also, your taking a very narrow view of it. its not that they wanted innocent americans dead. it was the means to an end. the only way to get support for the iraq war. "collateral damage" to use their antiquated terms.
ok I see. so to jusify going into Iraq, they (the administration) decided to attack america with 4 767 jets? and blow up WTC in a controlled demolition
wanted to blow a shuttle up. it was a hair from happening. had one person not blown the whistle, it would have happened.
and yes, i am amazed. you were probably one of those that are amazed that we weren't greeted as liberators too. and amazed there were no wmd. and amazed that our troops used white phosphorous on civilians in Fallujah. etc etc etc.
who about you stay on topic instead of assuming things about me that you have no idea about. ok, good.
ok I see. so to jusify going into Iraq, they (the administration) decided to attack america with 4 767 jets? and blow up WTC in a controlled demolition
well, they barely had support for the Iraq war WITH 9/11, so imagine without it. Iraq would have never happened. Given that we know the major players in the adminstration wanted a war with Iraq since 1998, it is really that hard for you to fathom this possibility?
if you stop yourself from thinking this was possible, then i have no reason to think you would look at the facts objectively. you're stuck on thinking that select people in our government could either not have pulled this off, or wouldn't pull this off.
check out the link earlier in this thread for PNAC, and then tell me this isn;t a possibility.
just tell me exactly your theory. lay it all out so I can understand
dude, i don;t have the 3 hours neccesary to go over this with someone who doesn;t think it is possible. the info is out there. if you really want to explore the possibility, i encourage you to do so.
dude, i don;t have the 3 hours neccesary to go over this with someone who doesn;t think it is possible. the info is out there. if you really want to explore the possibility, i encourage you to do so.
i'm not talking about possibilties. is it possible for me to be abducted from aliens today? sure.
im asking about who YOU think is responsible for 9/11. I believe it was el queda and OBL. no one else.
ok I see. so to jusify going into Iraq, they (the administration) decided to attack america with 4 767 jets? and blow up WTC in a controlled demolition
its more than just iraq, or iran or any of that. its all about control. controlling us, controlling resources, controlling economies. the very rich and powerful people in this world (and i don't mean people like bush or cheney, who are just useful tools to those really calling the shots) have long clamored for things like world government, population reduction, and all kinds of other crazy shit. thats why they create or support crisises like "terrorism" or "communism" or "nazism" - to control populations, and shift wealth around, and consolidate their power. 9/11 and this whole "war on terror" is just another step in that process.
the international bankers.. thats who are real enemy is.
look around that site a little.. it's interesting. and, I'd highly suggest, get the dvd of their documentary. it used to be up on google video, but it doesn't seem to be there anymore. but everyone should see that movie.
and now you must excuse me, i need to go shopping for a new tin-foil hat
i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
N E W Y O R K, May 1, 2001 In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.
America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."
Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.
The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.
"These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing," Bamford told ABCNEWS.com.
"The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants."
Gunning for War
The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," writes Bamford.
Here you go smart guy! look, something you didn't know....
its more than just iraq, or iran or any of that. its all about control. controlling us, controlling resources, controlling economies. the very rich and powerful people in this world (and i don't mean people like bush or cheney, who are just useful tools to those really calling the shots) have long clamored for things like world government, population reduction, and all kinds of other crazy shit. thats why they create or support crisises like "terrorism" or "communism" or "nazism" - to control populations, and shift wealth around, and consolidate their power. 9/11 and this whole "war on terror" is just another step in that process.
the international bankers.. thats who are real enemy is.
look around that site a little.. it's interesting. and, I'd highly suggest, get the dvd of their documentary. it used to be up on google video, but it doesn't seem to be there anymore. but everyone should see that movie.
and now you must excuse me, i need to go shopping for a new tin-foil hat
great there are rich powerful "evil" people in this world. I got it. still doesnt convince me that anyone other then osma bin laden was solely responsible for 9/11
i'm not talking about possibilties. is it possible for me to be abducted from aliens today? sure.
im asking about who YOU think is responsible for 9/11. I believe it was el queda and OBL. no one else.
and you?
this is what i am trying to say. we don;t know who was responsible. we need a REAL investigation on this. there are a lot of facts out there that need to be explored. this is what i'm trying to say. you are taking the administration's word without even looking into the possibility it was an inside job.
great there are rich powerful "evil" people in this world. I got it. still doesnt convince me that anyone other then osma bin laden was solely responsible for 9/11
ok, but the intent there was to show that governments and movements and events are controlled by people behind the scenes who will use scapegoats to protect themselves.
i have a question for you. you say you're convinced that bin laden was solely responsible for 911. whats your strongest piece of evidence to back that up?
i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
N E W Y O R K, May 1, 2001 In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.
America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."
Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.
The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.
"These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing," Bamford told ABCNEWS.com.
"The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants."
Gunning for War
The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," writes Bamford.
Here you go smart guy! look, something you didn't know....
operations northwoods thats all you had to say. I'm aware of that. do I believe our government had part in 9/11, no
this is what i am trying to say. we don;t know who was responsible. we need a REAL investigation on this. there are a lot of facts out there that need to be explored. this is what i'm trying to say. you are taking the administration's word without even looking into the possibility it was an inside job.
I believe that el queda is responsible. when you prove something else otherwise be sure to tell me and the world what you find
ok, but the intent there was to show that governments and movements and events are controlled by people behind the scenes who will use scapegoats to protect themselves.
i have a question for you. you say you're convinced that bin laden was solely responsible for 911. whats your strongest piece of evidence to back that up?
are you serious? the list is endless. i'll start with them admitting it.
Are you aware that Osama doesn't wear jewelry? Are you aware that Osama is using his wrong hand to sign a document in the confession video? Are you aware that the FBI's Most Wanted page for Bin Laden doesn't list the September 11, 2001 attacks?
Perhaps the confession isn't good enough evidence for the FBI. Perhaps it's not even Osama Bin Laden in the video. If it is Osama and it does prove he orchestrated the attacks, why has Bush said he's not worried about Osama, why has the search for Osama basically ended after he was repeatedly allowed to escape to Pakistan?
USAMA BIN LADEN IS WANTED IN CONNECTION WITH THE AUGUST 7, 1998, BOMBINGS OF THE UNITED STATES EMBASSIES IN DAR ES SALAAM, TANZANIA, AND NAIROBI, KENYA. THESE ATTACKS KILLED OVER 200 PEOPLE. IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD. http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I really am amazed 5 years later people still need proof that el queda was responsible for 9/11. makes me sick.
i'm amazed you simply believe anything the mainstream media tells you. i'd like to know why al-jazeera gets exclusive access to these tapes, and who they get them from. people can do a lot of wild things with photoshop.. especially if you give them 5 years to do it. funny how it pops up just before the 5th anniversary of 9/11, and 2 months before the elections.
Is that as far into my post as you were able to read? For your information he doesn't. Watch some of his other videos. And also FYI Muslims don't go to strip clubs and get drunk, they certainly don't bring their Qu'ran with them if they do.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
do you believe el qaeuda was involved in the attacks? a simply yes or no will be fine
Al-Qaeda or Al-Qaida (Arabic: القاعدة , translit: al-Qā`idah; "the foundation", "the base" or "the database") is an armed Sunni lslamist organization with the stated objective of eliminating foreign influence in Muslim countries. The most prominent members of the group are adherents of Wahabism, an extreme, militant sect of Islam. While Osama bin Laden is generally recognized as the group's leader, it is theorized that the group's operations are not centralized, and many independent and collaborative cells may exist in multiple countries linked by a common cause. There is no concrete proof of this assumption but it may be valid.
Moazzam Begg, while held in extrajudicial detention in the Guantanamo Bay detainment camps, requested a definition of al-Qaeda, when he was presented with a "Summary of Evidence" against him, in preparation for his Combatant Status Review Tribunal, which accused him of being a member of al-Qaeda, or the Taliban, or associated forces.[12] The unclassified definition offered to Begg by the US Department of Defense was:
"Al Qaeda is a radical Sunni Muslim umbrella organization established to recruit young Muslims into the Afghani Mujahideen and is aimed to establish Islamist states throughout the world, overthrow ‘un-Islamic regimes’, expel US soldiers and Western influence from the Gulf, and capture Jerusalem as a Muslim city."
Begg also asked for, and was not provided with, a definition of al-Qaeda's "associated forces".
Depending on the particular definition of Al-Qaeda... I believe Osama Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri in the honor of Sayyid Qutb's ideology did play a major role in the September 11 attacks. Do I think the Taliban was involved? Probably not. The Pakistan government? Maybe. Iran? Doubt it. Syria? Doubt it. Palestinian Authority? Doubt it. The entire muslim world? Absolutely not. The entire arab world? Absolutely not.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
okay, so now you admit that our government is capable of this type of stuff. History has proven this over and over again.
yet you can't admit that this administration is also capable?
capable or actually believing the administration had something to do with it?
based on the northwoods report,something that happened 50 years ago, capable? maybe. but 9/11 is alot different then the suggested attacks in the northwoods report.
bush administration have something to do with 9/11? absolutely 110% no.
bush administration have something to do with 9/11? absolutely 110% no.
Bush had a lot to do with 9/11
He allowed it to happen first of all.
After it happened it was used for his political gain.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
After it happened it was used for his political gain.
lets not play the blame game. I believe it was Clinton admitting he also made mistakes in catching him.
was it bush's fault clinton allowed OBL a base of operations in afgahistan? even after being attacked in africa? dont go there. both presidents have fucked up.
and what I meant by bush not being responsible for 9/11.....meaning he and his buddies didnt sit in a room and plan out 9/11. like you and a few others here believe
lets not play the blame game. I believe it was Clinton admitting he also made mistakes in catching him.
was it bush's fault clinton allowed OBL a base of operations in afgahistan? even after being attacked in africa? dont go there. both presidents have fucked up.
and what I meant by bush not being responsible for 9/11.....meaning he and his buddies didnt sit in a room and plan out 9/11. like you and a few others here believe
They planned out the events that took place post-9/11 and are still taking place in september of 2000.
Clinton provided Osama with a base in afghanistan? Would the afghan government have to support it? I though Bin Laden was part of afghan's resistance to soviet occupation well before Clinton's administration.
Clinton admitted to making mistakes. However, Bush did absolutely nothing to catch Bin Laden until 9/11. At least Clinton tried to stop him.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
capable or actually believing the administration had something to do with it?
based on the northwoods report,something that happened 50 years ago, capable? maybe. but 9/11 is alot different then the suggested attacks in the northwoods report.
bush administration have something to do with 9/11? absolutely 110% no.
if that were the only instance, i'd say you might be right. but our gvt has a history of making shit up for their benifit.
i admire your sticking to your guns on this, but we will just keep going around in circles if you fail to accept the possibility that certain people (not the whole gvt) had anything to do with 9/11. if you will not even examine the facts with an open mind, then what is the poitn here?
lets not play the blame game. I believe it was Clinton admitting he also made mistakes in catching him.
was it bush's fault clinton allowed OBL a base of operations in afgahistan? even after being attacked in africa? dont go there. both presidents have fucked up.
and what I meant by bush not being responsible for 9/11.....meaning he and his buddies didnt sit in a room and plan out 9/11. like you and a few others here believe
and there you go again insinuating that I am saying Bush had something to do with 9/11. I believe it took key members of PNAC, as well as highly placed people in the intelligence community (see the Colleen Rowley story) to pull this off.
Comments
ok I see. so to jusify going into Iraq, they (the administration) decided to attack america with 4 767 jets? and blow up WTC in a controlled demolition
who about you stay on topic instead of assuming things about me that you have no idea about. ok, good.
well, they barely had support for the Iraq war WITH 9/11, so imagine without it. Iraq would have never happened. Given that we know the major players in the adminstration wanted a war with Iraq since 1998, it is really that hard for you to fathom this possibility?
if you stop yourself from thinking this was possible, then i have no reason to think you would look at the facts objectively. you're stuck on thinking that select people in our government could either not have pulled this off, or wouldn't pull this off.
check out the link earlier in this thread for PNAC, and then tell me this isn;t a possibility.
dude, i don;t have the 3 hours neccesary to go over this with someone who doesn;t think it is possible. the info is out there. if you really want to explore the possibility, i encourage you to do so.
show me where this is true?
i'm not talking about possibilties. is it possible for me to be abducted from aliens today? sure.
im asking about who YOU think is responsible for 9/11. I believe it was el queda and OBL. no one else.
and you?
its more than just iraq, or iran or any of that. its all about control. controlling us, controlling resources, controlling economies. the very rich and powerful people in this world (and i don't mean people like bush or cheney, who are just useful tools to those really calling the shots) have long clamored for things like world government, population reduction, and all kinds of other crazy shit. thats why they create or support crisises like "terrorism" or "communism" or "nazism" - to control populations, and shift wealth around, and consolidate their power. 9/11 and this whole "war on terror" is just another step in that process.
the international bankers.. thats who are real enemy is.
go here: http://www.themoneymasters.com/presiden.htm to read what some of our past presidents have said regarding the control and influence of international bankers.
look around that site a little.. it's interesting. and, I'd highly suggest, get the dvd of their documentary. it used to be up on google video, but it doesn't seem to be there anymore. but everyone should see that movie.
and now you must excuse me, i need to go shopping for a new tin-foil hat
By David Ruppe
N E W Y O R K, May 1, 2001 In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.
America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."
Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.
The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.
"These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing," Bamford told ABCNEWS.com.
"The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants."
Gunning for War
The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," writes Bamford.
Here you go smart guy! look, something you didn't know....
great there are rich powerful "evil" people in this world. I got it. still doesnt convince me that anyone other then osma bin laden was solely responsible for 9/11
this is what i am trying to say. we don;t know who was responsible. we need a REAL investigation on this. there are a lot of facts out there that need to be explored. this is what i'm trying to say. you are taking the administration's word without even looking into the possibility it was an inside job.
ok, but the intent there was to show that governments and movements and events are controlled by people behind the scenes who will use scapegoats to protect themselves.
i have a question for you. you say you're convinced that bin laden was solely responsible for 911. whats your strongest piece of evidence to back that up?
operations northwoods thats all you had to say. I'm aware of that. do I believe our government had part in 9/11, no
I believe that el queda is responsible. when you prove something else otherwise be sure to tell me and the world what you find
are you serious? the list is endless. i'll start with them admitting it.
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=158086&Disp=All
I really am amazed 5 years later people still need proof that el queda was responsible for 9/11. makes me sick.
Are you aware that Osama doesn't wear jewelry? Are you aware that Osama is using his wrong hand to sign a document in the confession video? Are you aware that the FBI's Most Wanted page for Bin Laden doesn't list the September 11, 2001 attacks?
Perhaps the confession isn't good enough evidence for the FBI. Perhaps it's not even Osama Bin Laden in the video. If it is Osama and it does prove he orchestrated the attacks, why has Bush said he's not worried about Osama, why has the search for Osama basically ended after he was repeatedly allowed to escape to Pakistan?
you got me there, I had no idea.
i'm amazed you simply believe anything the mainstream media tells you. i'd like to know why al-jazeera gets exclusive access to these tapes, and who they get them from. people can do a lot of wild things with photoshop.. especially if you give them 5 years to do it. funny how it pops up just before the 5th anniversary of 9/11, and 2 months before the elections.
the original osama "confession" video was a fraud, so i am very skeptical of any of these videos. (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape.html
"al-qaeda" is a CIA creation anyway, so you might not be totally wrong saying they did it.
Is that as far into my post as you were able to read? For your information he doesn't. Watch some of his other videos. And also FYI Muslims don't go to strip clubs and get drunk, they certainly don't bring their Qu'ran with them if they do.
Al-Qaeda or Al-Qaida (Arabic: القاعدة , translit: al-Qā`idah; "the foundation", "the base" or "the database") is an armed Sunni lslamist organization with the stated objective of eliminating foreign influence in Muslim countries. The most prominent members of the group are adherents of Wahabism, an extreme, militant sect of Islam. While Osama bin Laden is generally recognized as the group's leader, it is theorized that the group's operations are not centralized, and many independent and collaborative cells may exist in multiple countries linked by a common cause. There is no concrete proof of this assumption but it may be valid.
Moazzam Begg, while held in extrajudicial detention in the Guantanamo Bay detainment camps, requested a definition of al-Qaeda, when he was presented with a "Summary of Evidence" against him, in preparation for his Combatant Status Review Tribunal, which accused him of being a member of al-Qaeda, or the Taliban, or associated forces.[12] The unclassified definition offered to Begg by the US Department of Defense was:
"Al Qaeda is a radical Sunni Muslim umbrella organization established to recruit young Muslims into the Afghani Mujahideen and is aimed to establish Islamist states throughout the world, overthrow ‘un-Islamic regimes’, expel US soldiers and Western influence from the Gulf, and capture Jerusalem as a Muslim city."
Begg also asked for, and was not provided with, a definition of al-Qaeda's "associated forces".
Depending on the particular definition of Al-Qaeda... I believe Osama Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri in the honor of Sayyid Qutb's ideology did play a major role in the September 11 attacks. Do I think the Taliban was involved? Probably not. The Pakistan government? Maybe. Iran? Doubt it. Syria? Doubt it. Palestinian Authority? Doubt it. The entire muslim world? Absolutely not. The entire arab world? Absolutely not.
you wanted proof, now you say you knew that? c'mon now...
I wanted more specifics. I knew of northwoods but you said "blow up a shuttle" thats not in northwoods, unless I missed it
okay, so now you admit that our government is capable of this type of stuff. History has proven this over and over again.
yet you can't admit that this administration is also capable?
capable or actually believing the administration had something to do with it?
based on the northwoods report,something that happened 50 years ago, capable? maybe. but 9/11 is alot different then the suggested attacks in the northwoods report.
bush administration have something to do with 9/11? absolutely 110% no.
Bush had a lot to do with 9/11
He allowed it to happen first of all.
After it happened it was used for his political gain.
lets not play the blame game. I believe it was Clinton admitting he also made mistakes in catching him.
was it bush's fault clinton allowed OBL a base of operations in afgahistan? even after being attacked in africa? dont go there. both presidents have fucked up.
and what I meant by bush not being responsible for 9/11.....meaning he and his buddies didnt sit in a room and plan out 9/11. like you and a few others here believe
They planned out the events that took place post-9/11 and are still taking place in september of 2000.
Clinton provided Osama with a base in afghanistan? Would the afghan government have to support it? I though Bin Laden was part of afghan's resistance to soviet occupation well before Clinton's administration.
Clinton admitted to making mistakes. However, Bush did absolutely nothing to catch Bin Laden until 9/11. At least Clinton tried to stop him.
if that were the only instance, i'd say you might be right. but our gvt has a history of making shit up for their benifit.
i admire your sticking to your guns on this, but we will just keep going around in circles if you fail to accept the possibility that certain people (not the whole gvt) had anything to do with 9/11. if you will not even examine the facts with an open mind, then what is the poitn here?
and there you go again insinuating that I am saying Bush had something to do with 9/11. I believe it took key members of PNAC, as well as highly placed people in the intelligence community (see the Colleen Rowley story) to pull this off.