FBI dropped the ball wrt Mossaoui

[Jetblast]

When did Rowley state that 9/11 was a false flag attack?

Hint: she didn't.

Rowley quite rightly pointed out that the FBI mishandled pre 9/11 intelligence - that's a far cry from false flag, and as I've pointed out, pretty much sop in the LE world. If it doesn't come down from above, the administrators could care less what a street investigator brings in.

Yeah, makes sense. You know those bureaucrats. Oblivious to agents telling them about confirmed arab terrorists...

 

[BStrong]

Yeah, makes sense. You know those bureaucrats. Oblivious to agents telling them about confirmed arab terrorists...

Unfortunately it's the rule rather than the exception.

 

[BStrong]

I love seeing a refuted false propagandist flopping. What I wrote wasn't opinions from writers it was the truthful record of the events backed by documented fact. I think it's clear you couldn't answer it.

VietNam was not interested in provoking the huge war-force of the American army into their national conflict. You once again enter false information. Meanwhile there is evidence forces within the government were enlisting government members like VietNam ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge and National Security Advisor McGeorge Bundy to work against JFK. Johnson was a ringer. VietNam was CIA's war and if you are saying CIA didn't use its infamous practices to create that war you are simply rowing against the tide with a weak paddle.

Is a refuted false propagandist a true propagandist? you have too many negatives in one sentence.

Is that SVN or NVN - at the time of the Tonkin incident, The NVA and the VC were actively engaged in a shooting war w/ the South and the US, like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ap_Bac

And there was absolutely no reason for an incident to be fabricated when you have an opponent that is happy to oblige by shooting at you.

Actually, there really only one or two posters that are incapable of discussing this issue, and you're one of 'em - was I you, I'd take to the study hall and hit the books.

 

[Jetblast]

Not working BStrong. You lost that one by the obvious facts you couldn't answer.


An honest review of those facts would see North VietNam was not interested in provoking the massive war-force of the US into attacking it. On the other hand everything I said about CIA, Johnson, and false flags holds true.


What has been shown here is US has a recorded pattern of big-time false flags designed to get it into wars of choice and CIA interest - just like 9-11.

 

[BStrong]

Not working BStrong. You lost that one by the obvious facts you couldn't answer.

An honest review of those facts would see North VietNam was not interested in provoking the massive war-force of the US into attacking it. On the other hand everything I said about CIA, Johnson, and false flags holds true.


What has been shown here is US has a recorded pattern of big-time false flags designed to get it into wars of choice and CIA interest - just like 9-11.

Show me a fact (your opinion or the opinion of an author working from a pov of Hollywood fiction doesn't count) and I'll respond. You make many assertions, but other than knowing that 9/11 happened on..well, 9/11, you are thin on facts.

NVN didn't care who they were shooting at, they did serious damage to the Japanese, beat the French, and Giap already knew how to beat the US.

If you've got a link to some VN evidence showing reluctance to engage the US, I'd be seriously interested in reading same.

ETA :Re: above, I just googled "north vietnamese reluctant to fight the us before gulf of tonkin" and got -0- relevant hits. Since I don't expect JB to respond as in honest debate, if any other posters have links to information proving or refuting his assertion (I ain't buying his assertion) please post relevant links.

 

[Jetblast]

That's just a strawman BStrong. What is at question here is US's false flag claim that NVA torpedo boats attacked it on the 4th and how that fits into Johnson/CIA-motivated attempts to get us into VietNam post-Kennedy assassination. You exploit the semantics of the word "assertion" while ignoring the facts behind that assertion.

The reason no torpedo boats attacked the hugely disproportionate US Navy force off VietNam is because the North VietNamese had no reason to.

 

[beachnut]

That's just a strawman BStrong. What is at question here is US's false flag claim that NVA torpedo boats attacked it on the 4th and how that fits into Johnson/CIA-motivated attempts to get us into VietNam post-Kennedy assassination. You exploit the semantics of the word "assertion" while ignoring the facts behind that assertion.

The reason no torpedo boats attacked the hugely disproportionate US Navy force off VietNam is because the North VietNamese had no reason to.

CIA? Thought it was the FBI and the 12 sites you can't name. Guess you will not be able to help the FBI.

How many more years will it take you to figure out 911? It took Passengers on Flight 93 minutes. Good luck.

Now is a great time to tie your silly JFK junk, CIA master plot, Johnson et al, to the FBI dropping the ball. Wait, how can you tie nonsense to a failed conspiracy theory formed with zero evidence? Same people behind your "unable to define conspiracy" as with the "MACH 4" flight 800 CT stuff?

 

[BStrong]

That's just a strawman BStrong. What is at question here is US's false flag claim that NVA torpedo boats attacked it on the 4th and how that fits into Johnson/CIA-motivated attempts to get us into VietNam post-Kennedy assassination. You exploit the semantics of the word "assertion" while ignoring the facts behind that assertion.

The reason no torpedo boats attacked the hugely disproportionate US Navy force off VietNam is because the North VietNamese had no reason to.

No strawman involved - and didn't you earlier describe DESOTO as a "provocation?"

Since guys from 1st SFG were already in country when JFK was in office, getting PH's and other decorations, do you really want to assert that the NVA/VC weren't in a shooting war with US forces?

 

[Jetblast]

You are ignoring the pertinent context of JFK intending to get out of VietNam and Johnson making good for being put into the presidency.


Yes, DESOTO was a provocation that involved a CIA false flag. You're not being honest because the Viet Cong were attacking the South VietNamese government not the US. The Maddox false flag achieved the image of aggressive North VietNamese communists attacking the US. Sound familiar?


I've now discovered another You-Tube discussing CIA's attempt to assassinate Cambodia's Prince Sihanouk and blame it on the commies. All described in JFK Assassination hero and Special Forces soldier Dan Marvin's book 'Expendable Elite'.


All false flags related to Moussaoui and 9-11.

 

[BStrong]

You are ignoring the pertinent context of JFK intending to get out of VietNam and Johnson making good for being put into the presidency.


Yes, DESOTO was a provocation that involved a CIA false flag. You're not being honest because the Viet Cong were attacking the South VietNamese government not the US. The Maddox false flag achieved the image of aggressive North VietNamese communists attacking the US. Sound familiar?


I've now discovered another You-Tube discussing CIA's attempt to assassinate Cambodia's Prince Sihanouk and blame it on the commies. All described in JFK Assassination hero and Special Forces soldier Dan Marvin's book 'Expendable Elite'.


All false flags related to Moussaoui and 9-11.

Not ignoring anything JB - you assert JFK was pulling out, I posted a quote from RFK contemporaneous with the assassination showing that there was no such action intended - RFK v. secondary sources, RFK wins.

DESOTO as a Navy op was an absolute provocation that in no way relied on the favorite buzz phrase of the hawkers, "False Flag" - the NV's were more than happy to shoot at anyone within range, and as I noted above, you still have not presented one bit of evidence otherwise past bare assertion.

Sound familar? you bet it does, you've been pimping the old whore in almost every post.

Dan Marvin?

http://www.socnet.com/showthread.php?t=56668

Let me clue you in, there are very very few actual operators that end up with fiction friendly nicknames (Dangerous Dan?) and the court case Marvin claimed verified the facts in his book did no such thing, the guy is right in there with Frank Dux, Warner Smith and Scott Barnes.

Mcadams has an interesting piece on 'ol DD:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/marvin.htm

 

[beachnut]

You are ignoring the pertinent context of JFK intending to get out of VietNam and Johnson making good for being put into the presidency.


Yes, DESOTO was a provocation that involved a CIA false flag. You're not being honest because the Viet Cong were attacking the South VietNamese government not the US. The Maddox false flag achieved the image of aggressive North VietNamese communists attacking the US. Sound familiar?


I've now discovered another You-Tube discussing CIA's attempt to assassinate Cambodia's Prince Sihanouk and blame it on the commies. All described in JFK Assassination hero and Special Forces soldier Dan Marvin's book 'Expendable Elite'.


All false flags related to Moussaoui and 9-11.

Yes, all false flags relate to Moussaoui in a fantasy world.

In your fantasy world of false flags all over. Flt 800, Bigfoot, Chemtrail, JFK, Honey Boo Boo, et al. There are no dots 911 truth can't connect to make up woo.

 

[carlitos]

Gee, OK. No chance that your speculation of an enormous treasonous, decades long, conspiracy of the CIA to subvert the gov't and direct resources to its own criminal agenda is simply a result of a paranoid world view?

See, OK. No chance that you are connecting dots that do not really have any relation to each other?

On a related note...

http://coloringforgrownups.com/image/48458638061

 

[Robrob]

I've now discovered another You-Tube discussing CIA's attempt to assassinate Cambodia's Prince Sihanouk and blame it on the commies. All described in JFK Assassination hero and Special Forces soldier Dan Marvin's book 'Expendable Elite'.

Interesting you would cite a book containing documented fabrications.

 

[jaydeehess]

In 1978 Vietnam invaded Cambodia thus provoking China into launching an offensive against Vietnam.
So what was that again about the NVA being reluctant to draw much larger country's forces into conflict?

 

[BStrong]

Interesting you would cite a book containing documented fabrications.

There are folks that would cite anyone that bolsters their argument, and never give a second thought to checking their bona fides.

Ross Perot was sucked in by Scott Barnes:

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/27/u...y-tricks-assertions-claims-life-intrigue.html

And Barnes had already been the subject of a state wide memorandum issued by the California Attorney Generals office advising every state law enforcement agencies that the AG's office would not assist nor act on any information developed or provided by Barnes.

He was a well known one man ******** factory long before he contacted Perot, and had Perot checked Barnes background, I can't imagine he'd give him the time of day, let alone listen to him.

 

[catsmate]

Your arguments only work if you ignore the glaring evidence and pattern for covert involvement.

That'd be the "glaring evidence" you've failed to show actually exists? Along with your "pattern for covert involvement".

In my opinon you're simply not being honest about the players involved or their methods.

Ah, but your opinion is worthless.

There's a simple formula here that maximum hit equals maximum carte blanche for retaliation.

Evidence?

Why do you think they mentioned Pear Harbor in PNAC?

Because it's a significant event in USAian history?

You're just in contempt of the well documented scenario

Citation for this "well documented scenario"? Or are you just mouthing off again?

.... paying back the generals and CIA for putting him into the presidency.......

Another claim that you fail to support.

The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident is now accepted by most serious historians as never having happened

Citation required. Name these "serious historians" and demonstrate they are in the majority. Plus that their opinions are supported by evidence.
Otherwise this is just another of your worthless, baseless, claims.

The reason they needed to fabricate the attack on the 4th is because the events of the 2nd were caused by the US and were too obvious.

Evidence?

Jetty, why does almost every one of your posts start with some sort of personal remark?

Because he gets angry when his claims are exposed as bring worthless?

 

[BStrong]

In 1978 Vietnam invaded Cambodia thus provoking China into launching an offensive against Vietnam.
So what was that again about the NVA being reluctant to draw much larger country's forces into conflict?

And they pretty much fought the PLA to a draw.

Fact is that the NVA was able to bring about the fall of the Khmer Rouge.

 

[jaydeehess]

And they pretty much fought the PLA to a draw.

Fact is that the NVA was able to bring about the fall of the Khmer Rouge.

So two very large , heavily armed countries with a large standing armed force. One of which shares a land border with you, the other must transport all men and machinery half way around the world to fight you.
If it comes down to being afraid to provoke a war with either of them which one do you fear most?

According to Jet Blast's logic, you fear the one 10K miles away more than the one on your own border.
Go ahead, provoke China, but for Minh's sake never shoot at the Americans!

 

[BStrong]

So two very large , heavily armed countries with a large standing armed force. One of which shares a land border with you, the other must transport all men and machinery half way around the world to fight you.
If it comes down to being afraid to provoke a war with either of them which one do you fear most?

According to Jet Blast's logic, you fear the one 10K miles away more than the one on your own border.
Go ahead, provoke China, but for Minh's sake never shoot at the Americans!

As I pointed out earlier, we had operators on the ground with the Laotians in '59, and there was a fair amount of contact between the Laotians (led and trained by SF) and the Viets. There is no recored reluctance on the part of NVA forces to fire on Americans or American led units.

If what JB asserts was true, the introduction of full scale US forces should have stopped NVA encroachment on the south.

 

[swright777]

As I pointed out earlier, we had operators on the ground with the Laotians in '59, and there was a fair amount of contact between the Laotians (led and trained by SF) and the Viets. There is no recored reluctance on the part of NVA forces to fire on Americans or American led units.

If what JB asserts was true, the introduction of full scale US forces should have stopped NVA encroachment on the south.

If anything that JB asserts was true I would probably pass out.