Saudi Arabia May Be Tied to 9/11, 2 Ex-Senators Say

[The Big Dog]

The CIA lied about, blocked information, and shielded al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi from FBI agents and it wasn't because of "the wall."

"the wall."

There must be a reason that you see fit to post in cryptic shorthand. It is a waste of time.

Is There Any Chance of Unity Between the Truthers and Debunkers?

It appears not.

 

[The Big Dog]

16.5 said:

Not only would someone have to listen to it, they'd have to come back here, describe it, and then "debunk it."

Which made me say he can't debunk it.

I wanted you guys to listen to the audio and tell me what you think about it.

And I wanted you to describe it, tell us what we should be listening to and for what reason.

you refuse.

it seems we are at an impasse.

 

[SpringHallConvert]

I'm just not stupid enough to believe that a government could create something of this magnitude and cover it up.

Why not? Because you think the government doesn't have the ability to carry out large-scale, covert operations? Because you think there aren't people in or attached to the government who'd kill or allow the killing of innocent people? Because you think people will always come forward to incriminate themselves or others after a crime?

Are any of these beliefs founded on any factual, concrete information? Of course not, but you believe them anyway.

 

[chrismohr]

The podcast consists of conversations with people such as Richard Clarke, Thomas Kean, Mark Rossini, etc..

You can't debunk it. All you can do is insult and ignore it.

Hi Shure,

Sorry you're getting such flack over your political questions. Did you ever watch my one "non-rebuttal" video? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LnYfB4OaDM

Here I talk about how torn I am by the political questions that are not talked about much by me or others... I've focused on the technical aspects of controlled demolition, obviously, but I have not ignored the other questions, as you will see if you watch this video.

 

[shure]

Hi Shure,

Sorry you're getting such flack over your political questions. Did you ever watch my one "non-rebuttal" video? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LnYfB4OaDM

Here I talk about how torn I am by the political questions that are not talked about much by me or others... I've focused on the technical aspects of controlled demolition, obviously, but I have not ignored the other questions, as you will see if you watch this video.

I just watched your video Chris. Although I appreciate what you have done concerning the nanothermite issue, you sounded pretty arrogant and sarcastic in the video. You admitted that you haven't looked into much else concerning 9/11 other than the scientific aspects of the buildings.

Please, if you ever have the time, read the book Intelligence Matters, by Bob Graham

 

[chrismohr]

I just watched your video Chris. Although I appreciate what you have done concerning the nanothermite issue, you sounded pretty arrogant and sarcastic in the video. You admitted that you haven't looked into much else concerning 9/11 other than the scientific aspects of the buildings.

Please, if you ever have the time, read the book Intelligence Matters, by Bob Graham

OK but I'm shocked. I absolutely did not intend any sarcasm.

 

[SpringHallConvert]

OK but I'm shocked. I absolutely did not intend any sarcasm.

Hey, Chris Mohr, do you believe it is at all possible that elements within the U.S. government could have covertly funded Al-Qaeda, monitored their progress in planning and organizing the attacks, allowed the attacks to occur, and then in the aftermath, stifle the investigation and mislead the 9/11 Commission?

In other words, forget the whole natural collapse/controlled demolition debate for a moment. Could the 9/11 attacks have been the product of a high-level "inside job"? If not, why?

 

[NutCracker]

You guys say there is nothing wrong with what we were told about 9/11.

Is that so? It's just that what we claim, and have succesfully demonstrated, time and time again, is that what the TM claims is wrong with "what we are told about 9/11" is just bullocks of the third degree. That we state that what the TM has put forward is bullocks does not imply we claim nothing is wrong with the events of 9/11. (Good old binary truther think, isn't it Shure?)

Sure you guys will focus on the stupid stuff such as spacebeams, no planes, fake phone calls, nanothermite, etc..

The TM focusses on these stupid things. Put differently: the TM might get us to focus on serious matters by putting serious matters on the table. Since the TM hasn't produced anything of value for years, and what it had come up with before is pretty abysmal, and the founders of the movement have abandoned ship, I can confidently state that the chances that the TM will produce something worth looking at in the foreseeable future are nil.

Why not take a critical look at some of the real issues instead of ignoring or poo pooing them?

The only "critical look" that I'm aware of coming from the TM are indeed of the poo-poo level.

First, a well reasoned, factually correct critique would have to be put forward.

How about the cover-up of the Saudi involvement and the intelligence failures!!!

Well, I'm not an American, but was it not that a great many of US tax dollars have been spent on investigating these intelligence failures? And was the Department of Homeland Security not a result of these investigations?

In regard to Saudi Involvement, where is your well written, ditto reasoned, factually correct analysis than?"Ah, here you have a youtube video to chew on, debunkahs! Lulz!" posts just don't cut it.

 

[shure]

OK but I'm shocked. I absolutely did not intend any sarcasm.

It started out good and I was hoping for something positive from you, but then you stated going on about should we investigate UFO's, etc..

Eventhough you did state you didn't mean it as a put down, it sure sounded like one.

As I said there are real issues.

From the joint Intelligence inquiry report:

The Administration has to date objected to the Inquiry’s efforts to interview the informant in order to attempt to resolve those inconsistencies. The Administration also would not agree to allow the FBI to serve a Committee subpoena and deposition notice on the informant. Instead, written interrogatories from the Joint Inquiry were, at the suggestion of the FBI, provided to the informant. Through an attorney, the informant has declined to respond to those interrogatories and has indicated that, if subpoenaed, the informant would request a grant of immunity prior to testifying." page 51/858
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/pdf/fullreport_errata.pdf


From Bob Graham's Intelligence Matters:

"We were seeing in writing what we had suspected for some time: the White House was directing the cover-up" (pg 166).



Is that not a cover-up???

 

[Edx]

You guys say there is nothing wrong with what we were told about 9/11.

Depends what you're talking about.

There is nothing wrong about what we were told in the sense that none of it proves anything truthers claim. But that doesnt mean everything the government said was necessarily correct and no one tried to misrepresent the truth in order to over their asses from accusations of incompetence and negligence.

How about the cover-up of the Saudi involvement and the intelligence failures!!!

Possible. So what? Doesn't suggest inside job even if you demonstrated this to a strong probability.

Wheres the lie from the "debunkers"? I have a ton of lies I could give you from truthers, I wouldnt know where to start, and they are obvious, shameless and easily demonstrable

 

[shure]

Ok, first I will ask... are you familiar with the information concerning the San Diego informant Abdussattar Shaikh and the connections with Kahlid al-Mihdhar, Nawaf al-Hazmi, Osama Basnan, and Omar al-Bayoumi?

 

[DGM]

Ok, first I will ask... are you familiar with the information concerning the San Diego informant Abdussattar Shaikh and the connections with Kahlid al-Mihdhar, Nawaf al-Hazmi, Osama Basnan, and Omar al-Bayoumi?

Yes I am.

Unfortunately I'm off to work (over-night no less). I will check back and I would like to discuss mostly why YOU think the Bush administration might have wanted to censor those pages.

Until later.

 

[MarkLindeman]

It started out good and I was hoping for something positive from you, but then you stated going on about should we investigate UFO's, etc..

Eventhough you did state you didn't mean it as a put down, it sure sounded like one.

As I said there are real issues....

In no way to presume to speak for Chris Mohr, but I construed that video in a different context than you seem to be taking it.

When people such as Richard Gage call for an investigation -- and sometimes even cite folks like Bob Graham and John Farmer -- they're usually fairly indiscriminate about the kind of investigation they are calling for.

To put it tribally, it isn't that debunkers lump Graham and Farmer in with the Truth Movement; it's that folks in the Truth Movement often claim Graham and Farmer for their own purposes. I've seen it many times.

There's no reason it has to be that way.

 

[chrismohr]

Hey, Chris Mohr, do you believe it is at all possible that elements within the U.S. government could have covertly funded Al-Qaeda, monitored their progress in planning and organizing the attacks, allowed the attacks to occur, and then in the aftermath, stifle the investigation and mislead the 9/11 Commission?

In other words, forget the whole natural collapse/controlled demolition debate for a moment. Could the 9/11 attacks have been the product of a high-level "inside job"? If not, why?

In other words, LIHOP if not MIHOP? (Let it happen on purpose vs make it happen on purpose)

I don't know. I spent hundreds of hours studying controlled demolition before going public with my first debate. Hundreds more before debating Richard Gage. Hundreds more preparing the YouTube Gage rebuttal videos. Hundreds more since, including the Millette dust study.

The falsehoods and outright lies I have encountered in 9/11 CD theories would make it impossible for me to approach your question with any real openness any more, since the evidence for a government conspiracy is provided by the same people who fed me the CD theories. Plus, years before all of this, I had the experience of disproving a supposed government conspiracy around the first Iraq War. I'm fed up with the whole thing and have decided against researching yet another set of claims in this area. I'm damaged goods, sorry.

Someone else will have to prove the truth of LIHOP claims. Or disprove them. What I took on was big enough, believe me.

 

[shure]

Would you be open to the idea that there was a "cover-up" because of the need to protect informants and/or intelligence methods for the sake of national security?

I just don't see that as being possible given the information we have today.

A good example would be the work of Kevin Fenton.

Here is an in depth explanation of what he found:

http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/4474777/1/

 

[shure]

Why would the CIA block the FBI from knowing about known terrorists in the United States. Especially since they had the Yemen communications hub tapped and were tracking the terrorists for the past two years.

This was a small group in the UBL unit. Richard Blee was the ring leader.

Say it did go too far... Shouldn't Richard Blee and others be dealt with properly for their negligence or incompetence in letting 9/11 take place?

You would think at least Blee would be demoted or fired. Not promoted to one of the head guys in the hunt for Bin Laden in Tora Bora. The best chance we had to get Osama back then, but he got away.

 

[beachnut]

I just don't see that as being possible given the information we have today.

A good example would be the work of Kevin Fenton.

Here is an in depth explanation of what he found:

http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/4474777/1/

Another book? How are sales? Pulitzer?

Did Fenton apply for the Pulitzer? What is the conspiracy, the crazy not true conspiracy theory for this?

This would be politics, or news, not CT stuff.


Oops, you are going to ask more questions because you have no evidence; no Pulitzer. Ask away.

 

[Brainster]

I just don't see that as being possible given the information we have today.

A good example would be the work of Kevin Fenton.

Here is an in depth explanation of what he found:

http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/4474777/1/

Miles Kara responds:

However, his entire work, unfortunately, is an imposition of retrospective awareness and understanding. He imposes meaning and intent with the crystal clarity of hindsight to events that in real time were not nearly what he portrays them to be. Moreover, he applies that harsh, retrospective judgment to the work of four organizations with little understanding of how they went about their work and why they worked the way they did. His assertions require that people working in real time do so with vision and near-perfect situational awareness. He does not describe reality as I know it.

 

[shure]

Miles Kara responds:

Do you let Miles do your thinking for you? He is entitled to his opinions. If a person ends up looking at the information produced by Kevin Fenton, You see that there was deliberate lying and blocking of crutial information concerning Khalid Almidhar and Nawaf Alhazmi being known terrorists in the U.S.

When you combine that with all the foreknowledge and tracking of these guys for years and the deliberate lying and covering up of that also, there is an undeniable picture that emerges.

Richard Clarke doesn't want to believe it either. That is why he came up with the theory that maybe the CIA was trying to recruit Almidhar and Alhazmi.

Would the CIA be trying to recruit these guys for over two years???

What is the excuse for the other terrorist cells that were Identified by Anthony Shaffer during the Able Danger operation?

Whas Shaffer's unit blocked from the other terrorists because the CIA was trying to recruit them also????

 

[beachnut]

Miles Kara responds:

Do you let Miles do your thinking for you? ... ????

... A good example would be the work of Kevin Fenton.

Here is an in depth explanation of what he found:
...

Do you let Miles do your thinking for you? ... ????

????

911 truth - quotes and opinions to form a revised reality.

...
But, is there any prospective for harmony between the two?
...?

It is easier to have Harmony with Bigfoot believers. There are no murdered people to disrespect mindlessly spreading a silly delusion, based on an illusion or gullibility.