israelside
Thinker
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2007
- Messages
- 160
ok Gumboot respond!
All 9/11 ideas welcomed here
- Thread starter israelside
- Start date
-
- Tags
- conspiracy theories
Ditto.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2574426&postcount=82
I think IS misunderstood Gumboot's invitation.....
I think IS misunderstood Gumboot's invitation.....
israelside
Thinker
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2007
- Messages
- 160
ok gumboot, stop playing games, if you want to reply to the things i wrote you on the other thread this is an "appropriate" place to do so!
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
israelside the standard proceedure is for you to repost your post here as the OP.
However since you're obviously incapable of doing that, I'll do it for you.
That is not about the CIA being used in the function of negotiators.
Guantanamo Bay is a military prison, not a CIA prison. And no, torturing or otherwise interrogating people is not negotiation.
Is english your first language? I don't ask that to be mean. It's just you clearly don't understand the next of this document at all. This would be understandable if english is not your first language.
The above document is talking about the CIA's role in enforcing and monitoring aspects of anti-Terrorism actions in Palestine/Israel as per a peace negotiation. It does not say the CIA were involved in brokering the peace agreement.
I imagine the Muslim Brotherhood has larger membership. Granted, it's debatable whether the Brotherhood is actually a terrorist organisation (the officially don't support violence) however virtually every islamic terrorist group ever formed can trace its roots back to the Brotherhood.
The 9/11 attacks were rather quite simple. The conclusion that Osama Bin Laden carried it out was also quite obvious. When I say "small fry" I mean prior to 9/11, as I said in my previous post. There were other far more serious threats in the world, and still are. Relatively speaking, terrorists are always smallfry.
That's categorically false. The only governments that ever recognised the Taliban were Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. They were quite explicitly not recognised by the United Nations. Indeed, the UN Security Council issued a number of resolutions against them.
Cuba? Why on earth would Cuba be a threat?
The Taliban banned the growing of opium. I agree that many other countries were more of a threat to global peace and security, however the fact remains that the UN did recognise them as a threat to global peace and security.
At 6,100 tonnes, Afghanistan currently produces about 92% of the world's opium.
However under the Taliban (and remember, we're talking about the period under the Taliban at the moment) production was down to about 70 tonnes, which, assuming level production everywhere else (in truth it's likely production increased elsewhere, thus making Afghanistan's % even smaller), would account for a little over 1% of the world's supply during that time period.
Al Qaeda were guests of the Taliban. The Taliban strictly prevented poppy cultivation and opium smuggling. Do you honestly think Al Qaeda would so blatantly defy their hosts? Why? Al Qaeda had plenty of money.
Osama Bin Laden himself has a personal fortune in the millions. Al Qaeda also established (as MAK) a widespread fundraising network around the world (at least 30 offices in the USA, mainly located in Mosques).
Al Qaeda are quite popular in the Muslim world, and many Muslims have ample money. Furthermore Al Qaeda are quite capable of taking money from unwitting Muslims via fundraising fronts professing a different motive. As far as currently, I believe they probably have problems now. After 9/11 the USA carried out a blitz on companies and organisations in the USA with links to radical Islam. They also froze terrorist assets and closed down companies such as the Al Taqwa Bank.
National secrets obviously. The identities of sources, spies in foreign countries, double agents and moles in other organisations. The details of what information they have on their enemies and how they gathered it. All sorts.
Why more than 2? How many? 3? 4? 10? 100?
What on earth are you on about?
You were talking about people "in office". People "in office" are not government workers. They are the government.
You are incorrect. The 9/11 Commission was an inquiry into one very specific aspect of the attacks - namely an investigation into the Government's performance leading up to it. The body of work that constitutes the 9/11 Investigation "Bible" was carried out by the FBI, FAA, NTSB, FEMA, NIST, and so forth. The 9/11 Commission Report was not underfunded.
You haven't even managed to support any of your points, let alone refute any of my rebuttals. None of the few articles you have linked to say what you think they say.
Yes, it is dangerous. But giving secret information to lots of people is often even more dangerous. Which is why western democracies have numerous safeguards to prevent their government over-reaching their power.
In order to live in a structured governed society one must extend a certain degree of trust to the government. Otherwise it doesn't work.
By electing certain peoples into government, a population is granting said peoples their trust to run their society for them. Thus is the way of society. It has worked for 10,000 years.
I'm sorry but this doesn't grant your story any credibility whatsoever.
Good for him. It's a work of fiction.
-Gumboot
However since you're obviously incapable of doing that, I'll do it for you.
That is not about the CIA being used in the function of negotiators.
Guantanamo Bay is a military prison, not a CIA prison. And no, torturing or otherwise interrogating people is not negotiation.
Is english your first language? I don't ask that to be mean. It's just you clearly don't understand the next of this document at all. This would be understandable if english is not your first language.
The above document is talking about the CIA's role in enforcing and monitoring aspects of anti-Terrorism actions in Palestine/Israel as per a peace negotiation. It does not say the CIA were involved in brokering the peace agreement.
I imagine the Muslim Brotherhood has larger membership. Granted, it's debatable whether the Brotherhood is actually a terrorist organisation (the officially don't support violence) however virtually every islamic terrorist group ever formed can trace its roots back to the Brotherhood.
The 9/11 attacks were rather quite simple. The conclusion that Osama Bin Laden carried it out was also quite obvious. When I say "small fry" I mean prior to 9/11, as I said in my previous post. There were other far more serious threats in the world, and still are. Relatively speaking, terrorists are always smallfry.
That's categorically false. The only governments that ever recognised the Taliban were Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. They were quite explicitly not recognised by the United Nations. Indeed, the UN Security Council issued a number of resolutions against them.
Cuba? Why on earth would Cuba be a threat?
The Taliban banned the growing of opium. I agree that many other countries were more of a threat to global peace and security, however the fact remains that the UN did recognise them as a threat to global peace and security.
At 6,100 tonnes, Afghanistan currently produces about 92% of the world's opium.
However under the Taliban (and remember, we're talking about the period under the Taliban at the moment) production was down to about 70 tonnes, which, assuming level production everywhere else (in truth it's likely production increased elsewhere, thus making Afghanistan's % even smaller), would account for a little over 1% of the world's supply during that time period.
Al Qaeda were guests of the Taliban. The Taliban strictly prevented poppy cultivation and opium smuggling. Do you honestly think Al Qaeda would so blatantly defy their hosts? Why? Al Qaeda had plenty of money.
Osama Bin Laden himself has a personal fortune in the millions. Al Qaeda also established (as MAK) a widespread fundraising network around the world (at least 30 offices in the USA, mainly located in Mosques).
Al Qaeda are quite popular in the Muslim world, and many Muslims have ample money. Furthermore Al Qaeda are quite capable of taking money from unwitting Muslims via fundraising fronts professing a different motive. As far as currently, I believe they probably have problems now. After 9/11 the USA carried out a blitz on companies and organisations in the USA with links to radical Islam. They also froze terrorist assets and closed down companies such as the Al Taqwa Bank.
National secrets obviously. The identities of sources, spies in foreign countries, double agents and moles in other organisations. The details of what information they have on their enemies and how they gathered it. All sorts.
Why more than 2? How many? 3? 4? 10? 100?
What on earth are you on about?
You were talking about people "in office". People "in office" are not government workers. They are the government.
You are incorrect. The 9/11 Commission was an inquiry into one very specific aspect of the attacks - namely an investigation into the Government's performance leading up to it. The body of work that constitutes the 9/11 Investigation "Bible" was carried out by the FBI, FAA, NTSB, FEMA, NIST, and so forth. The 9/11 Commission Report was not underfunded.
You haven't even managed to support any of your points, let alone refute any of my rebuttals. None of the few articles you have linked to say what you think they say.
Yes, it is dangerous. But giving secret information to lots of people is often even more dangerous. Which is why western democracies have numerous safeguards to prevent their government over-reaching their power.
In order to live in a structured governed society one must extend a certain degree of trust to the government. Otherwise it doesn't work.
By electing certain peoples into government, a population is granting said peoples their trust to run their society for them. Thus is the way of society. It has worked for 10,000 years.
I'm sorry but this doesn't grant your story any credibility whatsoever.
Good for him. It's a work of fiction.
-Gumboot
israelside
Thinker
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2007
- Messages
- 160
False, the article does mention the CIA using negotiation tactics at times, i guess you don't read.
yes english is my first language, what is "the next" of this document, i don't understand your usage of english either
Simple? So if they were so easy, why can't anyone conjure up a plan to terrorize folks and cause nations to forever change their foreign policies! It had to require alot of thought and coordination. So Osama was considered small fry prior to 9/11 but his guilt in the attacks was obvious moments after the attack, even though he initially denied the attacks and then a fatter darker blurrier picture of his so called "confession tape" arose, odd. Terrorists arn't small fry anymore buddy, Mr. Bush's legacy will be defined by 9/11 and this war on terrorism...its the talk of the world for the past 4 years (since the war began in iraq for the most part) if not since 911. I dont understand how they can be considered small fry anymore, granted the real murderers are the elite establishment planners who fund and create these false wars and use the terrorists as patsies.
Well they were going to be the brunt of operation northwoods, since the posed a threat against the US, but we all can forget about that right?
So, if the Taliban produced so little opium, what was their profit from? If they produce 92% now, heaven help us...I say keep the fields dead, do you want your kids smoking that stuff? Replace an evil govt with a more evil one.
Look, everyone of the commissioners should have access to the classified documents. period. Because its the honest thing to do, we do it everywhere else, why not here?
The Sumarian tribe thing is very interesting, google it up, Iraw has some interesting history. Which would be very valuable to people in the west, or anyone.
[/B]
Ok, it may have had a specific interest in mind to study, but events leading up to 911 included the ISI connection with the CIA and Al Qaeda...not an easy issue to simply sweep under the rug! Very complex!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Commission
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,437267,00.html
only $11 million
"Whereas the investigation of the Challenger disaster received $50 million, Bush promised only $3 million for the investigation of the much more deadly and complex disaster of 9/11. He then initially resisted when the commission asked for an additional $8 million." - David Griffin
I understand we extend trust to govt for a reason, hopefully for our benefit, of course there is always corruption. I guess that's as good as the world can be, I'm just looking at it from a christian stand point, where only the good people should be given authority...and only good people can elect other good people right? Otherwise just anyone has the right to vote, which is even more dangerous!
I have credability from Jesus, that's all i need bub, he is the one that should speak through us since he is the truth!
israelside
Thinker
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2007
- Messages
- 160
hey neo, you call me insane and my work crap, yet I haven't heard anything of importance from you? Why not? Please keep things orderly and civil, I am not insane and I am trying to learn here as well as say the things I know...if all you want to do is throw low blows, then go fight somewhere else!
thinkingaboutit
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 311
mmmmmmmm opium
israelside
Thinker
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2007
- Messages
- 160
Gumboot, here is the negotiations i have found by the CIA in that article and othere, I will repost...
http://www.cia-on-campus.org/social/price.html
On March 29, 1951 Johnson informed the Board that the "Proposal that Executive Secretary continue negotiations with the Central Intelligence Agency to arrange for compilation of a roster of Anthropologists
http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpWESSEX/Documents/FightSmart18-11-2001.htm
granted this could have been any "US rep"
The book reveals that the FBI's deputy director John O'Neill resigned in July in protest over the obstruction. With the strategic objective of securing access to oil and gas reserves in Central Asia one of the book's authors states: "At one moment during the negotiations, the U.S. representatives told the Taliban, 'either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs' ".
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030203-411370,00.html
Until about five years ago, it focused instead on gathering intelligence that could be used by other parts of the government. Before that, traditional CIA officers, often working under cover as U.S. diplomats, got most of their secrets from the embassy cocktail circuit or by bribing foreign officials. Most did not even have weapons training
the CIA might not outright "negotiate" with nations, that's obviously not their job, however, under the table deals and bribes of this sort have most assuredly happend throughout the years! I wonder what they bribe the prisoners at their secret prisons with for them to talk?
http://www.cia-on-campus.org/social/price.html
On March 29, 1951 Johnson informed the Board that the "Proposal that Executive Secretary continue negotiations with the Central Intelligence Agency to arrange for compilation of a roster of Anthropologists
http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpWESSEX/Documents/FightSmart18-11-2001.htm
granted this could have been any "US rep"
The book reveals that the FBI's deputy director John O'Neill resigned in July in protest over the obstruction. With the strategic objective of securing access to oil and gas reserves in Central Asia one of the book's authors states: "At one moment during the negotiations, the U.S. representatives told the Taliban, 'either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs' ".
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030203-411370,00.html
Until about five years ago, it focused instead on gathering intelligence that could be used by other parts of the government. Before that, traditional CIA officers, often working under cover as U.S. diplomats, got most of their secrets from the embassy cocktail circuit or by bribing foreign officials. Most did not even have weapons training
the CIA might not outright "negotiate" with nations, that's obviously not their job, however, under the table deals and bribes of this sort have most assuredly happend throughout the years! I wonder what they bribe the prisoners at their secret prisons with for them to talk?
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
Negotiation tactics?
israelside, what do you think "Negotiation" means?
yes english is my first language, what is "the next" of this document, i don't understand your usage of english either
Well spotted. "Text".
They can.
Basic piloting skills, some GPS coordinates, a handful of knives, an airline timetable, some wristwatches, and 19 soldiers willing to die for the cause.
That's all.
I wouldn't say it was "obvious" but I would say he was the most likely suspect.
Conspiracy Theorists pick out specific frames from a single poor quality video and say it isn't Osama Bin Laden. In other parts of the same video it is obvious it is Osama Bin Laden, and more importantly he has also claimed responsibility in later tapes of much higher quality where it is very clear it is him. There are also videos where he is depicted with some of the hijackers.
I am not your buddy.
Indeed it is.
Neither do I. But sadly some people don't consider them a serious threat, even after 9/11.
Are you saying you don't believe Al Qaeda carried out the 9/11 attacks?
Well they were going to be the brunt of operation northwoods, since the posed a threat against the US, but we all can forget about that right?
Cuba was only a threat to the USA because the USSR was intended to put nuclear missiles on it.
Their profit?
Well I don't know what is happening elsewhere, but the New Zealand Provincial Reconstruction Team in Bamyan Province have identified destruction of drug cultivation as one of their most important tasks.
Who does what everywhere else?
Where on earth did this comment come from?
Not really. The ISI connection to Al Qaeda is well known and goes back a long way. There is no CIA connection to Al Qaeda.
David Griffin is not a very useful source for 9/11 research. He presents copious misleading and often entirely false claims.
As I have previously said, the 9/11 Commission Report was not the primary investigation into the September 11 Attacks. Literally dozens and dozens of Federal and State departments were involved, each operating under their own budgets.
The criminal investigation into the September 11 Attacks is the largest ever undertaken by the FBI, and quite possibly the largest criminal investigation in history.
Of course. The idea is to minimalise it.
No, I think your idea is much more dangerous. Who decides who is a "good" person?
I'm afraid if your only credibility comes from Jesus, you don't have much credibility regarding 9/11. Jesus was hardly involved at all.
And I'm not your "bub" any more than I am your "buddy". If you need to address me by name, call me gumboot.
-Gumboot
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
No doubt CIA agents negotiate their contracts and the Director of the CIA negotiates his department budget as well. That's not what we're talking about. We're talking about the CIA negotiating with the Taliban.
David Griffin entirely misrepresents this meeting.
It was organised by the United Nations, not the USA, and the US representatives were retired diplomats, not members of the government, and not CIA agents. The allegations of these threats were made by one person - Niaz Naik from Pakistan. No one else mentions this threat, and indeed others present have explicitly denied it.
Even Naik has explicitly stated that the pipeline was not discussed at the meeting.
Of course that sort of thing occured. That's not negotiation, and certainly not in the manner we were discussing.
You remind me of Bruce Willis' character in The Fifth Element. "Anyone else want to negotiate?"
Let's stick to a more specific definition.
Again, I very much doubt there's any negotiation going on in those places. It seems pretty clear what's going on there is illegal torture.
-Gumboot
israelside
Thinker
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2007
- Messages
- 160
to come up with a deal that benefits both sides!
Al Qaeda is a pasty group, used by the elite to carry out false flags events that create their beloved NWO goals!
operation northwoods was a plan to create an attack on america, blame it on cuba so we could invade cuba, can't you just admit it, it never happend thankfully!
sumarian tribe is associated with IRAQ, and it could be a very crucial motivation for the invasion of iraq by america!
cia used al qaeda and bin laden from the onset, how did rj abbas know the towers were going to come down? he was an ISI agent, you know about OP diamondback?
david griffin is a well respected investigator, i have to consider what he says. Chill out gummy, i know you're not my buddy, its a phrase we just use, deal with it!
what do you think about this article?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1266520,00.html
or this one
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_20141.html