The 9/11 Conspiracy Facts

[WildCat]

I'll be back later, but since I couldnt resist...



I think inherently bigoted would be a more appropriate slur here.

Statements such as this do nothing but further reveal your astounding ignorance of the issues at hand. You really should try reading a book some time by respected authors, or even watch some of the many fine documentaries available on Afghanistan.

 

[jab712]

I think inherently bigoted would be a more appropriate slur here.

Oh, I see, you didn't read any of the information I provided. Not that I am surprised really.

 

[WildCat]

Oh, I see, you didn't read any of the information I provided. Not that I am surprised really.

Of course he didn't read the links. To do so would not be propitious to maintaining his delusions.

 

[HeyLeroy]

Thats because I have the courtesy to reply to most everyone who posts here; I think I can be excused the odd abbreviation/avoidance of repetition.

Funny, you've avoided several of my posts while choosing to respond to posts bracketing mine.

which is fine when you have answers. when you dont, it is speculating.

Agreed 110 %.

Ok, good. So you are now arguing that we cannot trust this man since though he is an American, he has Afghan heritage, and as such cannot be trusted. Of course this is an argument from xenophobia, and racism, and as such while you may like to argue from it, it is generally inadmissible to any serious debate. Try again.

You are purposely misinterpreting what he said. He's asking you to widen your understanding of a different culture; that doesn't sound very racist to me. You've been shown where to find this information being discussed yet you purposely avoid that as well. Very strange; it appears that you're running some kind of game here. Oh well, here are more links to skip over:

Pakhtoonwali / Pashtoonwali / Pakhtunwali / Pashtunwali(PDF)
Pakhtoonwali / Pashtoonwali / Pakhtunwali / Pashtunwali(HTML)

I've known many Afghani refugees from the Soviet invasion era; during that war I sent part of my paper-route money and whatever childrens' clothing I could gather to the mujahidin there in support of their war against the communist invaders (I started when I was thirteen). I've broken bread with them, met their families, seen with my own eyes the stumps of missing arms of children who'd had the misfortune of picking up anti-personnel mines disguised as red toy trucks left behind by columns of Soviet soldiers as they passed through villages. Afghanis are very honourable people and they take that very seriously. Were you to read up on the subject it might make more sense to you how incongruous your arguments are to the reality of the situation.

If you don't understand a different culture, that's fine. If people try to educate you on the subject, it's also fine to disregard such an attempt. But if you try to discuss said culture with a wilful ignorance of the topic at hand, it only makes you look foolish.

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir
Originally Posted by
But AQ aren't 'invisible'... many government agencies worldwide are fully aware of prominent members of AQ. OBL was on the FBI's 'Most Wanted' list years before 9/11. Neither is the threat invisible.

This isnt the "War on AQ"
Semantics; AQ were the catalyst for the whole War on Terror, but that's by-the-by; my point was that the enemy in this instance are not 'invisible', which you didn't address.


Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir
So what IS the point?! With Saddam alive or dead, the dissidents will still fight. With OBL alive or dead, they will still fight.
Does that mean that they shouldnt be killed/arrested? Does that mena that by doing such you are helping thei terrorists efforts?

Not what I'm saying; my point was that with or without a figurehead, the dissidents will still fight; you seem to be suggesting that 9/11 would never have happened if OBL had been 'taken care of' earlier./B]

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir
So they are dastardly superfiends who leave clues to their cunning plots littered around to mock the only ones who are intelligent enough to realise what they are - the 'Truth' movement?

No, they are moronic, bumbling, murderous imbeciles who would struggle to organise a piss up in a brewery. But given the power of demicratic propaganda, which I have alluded to many times here so far, many people will struggle to find out the information, and when they do, will accept ridiculous subterfuges in order to not have to believe it.

"moronic, bumbling, murderous imbeciles who would struggle to organise a piss up in a brewery" who yet - according to you - who managed to perpetrate/take advantage of the events of 9/11, and - bar the minority of intrepid 'Truth Seekers' - have convinced the world that they knew nothing about it?

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir
So, given that the entire gullible British Government

why entire?

So far as I am aware, not one MP has publicly come forward and stated that they believe 9/11 was an 'inside job'.

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir
has been unwittingly hoodwinked by the villainous and cunning US Government into going to war over a terror plot they allowed and encouraged, and as a result of which have lost probably millions of pounds in destroyed equipment,

Oil, gas and weapons contracts offset that quite readily i would think

Think again. ONE Warrior AFV costs approximately 2 million pounds - not including a full BOWMAN fit. I can think of four instances of destroyed Warriors straight away, since the invasion of Iraq, and when you factor in the logistical costs of simply getting to Iraq and BEING there, I would suggest there IS no benefit. Hence why the British Army are closing down many bases in Iraq and looking to withdraw as soon as possible.

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir
brought the popularity of the current Government to an all-time low,
errr.. Brown may well win the next election, and if he doesnt, Cameron, who has endorsed all of this himself, will do

Whether he endorsed all this or not, if Cameron wins the next election; ie - the OPPOSITION government come to power, I would suggest that is pretty demonstrative of the unpopularity of the current Government who made the decision to aid the US in the War on Terror. Blair's handling of the Iraq invasion is a big factor in the calls for him to step down which, again, indicates unpopularity, don't you think?


Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir
spent millions on getting troops to war, millions maintaining them while they're AT war, are currently undergoing an armed forces manning crisis as overstretched soldiers are leaving the army in droves, and last - but not least - have had 150 British soldiers killed - many who's deaths sparked newer controversies - in Iraq alone, can you tell me if you think the benefits outweigh the negatives?

As above, plus think about geo-political strategy for the Brits, It is a matter of hanging on to the big boys coat tails.

Which only maintains the relationship we already have with the US; we don't GAIN from it.

If I may ask again; do you think the London bombings were also 'allowed' to happen so the British Government could further it's own agenda?

 

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir
Originally Posted by

SMVC, I find it very difficult to read your posts the way they are formatted - I'm not sure who you're responding to and where a response ends and a quote begins. It's much easier if you'd just use the "quote" button/tags.

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

Apologies Wildcat, I post in somewhat of a rush quite a lot of the time.
I shall make every effort to make posts more clear and organised!

 

[Belz...]

Use the quote function, Choir. It helps.

And while you're at it, sing us a little song. Hell kings also need some tunes...

 

[mjd1982]

Provide reference to support statement that "the Saudi gov would be choosing the clerics". Where is this supported?

It;s one of the main articles by have been discussing, keep up:
http://www.infowars.com/saved pages/Prior_Knowledge/US_met_taliban.htm

Briefly, I have never made that argument.

(The argument being that Mohabbat cannot be believed since Afghans are inherently dishonest)

Of course, this is a [url="http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84473&page=40]complete lie[/url]

Do you notice that honesty is not part of this code?

and again

Research pashtun-wali and pannah warkawel...the concept of "honesty" appears nowhere in the pashtun-wali (which, if you knew what Mohabbat's tribal affiliation was, you would be able to judge relevance)..."Lying" or "shading the truth" is done widely, with little to no regret or even awareness

I don't think I will need to do much more to emphasise the irony of the last phrase, but maybe you can explain why you do such? Maybe I can infer that this is therefore part of the US "cultural code", and can make inferences on US official statements based on that?

I have argued that Mohabbat's claims are questionable because:
- his claims go against all documentation of meetings, documentation done immediately following or soon afterwards, while his claims are years later,

Right. Such as? Show me docs that are mutually exclusive, contrary to what Mohabbat says.

- his claims go against the Taliban cultural code, and their historical record of refusal to turn over bin Laden,

Again, another broad ethnic slur to justify you pov. How sad is this? Do you not understand that you cannot apply a sterotype, or what you call a "cultural code" to every instance of behaviour of every member of a population? It disgusts me to have to be telling somebody this, boy oh boy...

On top of which sources that your colleagues are using do state that the Taliban were willing to hand over OBL to what would have been in essence a US mandated court, which is 100% congruent with what Mohabbat stated.

And finally, we have independence. Your bigoted nature aside, are we going to believe an American/Afghan intermediary with no evident conflicts of interest, or the US state dept's comments on how their procrastination didnt in fact assist in the deaths of 3000 US. This is a simple question for anyone who is looking at this seriously.

- complete absence of any public statement by any Taliban official expressing any desire to turn over bin Laden,

Why would this have to be the case?

- complete absence of any corroborating details,

Other than the reports that we already know, as shown above

- he is not independent, and his credibility as a witness bears examination, particularly in light of the nature of his claims with respect to above.

as above... dear oh dear.

 

[mjd1982]

It most certainly is. From S.J.Res.23:

That is one element of the WOT, I have said this a million times, to you especially, think before posting tripe please.

 

[mjd1982]

Oh, I see, you didn't read any of the information I provided. Not that I am surprised really.

No, I had read the wikipedia pages when I was referred to them initially.

I will repeat- using an ethnic slur (i.e. that Afghans are inherently, culturally dishonest, thus we cannot believe any of them) is of zero value to a serious argument.

I can give you a nice example of such in fact. There is a common stat repeated outside the US, that some fractional percentage of US own a passport. This, were I to argue from an ignorant standpoint similar to you are your ilk, illustrates that there is a deeply ingrained culture of complete ignorance and apathy about anything that goes ont outside the US. I could buttress this claim further with quotes from the holder of the highest office in the US. And this premise would lead to the conclusion that nothing a yank says about anything to do with a foreign country can have validity, since ignorance, or at best, ignorant revisionism will colour anything they say on the topic.

Now this is obviously stupid, but it is no more than any other racial slur. So, let's stick to sensible facts and sensible inferences.

 

[mjd1982]

Funny, you've avoided several of my posts while choosing to respond to posts bracketing mine.

This is because you have had your chance, and very few of your posts here seem serious. This is, pretty much another instance of such.

You are purposely misinterpreting what he said. He's asking you to widen your understanding of a different culture; that doesn't sound very racist to me.

No, that is not what is being asked, it is you who is apparently deliberately misleading himself. The argument is that since Afghans have a "cultural code" of dishonesty, we cannot trust what a half Afghan half yank has to say. This is hard to miss.

You've been shown where to find this information being discussed yet you purposely avoid that as well. Very strange; it appears that you're running some kind of game here. Oh well, here are more links to skip over:

Pakhtoonwali / Pashtoonwali / Pakhtunwali / Pashtunwali(PDF)
Pakhtoonwali / Pashtoonwali / Pakhtunwali / Pashtunwali(HTML)

I've known many Afghani refugees from the Soviet invasion era; during that war I sent part of my paper-route money and whatever childrens' clothing I could gather to the mujahidin there in support of their war against the communist invaders (I started when I was thirteen). I've broken bread with them, met their families, seen with my own eyes the stumps of missing arms of children who'd had the misfortune of picking up anti-personnel mines disguised as red toy trucks left behind by columns of Soviet soldiers as they passed through villages. Afghanis are very honourable people and they take that very seriously. Were you to read up on the subject it might make more sense to you how incongruous your arguments are to the reality of the situation.

If you don't understand a different culture, that's fine. If people try to educate you on the subject, it's also fine to disregard such an attempt. But if you try to discuss said culture with a wilful ignorance of the topic at hand, it only makes you look foolish.

Well, well done on your younger efforts.

I will repeat, the posts here are not "learn about another culture". This isnt lonelyplanet.com. It is learn that Afghans lie without knowing it, thus we cannot believe what any of them says. This is, by definition , an ethnic slur, and I hope we will not have to argue this any more here.

 

[DGM]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2726463#post2726463

I see you chose not to deal with this post that seriously brings into question the credibility of this source.

 

[mjd1982]

Semantics; AQ were the catalyst for the whole War on Terror, but that's by-the-by; my point was that the enemy in this instance are not 'invisible', which you didn't address.

They were the catalyst, but this isnt a war on AQ.

They are, essentially invisible in that you cannot see them (!). You can identify them after the fact, but the problem is that this is a "hidden enemy"- they could be sitting opposite you on the tube, bus etc.

Not what I'm saying; my point was that with or without a figurehead, the dissidents will still fight; you seem to be suggesting that 9/11 would never have happened if OBL had been 'taken care of' earlier./B]

I have said a number of times, 2 things- 1) The non killing/arrest of OBL is inexplicable in any other sceanrio than conspiracy (unless someone wants to show me otherwise, which thy havent), and 2) It may not have stopped 911, but would have hindered it at the very least.

"moronic, bumbling, murderous imbeciles who would struggle to organise a piss up in a brewery" who yet - according to you - who managed to perpetrate/take advantage of the events of 9/11, and - bar the minority of intrepid 'Truth Seekers' - have convinced the world that they knew nothing about it?

This is not hard. Read this, chapters 1-3 and 6 if you are serious about finding out more.
http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html

Oh, and watch this
http://youtube.com/watch?v=pkKsaRXrvSo

So far as I am aware, not one MP has publicly come forward and stated that they believe 9/11 was an 'inside job'.

Michael Meacher.

This doesnt mean that no others believe it, btw

Think again. ONE Warrior AFV costs approximately 2 million pounds - not including a full BOWMAN fit. I can think of four instances of destroyed Warriors straight away, since the invasion of Iraq, and when you factor in the logistical costs of simply getting to Iraq and BEING there, I would suggest there IS no benefit. Hence why the British Army are closing down many bases in Iraq and looking to withdraw as soon as possible.

£8mn? That's nothing!

Whether he endorsed all this or not, if Cameron wins the next election; ie - the OPPOSITION government come to power, I would suggest that is pretty demonstrative of the unpopularity of the current Government who made the decision to aid the US in the War on Terror. Blair's handling of the Iraq invasion is a big factor in the calls for him to step down which, again, indicates unpopularity, don't you think?

The war is unpopular, yes, but whats your point? Its not the decision that wa unpopular, the war has become an albatross, very different. The gov wasnt to know this when they made the decision.

Which only maintains the relationship we already have with the US; we don't GAIN from it.

If I may ask again; do you think the London bombings were also 'allowed' to happen so the British Government could further it's own agenda?

No.

There is a terror threat, but this is the cunning of the WOT- invade countries, mainly Muslim, illegally, commit atrocities, and stir up tensions amongst Muslims, which leads inevitably to teror, or the threat of terror.

 

[mjd1982]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2726463#post2726463

I see you chose not to deal with this post that seriously brings into question the credibility of this source.

Oh please! I missed you, I'm sorry.

Read the article closer. The claim as to the successful nature of his negotiations comes from CP, not from him. There is thus no conflict.

 

[DGM]

Oh please! I missed you, I'm sorry.

Read the article closer. The claim as to the successful nature of his negotiations comes from CP, not from him. There is thus no conflict.

Wrong. He claims to be successfully negotiating her release. This did not happen. The very same thing as with OBL. He overstates his importance. Really quite simple. Try to comprehend

Towards the end of that same month of October, 2001 Mohabbat was successfully negotiating with the Taliban for the release of Heather Mercer

 

[DGM]

The claim as to the successful nature of his negotiations comes from CP

Please, He is the source of the article.

 

[WildCat]

That is one element of the WOT, I have said this a million times, to you especially, think before posting tripe please.

"One element"? It's the actual freaking declaration of war!

 

[Unsecured Coins]

 

[DGM]

Kabir Mohabbat definitely should not use the "counter punch" article on his negotiator resume.

Figuring in his extensive dealings with the Taliban in the late 1990s was much investment of time and effort for a contract to develop the proposed oil pipeline through northern Afghanistan.

FAIL

Towards the end of that same month of October, 2001 Mohabbat was successfully negotiating with the Taliban for the release of Heather Mercer

FAIL

Osama bin Laden

FAIL

He's 0 for 3.