What's your theory about 9/11?

Honestly, my theory is too convoluted, complex and absurd to be written down here.

It envolves thousands of politicians that I personally dislike, numerous international secret agencies, humanitarian organizations, and Hollywood, Warner Bros., Dreamworks and Pixar Studios (for providing the digital effect planes).
 
paloalto said:
It is clear that you know absoutley nothing about the attacks on 9/11 and never will.
Click to expand...

As a truth seeker, it is actually not a shame to know nothing about 9/11. This is hwy we have to ask critical questions, not afraid of being framed leftist loons, communist bastards or lunatic fringe retards.

What happened on 9/11? I don't know.

Pre 9/11, there were 2 giant towers standing in Manhattan. Where are they now? Where did they go? I don't know.

Did thin aluminum planes really hit the WTC? I don't KNOW.

I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT 9/11! This is why I want the US government to spend a lot of money on a new impartial investigation, which will hopefully answer my questions and do the research that I am NOT willing to do.

Not being a US citizen, I think this is a reasonable demand, no?
 
Starving for Truth said:
Honestly, my theory is too convoluted, complex and absurd to be written down here.

It envolves thousands of politicians that I personally dislike, numerous international secret agencies, humanitarian organizations, and Hollywood, Warner Bros., Dreamworks and Pixar Studios (for providing the digital effect planes).
Click to expand...

A fantasy, not a theory. Carry on trolling, you're good at it.
 
Starving for Truth said:
I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT 9/11! This is why I want the US government to spend a lot of money on a new impartial investigation, which will hopefully answer my questions and do the research that I am NOT willing to do.
?
Click to expand...

Don't be so lazy. Actually reading about it would be a lot cheaper than a new investigation.
 
dafydd said:
A fantasy, not a theory. Carry on trolling, you're good at it.
Click to expand...
Not really. Good trolls are ones that keep peoples interest so they can continue receiving the attention they desire. I can't see why everyone doesn't put this one on ignore, he's not even interesting or funny. Must be boredom. :confused:
 
What DGM does not know is, that he's been on my ignore list since week 1. *chuckle*

"This message is hidden because DGM on your ignore list."
 
Last edited:
paloalto said:
Here is the link to the quote I had posted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleen_Rowley
Click to expand...
Great, you used a wiki link that is a quote mine. Not a very smart idea. Next time you should find a source that shows the entire text. Now taking the full text in context, Rowley is not saying these superiors intent was to purposely allow the attacks to happen. Read it again, their inaction was the result of them being afraid if they made a mistake, that would cost them their careers. The safe road was to proceed on the side of extreme caution. They saw colleagues careers go down the tubes because they were too aggressive. Hence they were too tentative:

5) During the early aftermath of September 11th, when I happened to be recounting the pre-September 11th events concerning the Moussaoui investigation to other FBI personnel in other divisions or in FBIHQ, almost everyone's first question was "Why?--Why would an FBI agent(s) deliberately sabotage a case? (I know I shouldn't be flippant about this, but jokes were actually made that the key FBIHQ personnel had to be spies or moles, like Robert Hansen, who were actually working for Osama Bin Laden to have so undercut Minneapolis' effort.) Our best real guess, however, is that, in most cases avoidance of all "unnecessary" actions/decisions by FBIHQ managers (and maybe to some extent field managers as well) has, in recent years, been seen as the safest FBI career course. Numerous high-ranking FBI officials who have made decisions or have taken actions which, in hindsight, turned out to be mistaken or just turned out badly (i.e. Ruby Ridge, Waco, etc.) have seen their careers plummet and end. This has in turn resulted in a climate of fear which has chilled aggressive FBI law enforcement action/decisions. In a large hierarchal bureaucracy such as the FBI, with the requirement for numerous superiors approvals/oversight, the premium on career-enhancement, and interjecting a chilling factor brought on by recent extreme public and congressional criticism/oversight, and I think you will see at least the makings of the most likely explanation. Another factor not to be underestimated probably explains the SSA and other FBIHQ personnel's reluctance to act. And so far, I have heard no FBI official even allude to this problem-- which is that FBI Headquarters is staffed with a number of short term careerists* who, like the SSA in question, must only serve an 18 month-just-time-to-get-your-ticket-punched minimum. It's no wonder why very little expertise can be acquired by a Headquarters unit! (And no wonder why FBIHQ is mired in mediocrity! -- that maybe a little strong, but it would definitely be fair to say that there is unevenness in competency among Headquarters personnel.) (It's also a well known fact that the FBI Agents Association has complained for years about the disincentives facing those entering the FBI management career path which results in very few of the FBI's best and brightest choosing to go into management. Instead the ranks of FBI management are filled with many who were failures as street agents. Along these lines, let me ask the question, why has it suddenly become necessary for the Director to "handpick" the FBI management?)
Click to expand...
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/wtc_whistleblower1.htm

Rowley disagrees with you completely.
paloalto said:
Harry Samit, who was lead investigator on the Moussaoui investigation with Rowley, called the actions of Maltbie and Frasca in shutting down his FBI criminal investigation of Moussaoui criminal and called both Maltbie and Frasca criminals in sworn testimony at Moussaoui’s trial..
Click to expand...
As does Harry Samit. Samit may believe there is criminal neglience, but let's look at what he believes the motive is:

Under cross-examination by defense lawyers in Moussaoui's sentencing trial, Samit said he believed his superiors were guilty of ''criminal negligence and obstruction."
He accused them of ''careerism," and said they had thwarted his efforts in order to protect their own positions within the FBI. ''They obstructed it," Samit said, calling their actions a calculated management decision ''that cost us the opportunity to stop the attacks."http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/03/21/an_agent_tells_of_moussaoui_lapses/
Click to expand...
Yes, same as Rowley, trying to protect their careers. Nothing there about these supervisors allowing the attacks to happen on purpose. You see the pattern here? You just pick and choose what you want to hear and completely disregard context.

Attempting to find motivation is in effect trying to get into their heads and figure out what these people were thinking. This is not an exact science, and is largely based on speculation and conjecture.
Click to expand...
I'm not even going to attempt to wallow through the rest of the muck you posted trying to find a plausible motive to why these agents would deliberately allow the attacks to occur. Seeing how difficult it is for you to come up with one should be very telling, yet you persist.

It's easy to see that the problems of 9/11 were systematic, not some crazy notion that agents were knowingly permitting terrorists to invade the U.S.
 
Last edited:
TexasJack said:
Great, you used a wiki link that is a quote mine. Not a very smart idea. Next time you should find a source that shows the entire text. Now taking the full text in context, Rowley is not saying these superiors intent was to purposely allow the attacks to happen. Read it again, their inaction was the result of them being afraid if they made a mistake. that would cost them their careers. The safe road was to proceed on the side of extreme caution. They saw colleagues careers go down the tubes because they were too aggressive. Hence they were too tentative:

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/wtc_whistleblower1.htm

Rowley disagrees with you completely.
As does Harry Samit. Samit may believe there is criminal neglience, but let's look at what he believes the motive is:

Yes, same as Rowley, trying to protect their careers. Nothing there about these supervisors allowing the attacks to happen on purpose. You see the pattern here? You just pick and choose what you want to hear and completely disregard context.

I'm not even going to attempt to wallow through the rest of the muck you posted trying to find a plausible motive to why these agents would deliberately allow the attacks to occur. Seeing how difficult it is for you to come up with one should be very telling, yet you persist.

It's easy to see that the problems of 9/11 were systematic, not some crazy notion that agents were knowingly permitting terrorists to invade the U.S.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the help Texas. Only a few people would bother squandering their time researching this rabbit hole blathering. I now have the time to give my girlfirend more backrubs.

The only conspiracy I see is the conspiracy by truthers like palocorto to hide the actual reasons for the failure of the CIA and FBI to share information and stop the 9/11 attacks.
 
Last edited:
fess said:
You’re not a citizen of the US, but yet you want our government to squander millions of dollars to do something that has already been done?
Click to expand...

The epitome of arrogance.... :rolleyes: One can only speculate on the country of origin of this sft...
 
Pardon me for possibly opening up the wrong door, but what happened to our resident military aviation expert… FrankHT?
 
paloalto said:
Harry Samit, who was lead investigator on the Moussaoui investigation with Rowley, called the actions of Maltbie and Frasca in shutting down his FBI criminal investigation of Moussaoui criminal and called both Maltbie and Frasca criminals in sworn testimony at Moussaoui’s trial..

Here is the link to the quote I had posted:

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

Attempting to find motivation is in effect trying to get into their heads and figure out what these people were thinking. This is not an exact science, and is largely based on speculation and conjecture.

But I could give it a try, recognizing that this is pure speculation.

I gave a very short summary of the many times the CIA had hidden the information on Mihdhar and Hazmi starting in January 4, 2000, almost 19 months before the attacks on 9/11. I didn't even mention that FBI Agent Ali Soufan had asked the CIA for any information the CIA had on Walid bib Attash and any information on any al Qaeda planning meeting the CIA had, three times. While the CIA had all of this information they either said they had none of this information or did not even reply to Soufan’s request.

This conspiracy to hide the information on Mihdhar and Hazmi seemed to go into high gear when Walid bin Attash was positively identified from the Kuala Lumpur photo of him on January 4, 2001 by the FBI/CIA joint source. This identification had been done in secret by the CIA when the FBI agent that was working with the FBI/CIA joint source in the debriefing of this Joint source stepped out of the room where the joint source was being debriefed to photo copy a number of documents while the CIA Pakistani alat showed the Kuala Lumpur photo of Walid bin Attash to this Joint source. The source positively identified this person a high level al Qaeda terrorist who had taken part in the east Africa bombings and the Cole bombing. At that point the CIA Yemen Station, the CIA Pakistani Station, the CIA bin Laden unit, and even the CIA top managers all knew that Walid bin Attash, who the FBI Cole bombing investigators had identified as the mastermind of the Cole bombing, had been at the Kuala Lumpur meeting with Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi actually planning the Cole bombing. The CIA knew that if this information got out to the main stream media it would be deleterious to the reputation of the CIA and that Tenet, Black and Blee would have their jobs on the line. They also knew that if this information got to FBI criminal investigators on the Cole bombing, the CIA actions to allow Mihdhar and Hazmi to enter the US in secret would be exposed and the CIA culpability in allowing the Cole bombing to take place would be exposed. In spite of at least three different CIA units having this information, and information known by CIA management, it was kept completely secret from the FBI Cole bombing investigators. The people in these units all knew that the FBI Cole bombing investigators were keenly interested in any information on this al Qaeda planning meeting and on Walid bin Attash. But in spite of this they still conspired to keep all of this information secret

When FBI Agent Ali Soufan sent a request to the CIA headquarters in April 2001, the CIA must have thought that he and his Cole bombing investigators had uncovered this information that the CIA had been trying to keep secret. The CIA immediately moved Tom Wilshire over to be Deputy Chief of the FBI ITOS unit, the one unit in charge of all FBI investigations of terrorists including al Qaeda terrorists in the world. The first thing Wilshire did when he got to the FBI was enlist FBI Agent Dina Corsi to set up a meeting with the Cole bombing investigators in order to show them the three photos of Mihdhar taken at Kuala Lumpur that Wilshire had obtained from the CIA. At that meeting CIA officer Clark Shannon asked Bongardt and his team if they recognized anyone in these photos?

Since one photo only had Midhar and Hazmi in it and the CIA knew full well what these al Qaeda terrorists looked like it is clear that the CIA only wanted to know if the Cole bombing investigators had uncovered in their search for Walid bin Attash, that bin Attash had been at Kuala Lumpur with Mihdhar and Hazmi planning the Cole bombing.

Wilshire was denied twice by his direct CTC managers Blee, Black and Tenet, in July 2001 permission to transfer the Kuala Lumpur information to the FBI Cole bombing investigators. Since Wilshire had made two requests to transfer this information to the FBI, at the time he made these requests he only knew that the CIA had moved him to the FBI to find out what the Cole bombing investigators had found out about the Kuala Lumpur meeting. But after two of his direct requests were denied Wilshire must have known that the CIA, and his managers Blee, Black and Tenet wanted all information on Kuala Lumpur from ever going to the FBI Cole bombing.

When the CIA found out that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US on August 22, 2001, this information went to FBI Agent Dina Corsi and Deputy Chief of the ITOS unit Tom Wilshire, in Wilshire's office at the FBI.

The first thing Corsi did after this metering was call Craig Donnachie, a intelligence SA at the New York FBI field office and tell him it was urgent that he start an intelligence investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi right away. As soon as Donnachie agreed to start a intelligence investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi Corsi sent Wilshire an email and said that " Craig will start a intelligence investigation". Even though both Wilshire and Corsi knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing with bin Attash, at Kuala Lumpur, they knew an intelligence investigation would block Bongardt from starting a criminal investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi, as long as they kept the information that Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the Cole bombing secret. The FBI OPIR almost never allowed a intelligence investigation and an criminal investigation to take place at the same time for the same target. Corsi acting under Wilshire’s request wrote up a EC to start a intelligence investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi. When the EC was completed and had a final review by Wilshire, on August 28, 2001, it was marked with precedence “Routine" in spite of the fact that Corsi had called Donnachie on August 22, 2001 and said it was urgent that he start an intelligence investigation as soon a possible. Routine is the lowest possible priority for any investigation, meaning that the investigation would have no urgency to find Mihdhar or Hazmi. This precedence was marked on this EC even though both Wilshire and Corsi knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US only in order to take part in a horrific al Qaeda terrorists attack that would kill thousands of Americans and that it was important to find these terrorist before they had time to carry out a horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack inside of the US.

On August 28, 2001 Corsi’s EC was sent to the New York FBI office and was sent accidentally by John Liguori, Craig Donnachie’s boss, to FBI Agent Steve Bongardt, who headed the Cole bombing investigation in New York City. Bongardt called Corsi and requested that this investigation be given to him and his team. But Corsi refused and said that the NSA cable that was part of her EC prevented her EC from going to Bongardt, due to a NSA restriction placed on all NSA cables, the “wall”. But the NSA had already approved Corsi’s request to pass this information on to the FBI criminal investigators in New York, (Bongardt and his team) on August 27, 2001, one day before she told him that he could not take part in this investigation.

When Bongardt protested and stated that this NSA information had no connection to any FISA warrant, the only real reason the NSA would deny this information from going to FBI criminal investigators, Corsi at Bongardt’s insistence contacted a NSLU attorney at FBI HQ. On August 29, 2001 Corsi told Bongardt that the attorney she had contacted had ruled that Bongardt could not take part in any investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi. But page 238 of the 9/11 Commission report, footnote 81, says that the attorney, Sherry Sabol, in testimony given to DOJ IG investigators on November 7, 2002, told Corsi that since the NSA information had no connection to any FISA warrant, Bongardt could take part in any investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi. Corsi had lied again to FBI Agent Steve Bongardt in order to illegally shut down his investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi. It was these two lies that not only were Federal felonies but cost almost 3000 people their lives on 9/11.

On August 30, 2001, the CIA sent Rod Middleton, Corsi's boss, the photograph of Walid Bin Attash taken at Kuala Lumpur, directly connecting both Mihdhar and Hazmi to the planning of the Cole bombing. In spite of both Corsi and Middleton having this information they never called Bongardt and asked that he restart his investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi.

Corsi and Middleton who had been directly supervised by Tom Wilshire had illegally shut down the one criminal investigation that could have prevented the attacks on 9/11. There is no way they would commit major Federal felonies unless they had been direct orderedly to do this by their supervisor, Tom Wilshire. Wilshire, Corsi and Middleton were even all aware of a huge al Qaeda terrorist attack that was just about to take place inside of the US. Wilshire was also still secretly working for the CIA while ostensibly working as a high level manager at the FBI HQ. His CIA managers Blee, Black and Tenet were also all aware of this huge attack and still allowed Wilshire, Corsi and Middleton to block Bongardt's investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi.

All of these people knew they had already committed many Federal felonies by withholding the Kuala Lumpur information from Bongardt and his team, and knew that if Bongardt or Soufan continued with any criminal investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi, and then found the photo of bin Attash taken at Kuala Lumpur, that they would have realized immediately that the CIA and FBI HQ had criminally obstructed their criminal investigation of the Cole bombing numerous times. The CIA and FBI HQ clearly knew that this would have sent many people at the CIA and the FBI to Federal prision for years.
Click to expand...

Rather than read all this, I'm going to make use of my extensive experience in analyzing truther posts and conclude that it proves absolutely nothing.

Was I close? Do I win anything?
 
fess said:
Pardon me for possibly opening up the wrong door, but what happened to our resident military aviation expert… FrankHT?
Click to expand...
He is on SOF duty until further notice, no flying.

Was he silenced by the bad guys? He was going to name names.

FrankHT said:
Yes,I could name SOME of them and even tell you where the line was drawn at NEADS. The last time I did (at Fortean Times message board) the post was deleted and I got a warning from the moderator. If the moderator here will allow it (perhaps with some sort of disclaimer) I will.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom