Credible People Who Say 911 Was An Inside Job: CIA Agents, Foreign Presidents, Etc

DriftingByTheStorm · March 2008

Gather No Moss wrote:

I would have to be a complete idiot to even argue with you on this subject.

ding ding ding.

Abookamongstthemany · March 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Foolish.
You mean like wasting your breath to do nothing more than insult me for having an prefered font & writing style?

Its not even original.
At least you didn't try the lame, "hey man, like, maybe i'd read what you had to say, if i wasn't too stupid to read bold letters and colors."

I've had people tell me that MULTIPLE times.
Hey man, bold, and red font, like, wow ... i can't read!
Oh no!

It's like i said to that "argument" originaly.
If some bold letters and colors are enough to stunt your comprehension, i may as well stop wasting my time. Because if the PHYSICIAL quality of the words on the page is enough to stupify you, god help us when we get to actualy understanding the MEANING on the page.
:rolleyes:

But taking the time to make a level headed, logical reply is too much too ask!

I always find it odd how so many people will disagree about this so vehemently but have no intentions to tell us why exactly. I just figured if you're so worked up about this to wanna post angry, sarcastic remarks then you must be well read on the subject and could enlighten us all about your findings.

Gather No Moss · March 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

ding ding ding.

I never argued the point, at all..because it is a fact...get used to it!

The Champ · March 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Foolish.
You mean like wasting your breath to do nothing more than insult me for having an prefered font & writing style?

Its not even original.
At least you didn't try the lame, "hey man, like, maybe i'd read what you had to say, if i wasn't too stupid to read bold letters and colors."

I've had people tell me that MULTIPLE times.
Hey man, bold, and red font, like, wow ... i can't read!
Oh no!

It's like i said to that "argument" originaly.
If some bold letters and colors are enough to stunt your comprehension, i may as well stop wasting my time. Because if the PHYSICIAL quality of the words on the page is enough to stupify you, god help us when we get to actualy understanding the MEANING on the page.
:rolleyes:

I insulted you by saying it's a great touch? You can't be this sensitive..but in the case you are, I apologize..

RolandTD20Kdrummer · March 2008

Gather No Moss wrote:

Sorry I took so long to get back to you.. I'm sure you have not left your computer for days... I actually had something to do..

I just have one question for you:

1. You think the US government hired terrorists to fly planes into our own buildings and kill are own people and then they set off the bombs?

I am sorry if I seem simple to you, King of the message pit, that is your name right...but give me a fucking break! You really don't believe this do you. I would have to be a complete idiot to even argue with you on this subject.

Hire? Actually they looked the other way, and/or did nothing at all specifically. Look into the CIA, and Mossad sometime and discover all the neat things certain branches of those organizations do in their spare time that gov't knows nothing about.

But again, I'm not feeling your level of sophistication on this topic at all to put it politely. And you're far too abrasive to be interesting (to put that politely).

JD Sal · March 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Try doing some reading for once in your life, you know like, off of this message board.

I read plenty, thanks. I just don't buy into the *many* conspiracy theories that you do.

Eliot Rosewater · March 2008

yoke wrote:

I will quote Bill Maher here.....

you know why our government had nothing to do with the attacks on Sept 11?

Cuz it worked

Bill Maher has a lot of good things to say but NONE of them have a thing to do with 9/11. I think he's been deeply hypnotized and 9/11 is some sensory word...every time he hears it he turns into a cunt.

The Champ · March 2008

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html

Commy · March 2008

The Champ wrote:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html

It says take at a look at the "world trade centers collapsing" but shows the pentagon for some reason.

Gather No Moss · March 2008

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Hire? Actually they looked the other way, and/or did nothing at all specifically. Look into the CIA, and Mossad sometime and discover all the neat things certain branches of those organizations do in their spare time that gov't knows nothing about.

But again, I'm not feeling your level of sophistication on this topic at all to put it politely. And you're far too abrasive to be interesting (to put that politely).

Everyone knows they did nothing.. This thread is insinuating a lot more than that, as you know..

Sorry if I was too abrasive for you baby..I should have known your delicate mind would not find that interesting.. wait.. I don't care what your think..:)

RolandTD20Kdrummer · March 2008

Gather No Moss wrote:

Everyone knows they did nothing.. This thread is insinuating a lot more than that, as you know..

Sorry if I was too abrasive for you baby..I should have known your delicate mind would not find that interesting.. wait.. I don't care what your think..:)

Hey, you sound like a *really* great person... take that as sarcasm or not...but unfortunately you have already shown your true colors here for all to see.

BTW name calling is what people do when they have nothing left upstairs to offer intellectually.

Shame you can't seem to break the habit.

Why is that?

Gather No Moss · March 2008

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Hey, you sound like a *really* great person... take that as sarcasm or not...but unfortunately you have already shown your true colors here for all to see.

BTW name calling is what people do when they have nothing left upstairs to offer intellectually.

Shame you can't seem to break the habit.

Why is that?

You actually think this thread is interesting, it is a joke.. I am just trying to put it to bed..

JD Sal · March 2008

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I was hoping you'd answer my questions directly and not with more questions. And I was also hoping you'd tell me the spcifics of why your thoughts on this were more logical than mine. But tis true...these discussions usually don't go anywhere on either side and take way more energy than I feel like putting into it right now.

Btw, what did you think of the info in that link?

I didn't get a chance to read the info in the link because I was at work, but I'll check it out soon.

Ok, if I really need to answer those questions, and explain things like why a 9/11 inside job would be more difficult to pull off than planting of WMD, here goes:

a) the sheer number of people involved to pull off 9/11 would be far greater than that of planting WMDs. Thus, keeping the information quiet would be far more difficult. People involved would include the terrorists (or those pesky actors or whoever they were that we hired to fly the planes), the CIA, FBI, Justice Dept, NY Police, etc, etc. Do you think 5-10 people in the Bush administration planned and pulled off 9/11? There would have been thousands of people involved. And all of them were for this plan to fly planes into the trade centers. No one felt bad about it and tried to come forward. No trace of evidence at all. Not an email, a phone call, or something proving the conspiracy, or at the very least, substantiating it in some way, shape, or form? How was all this communication accomplished in the months or years it took to plan 9/11 and no evidence has surfaced?

b) 8 years of pure incompetence from this administration. They were caught in scandal after scandal and lie after lie (Walter Reed, Firing of US Attorneys, Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame, Katrina, Iraq, Afghanistan, Homeland Security, Cheyney's Energy Policy, Global Warming, the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, Alberto Gonzales, Harriet Miers, FDA, EPA, black prisons and torture, the Economy, War on Science, etc, etc, etc). The Bush administration can't even forge a WMD document. They can't sufficiently cover anything up, but they can somehow pull off such a large scale plot like 9/11 without leaving some sort of paper trail. It's totally illogicial.

Where's Bin Laden? We can pull off 9/11, but can't capture Bin Laden? Or do anything else right for that matter. Think about it, if you had the capability, intelligence, resources, time, and all the other neat things that Bush would need for 9/11 to be an inside job, then why would you fuck up everything else? Why create all that controversy? As a diversion to appear inept so the country wouldn't think you were capable of doing 9/11? That's an unimaginable stretch. It would be more sensible to do everything else right and get the country and the world's trust, instead of making everyone hate you and turning international support into worldwide condemnation. If all you do is lie and lie as president, then we should question his truthfulness when he says 9/11 wasn't an inside job. That's the only logical connection to this conspiracy.

DriftingByTheStorm · March 2008

Gather No Moss wrote:

Everyone knows they did nothing.. This thread is insinuating a lot more than that, as you know..

Sorry if I was too abrasive for you baby..I should have known your delicate mind would not find that interesting.. wait.. I don't care what your think..:)

Lets try this another way

when an institution that is established and funded to STOP enemy threats IS INSTEAD fully aware of, tracking, training, and abeiting that threat ...

... further, the chain of command of those institutions is actualy STONE WALLING the good agents who have reported such threats, demoting, firing, threatining, and otherwise obstructing their efforts ... when they tell these agents, "you will not go near any Saudi Arabian suspects", and 16 of the 19 hijackers turn out to be, gasp, Saudi, and then they send memos to border guards ordering them to let said terrorists in to the country, meet with the man who wired them $100,000 in a government building the day before AND the day of 911, and deliberately reschedule a massive airline hijacking war games exercise to the week of 911 when it has been held anualy in another month for quite some time ... oh and Dick Cheney in August has sole "shoot down order" authority assigned to him in sole ...

... you start adding all that shit up ... and then low and behold, no planes got shot down, and all these terrorists that we knew about, were tracking, had trained, and deliberately kept agents off their trail go plowing those plains in to a building ...

... where exactly is the difference between "doing nothing" and "planning the whole thing" ?

Commy · March 2008

JD Sal wrote:

I didn't get a chance to read the info in the link because I was at work, but I'll check it out soon.

Ok, if I really need to answer those questions, and explain things like why a 9/11 inside job would be more difficult to pull off than planting of WMD, here goes:

a) the sheer number of people involved to pull off 9/11 would be far greater than that of planting WMDs. Thus, keeping the information quiet would be far more difficult. People involved would include the terrorists (or those pesky actors or whoever they were that we hired to fly the planes), the CIA, FBI, Justice Dept, NY Police, etc, etc. Do you think 5-10 people in the Bush administration planned and pulled off 9/11? There would have been thousands of people involved. And all of them were for this plan to fly planes into the trade centers. No one felt bad about it and tried to come forward. No trace of evidence at all. Not an email, a phone call, or something proving the conspiracy, or at the very least, substantiating it in some way, shape, or form? How was all this communication accomplished in the months or years it took to plan 9/11 and no evidence has surfaced?

b) 8 years of pure incompetence from this administration. They were caught in scandal after scandal and lie after lie (Walter Reed, Firing of US Attorneys, Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame, Katrina, Iraq, Afghanistan, Homeland Security, Cheyney's Energy Policy, Global Warming, the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, Alberto Gonzales, Harriet Miers, FDA, EPA, black prisons and torture, the Economy, War on Science, etc, etc, etc). The Bush administration can't even forge a WMD document. They can't sufficiently cover anything up, but they can somehow pull off such a large scale plot like 9/11 without leaving some sort of paper trail. It's totally illogicial.

Where's Bin Laden? We can pull off 9/11, but can't capture Bin Laden? Or do anything else right for that matter. Think about it, if you had the capability, intelligence, resources, time, and all the other neat things that Bush would need for 9/11 to be an inside job, then why would you fuck up everything else? Why create all that controversy? As a diversion to appear inept so the country wouldn't think you were capable of doing 9/11? That's an unimaginable stretch. It would be more sensible to do everything else right and get the country and the world's trust, instead of making everyone hate you and turning international support into worldwide condemnation. If all you do is lie and lie as president, then we should question his truthfulness when he says 9/11 wasn't an inside job. That's the only logical connection to this conspiracy.

Why would they want to capture Bin Ladin when he's part of the plot? The bin Ladens and bush's are actually pretty tight.

JD Sal · March 2008

Commy wrote:

Why would they want to capture Bin Ladin when he's part of the plot? The bin Ladens and bush's are actually pretty tight.

Fair enough. Care to comment on anything else I said?

JD Sal · March 2008

Commy wrote:

Why would they want to capture Bin Ladin when he's part of the plot? The bin Ladens and bush's are actually pretty tight.

One more thing. If the conspiracy was that Bush and Bin Laden were in on 9/11 together, and Bush just allowed the terrorist attack to happen, it would actually be believable versus the notion this adminstration planted bombs and that's what brought down the towers instead of the planes that flew into them.

RolandTD20Kdrummer · March 2008

Gather No Moss wrote:

You actually think this thread is interesting, it is a joke.. I am just trying to put it to bed..

Saying so does nothing make it so except within the confines between your ears alone.

It impacts everything, and has set the world on a completely new course. It's far from a joke by any means. There are so many suspicious and interconnected events surrounding it on so many levels it absolutely ridiculous. Not to mention all the flawed science.

From any angle one can slice it, this apple appears rotten.

DriftingByTheStorm · March 2008

JD Sal wrote:

[...] [it] would include the terrorists (or those pesky actors or whoever they were that we hired to fly the planes), the CIA, FBI, Justice Dept, NY Police, etc, etc. Do you think 5-10 people in the Bush administration planned and pulled off 9/11? There would have been thousands of people involved. And all of them were for this plan to fly planes into the trade centers. No one felt bad about it and tried to come forward. No trace of evidence at all. Not an email, a phone call, or something proving the conspiracy, or at the very least, substantiating it in some way, shape, or form? How was all this communication accomplished in the months or years it took to plan 9/11 and no evidence has surfaced?
[...]
Where's Bin Laden? We can pull off 9/11, but can't capture Bin Laden? .

Where's Bin Laden? We can pull off 9/11, but can't capture Bin Laden?

Exactly. Bin Laden was part of the deal.
We wouldn't dare capture him and piss off our little buddies the Saudis. We had a chance numerous times and deliberately delayed the trigger. There are also rumors that he has either been killed by someone, or had some sort of terminal kidney problem (i think it was kidneys, anyhow) ... so he could actualy be dead now, anyhow. But saying so sure wouldn't help us continue this phoney war on terror. Why in gods name would they have wanted to capture him anyhow? Assuming he WAS really responsible? Like i said, no Bin Laden = lots more war. "Well, we're still looking for him." ... all though, they haven't even needed to use that. They just talk about his buddies, "Al Qaeda" being in Iraq now.

As far as who needed to be in on 911, you are totally wrong.

SOME members of the CIA, and i mean at the top, maybe the same for the FBI, maybe not (with JFK, Hoover of the FBI seems to have been left in the dark, and also possibly blackmailed in to silence) ... the NYPD would not need to know dick, i'm pretty sure no one in the Justice Dept. really needed to no dick, and the only person on the 911 Commission who needed to know dick was the Executive Director, Condy's good buddy, Phillip Zelikow. Notice they TRIED to appoint KISSINGER -- a man who has talked about a "new world order" repeatedly, and at length.

Hmm.

So how many people needed to know?

Well i suspect Cheney knew, thats for damn sure.
That makes 1.
Maybe Bush knew, maybe he was purposely left in the dark about most of it, but probably he knew.
2
Condy Rice, she lied repeatedly about it.
3
Rumsfeld, probably, but maybe not. will give him .5 point.
3.5
Lets say 3 or 4 well placed high ranking CFR scum CIA officers at the top

8-10

And honestly, thats about it.
You want to add some FBI agents?

Add a few more here and there too?
Thats fair, someone at NORAD was in on it, you're right.

Lets make it 30, hell.

30 - 10 who are 100% trustworthy, they are at the top of the pack of bullshit. If they came out about it, they are all going to get tried and hung for treason.

What about the other 20, if they were really that instrumental, same thing. Tried and "hung".
:cool:

How many people do you really think it takes to stonewall well meaning agents, and make it too difficult for good pilots in F16s to scramble, or good agents to get them detained beforehand?

Anything else needed could be done by the terrorists themselves, provided the CIA or FBI agents at the top (in on it) were able to keep their dogs off the trail long enough to let it happen. The only other matter was letting them back in to the country.

You still fail to address how we could be so stupid as to not know about agents that WE HAD TRAINED. We trained these fuckers. What say you to that? Why did we let them back through the borders? Why did we meet with the guy from Pakistani ISI who wired Attah 100k on the day before and of 911? We repeatedly answer the questions posed by non-truthers, how come ya'll ALWAYS gloss over the questions posed by us?

???
And why would all these people in my title post come forward about it?
You just said, "How come no one has come forward?" and my freaking title post has SEVEN CIA officers who have said so, a former Italian President and intelligence service member himself, a very high ranking german parliament member and former intelligence officer, and our good "buddy", Mr. Chavez.
So, okay, with the exception of ole Chavez who you can obviously argue has a motive to lie, what about the good men from the CIA who appear credible on the face and would know better than you what the CIA is and is not capable of, and the foreign intelligence and political figures who claim the same? What of them?

Abookamongstthemany · March 2008

JD Sal wrote:

I didn't get a chance to read the info in the link because I was at work, but I'll check it out soon.

Ok, if I really need to answer those questions, and explain things like why a 9/11 inside job would be more difficult to pull off than planting of WMD, here goes:

a) the sheer number of people involved to pull off 9/11 would be far greater than that of planting WMDs. Thus, keeping the information quiet would be far more difficult. People involved would include the terrorists (or those pesky actors or whoever they were that we hired to fly the planes), the CIA, FBI, Justice Dept, NY Police, etc, etc. Do you think 5-10 people in the Bush administration planned and pulled off 9/11? There would have been thousands of people involved. And all of them were for this plan to fly planes into the trade centers. No one felt bad about it and tried to come forward. No trace of evidence at all. Not an email, a phone call, or something proving the conspiracy, or at the very least, substantiating it in some way, shape, or form? How was all this communication accomplished in the months or years it took to plan 9/11 and no evidence has surfaced?

b) 8 years of pure incompetence from this administration. They were caught in scandal after scandal and lie after lie (Walter Reed, Firing of US Attorneys, Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame, Katrina, Iraq, Afghanistan, Homeland Security, Cheyney's Energy Policy, Global Warming, the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, Alberto Gonzales, Harriet Miers, FDA, EPA, black prisons and torture, the Economy, War on Science, etc, etc, etc). The Bush administration can't even forge a WMD document. They can't sufficiently cover anything up, but they can somehow pull off such a large scale plot like 9/11 without leaving some sort of paper trail. It's totally illogicial.

Where's Bin Laden? We can pull off 9/11, but can't capture Bin Laden? Or do anything else right for that matter. Think about it, if you had the capability, intelligence, resources, time, and all the other neat things that Bush would need for 9/11 to be an inside job, then why would you fuck up everything else? Why create all that controversy? As a diversion to appear inept so the country wouldn't think you were capable of doing 9/11? That's an unimaginable stretch. It would be more sensible to do everything else right and get the country and the world's trust, instead of making everyone hate you and turning international support into worldwide condemnation. If all you do is lie and lie as president, then we should question his truthfulness when he says 9/11 wasn't an inside job. That's the only logical connection to this conspiracy.

So you're saying that some men in robes and sandals operating out of cave would stand a better chance of pulling this off than the United States gov't? Interesting and a bit illogical to me.

And most of the examples of incompetence you gave weren't examples of stupidity but rather, things they didn't give a shit about anyway or simply wanted in the first place. It's no surprise that greedy, manipulating, power driven people would fail when it comes to looking out for the people. I know plenty of greedy assholes who are intelligent but that doesn't mean they care for the less fortunate or the common man. They don't care what happens to them...their only effort lies in lining their pockets further. Katrina victims, dead Iraqis and soldiers...just don't get too much consideration when they are planning their agenda.

Everytime people bring up examples of where they failed to cover their tracks you guy never pay it any attention. Just like the link I posted to you earlier. People have brought up huge holes and inconsistencies in the official story and you guys just don't want to even discuss it.

Credible People Who Say 911 Was An Inside Job: CIA Agents, Foreign Presidents, Etc

Comments

Categories