the 'terrorists' was an FBI informant, who was told he was delivering a fake bomb as part of a sting (according to the ny times).
i did.. so what was the problem on 9/11? all the planes were off course for more than 20 minutes.
why limit themselves? why not leave it open-ended? the element of mystery that comes with "al qaeda" serves to scare people more. and it leaves the door open to invade other countries when you can say "they" are being or have been harbored here, financed from here, etc.. [/quote]
their ambitions don't end in baghdad and tehran.
their ambitions don't end in baghdad and tehran.[/quote]
For discussions sake let's say the US planned it. Why would we say that 15 of the 19 hijackers where Saudi's. Why would we say that Bin Laden was responsible why not a Iran, Iraq, Syria, or even that the hijackers obtained significant help from the government's of these countries and that the government's had advanced knowledge of the attack. That would provide the administration with an air tight case to unleash hell on all three countries plus garner the support of the UN, NATO, and the EU. If the attack was planned by the US for the purpose of jump starting some world domination plan then they did an awefully bad job of it. Had it been I, I would have difinitely produced "evidence" that would have led back to those three troublesome nations. That way our military conquest of those countries, and the region, would have been legitamate (in the public eye) and it would not have been a unilateral exercise.
I think the point that negates that argument is the fact that they didn't need to in order to muster enough population support to invade Iraq. As in: even though they said 15/19 were Saudi people didn't care and still supported the war on Iraq. Therefore, there was no need.
I believe there were reports about top US officials stating going to the UN was just an act and that they were already planning a war with Iraq before discussing this with the UN. That negates the UN support argument.
The point thickens with the fact that after the support for the Iraq war declined immensely, they realised they needed a new reason to muster enough support to attack Iran. And so the show begins again...
In the end I think it doesn't really matter what happened that day because there's no way of changing what happened next.
True they didn't need the attacks to be orchestrated by Iraq or the hijackers even being Iraqi citizens to get the necessary support from the public to invade, but there was no way to know this prior to the attacks. Hypothetically speaking if I was the president I would make sure that all the "evidence" produced would point dirrectly to my intended target(s).
Maybe thats where they erred
I don't believe they did it but I feel they knew it was coming and opened the doors to it. That is what all the evidence points towards IN MY OPINION.
I think that they knew that an attack was immenant and they failed to heed all the warning signs. In a way they are responsible because of their incompidence and that applies to the Clinton administration as well.
This is the logical conclusion which requires no visits to fantasy island.
The last two administrations totally fucked up in intelligence capabilities and response. They are certainly culpable. That doesn't mean they planned and executed it.
Don't forget that USA is playing for the world leadership and there are a lot of thorns on the rose that can give a headache so you just say "terrorism has no boundaries" and get a chance to bully any country you can.
and binding everything to this or that administration does not sound correct to me. administrations come and go but the main policies remain the same because main beneficiaries from the government policy always remain the same (I mean the big boys who are really running the show). Who are funding the multi-million campaigns for the office?
I can't help but weigh in on such an intriguing and dark subject although as much as we'd like to debate and question and bitch, as ordinary citizens we will never be privy to all the information pertaining to 9/11 and specifically the American 77 and the Pentagon.
I have a hard time swallowing explicit participation by our government in the 9/11 attacks, but a great many questions do exist. One concept, for me, which is extremely perplexing is the video from the Pentagon. Think about how many times in the days after 9/11 you saw those images of the planes hitting the WTC. Shortly after the Pentagon was hit, the FBI confiscated surveillance tapes from every business that would have showed the explosion at the Pentagon. It wasn't until many months after that the FBI released the tape that doesn't seem to show much of anything other than a few empty frames then an explosion. Why would the FBI confiscate the tapes of the Pentagon when the WTC tapes were showed so frivilously? That's a fishy motherfucker, in my opinion.
Some of you who've responded have cited a shortage of time in terms of the second plane hitting the WTC and the Pentagon attack. Thirty plus minutes is plenty of time. The FAA tracks every commercial flight in the country; the confusion on part of the air traffic controllers occurred when the WTC flights initially went off path. They were unsure of whether it was part of the exercise (very questionable timing) or real world events but confirmed it ina fairly quick manner. Planes are scrambled when commercial airlines go off course and after the first plane hit the WTC and others were known to be off course and weren't responding, our military, as with the Payne Stewart flight, would've been dispatched. Keep in mind a plane had crashed into the WTC and others were KNOWN to be off course. Why would our military be conditioned to respond to commercial airliners that went off course then not be able to intercept American 77 before it hit the Pentagon after pulling a 180 over Western Kentucky. I'd say flying back clear across West Virgina would have given ample time for a response considering that the hijacking took place between 8:51 and 8:54 a.m. in lieu of the events in New York.
A truly informative site I stumbled upon concerning this incident is http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pentagon.html . There is a section of three videos enitiled: Analysis of Flight Path Animation Provided by NTSB. Watch the middle video which provides the recording of two separate phone calls between a gentleman seeking information and the NTSB. Fucking interesting to say the least. What about the countless pilots who've stated that the turnaround performed by American 77 could not have transpired in a commercial airline with a poorly skilled pilot at the helm?
Lastly, why is is that a fair number of the 9/11 hijackers have supposedly been seen alive?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
they working for a moving company, whose headquarters were completely abandoned after their arrest.
another very curious happening on 9/11..
The very same thing happened here on the 7/7 attacks.
That to me says something is up.
Two attacks and they just happen to be running drills at the same time.
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
The 93 WTC attack also happened under the guise of an an "exercise"
If you ask me, it's corrupt as all get out...
That's probably how they get so many people to casually go along with the program....then all the sudden it's "oops" I guess the bad guys somehow slipped in...
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I didn't know this. That's too much of a coincidence to me, but i'm sure some on here has a rational explanation for this too.
I'm guessing the pesky terists had inside info each time.
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
oh yeah 24/7 exercises ...you got it they never stop running them.
now that's some funny shit right there.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Ok well i can tell you now, that they do not hold training exercises every day on the tube over here. I know a fair few people who work on the underground.
Do you have no questions about anything that happens in the world at all, or do you really think it is exactly as the media tells it?
False flag ops do happen, that is a fact but that doesn't mean that every single one is known about.
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
Bin Laden: Europeans Should End US Help
By MAAMOUN YOUSSEF – 17 hours ago
CAIRO, Egypt (AP) — Al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden called on Europeans to stop helping the United States in the war in Afghanistan, according to excerpts of a new audiotape broadcast Thursday on Al-Jazeera television.
Bin Laden said it was unjust for the United States to have invaded Afghanistan for sheltering him after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, saying he was the "only one responsible" for the deadly assaults on New York and Washington.
"The events of Manhattan were retaliation against the American-Israeli alliance's aggression against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, and I am the only one responsible for it. The Afghan people and government knew nothing about it. America knows that," the al-Qaida leader said in the five-minute tape.
The message appeared to be another attempt by bin Laden to influence public opinion in the West. In 2004, he offered Europeans a truce if they stopped attacking Muslims, then later spoke of a truce with the U.S. In both cases, al-Qaida then denounced those areas for not accepting its offer.
The terror leader said Afghans have been caught up in decades of struggle, first "at the hands of the Russians ... and before their wounds had healed and their grief had ended, they were invaded without right by your unjust governments."
He said that two separate injustices were visited upon Afghanistan as the Taliban was toppled in 2001: First, the war was "waged against the Afghans without right", and second coalition troops have not followed the "protocol of warfare," with the result that most bomb victims have been women and children.
"I have personally witnessed incidents like these, and the matter continues on an almost daily basis," he said.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack dismissed the new tape as typical of bin Laden's tactics and expressed faith in the European allies.
"I think our NATO allies understand quite clearly what is at stake in Afghanistan as well as elsewhere around the world in fighting the war on terror," he told reporters. "It's going to require a sustained commitment over a period of time and we have seen that kind of commitment from our European allies."
FBI analysts were reviewing the tape but were not immediately able to say how long it was or when it might have been recorded nor could they provide other details. Spokesman Richard Kolko said it was being examined "to determine if it is authentic and for any intelligence value."
"As the FBI has said since 9/11, bin Laden was responsible for the attack," Kolko said in a statement. "In this latest tape, he again acknowledged his responsibility. This should help to clarify for all the conspiracy theorists, again — the 9/11 attack was done by bin Laden and al-Qaida."
This has been the deadliest year in Afghanistan since the U.S.-led invasion in late 2001, with more than 6,100 people killed — including more than 800 civilians — in militant attacks and military operations, according to an Associated Press tally of figures from Afghan and Western officials.
In the new tape, bin Laden said European nations joined the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan "because they had no other alternative, only to be a follower."
"The American tide is ebbing, with God's help, and they will go back to their countries," he said, speaking of Europeans.
Bin Laden urged Europeans to pull away from the fight.
"It is better for you to stand against your leaders who are dropping in on the White House, and to work seriously to lift the injustice against the believers," he said, accusing U.S. forces and their allies of intentionally killing women and children in Afghanistan.
Al-Jazeera aired two brief excerpts of the audiotape, titled "Message to the European Peoples," which al-Qaida had announced Mondday that it would release soon.
Bin Laden issued four public statements earlier this year — on Sept. 7, Sept. 11, Sept. 20 and Oct. 22. The Sept. 7 video was his first in three years and was issued to mark the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.
Al-Qaida has dramatically stepped up its messages — a pace seen as a sign of its increasing technical sophistication and the relative security felt by its leadership. Bin Laden is believed to be hiding along the Afghan-Pakistan frontier.
Bin Laden's message was the 89th this year by Al-Qaida's media wing, Al-Sahab, an average of one every three days, double the rate in 2006, according to IntelCenter, a U.S. counterterrorism group that monitors militant messaging.