Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist., Moderator
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Where was 9/11 plotted? Germany? Afghanistan? Pakistan?
- Thread starter Allen773
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 9/11 9/11 hijackers al-qaeda
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
If you have nothing to add, maybe you should say nothing. If you think there is anything i said which is incorrect...by all means, correct me.
FTFY.
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist., Moderator
You've been corrected. Your basic premise is wrong: redacted information does not mean information embarrassing to the government. Information may be redacted to protect intelligence assets, to protect innocent third parties, and other reasons. Since the 9/11 Report, there have been two administrations and three Democratic challengers: Keery, Obama (who was President for 8 years), and Hillary Clinton. If W.'s regime tried to pull some nonsense, all of these people had the chance to expose it - effectively killing Republican chances of ever winning the White House completely. And, in fact, all three of those individuals would eventually be in the position to see all of the documentation unredacted.
You're just injecting fantasy into blank spaces the way your brain injects dreams into your head when you go to sleep and deprive it of input. That's not being a skeptic. A skeptic believes that for which there is evidence. You're claiming a lack of evidence leads to a preferred belief. That's trutherism. You're a truther.
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
"You've been corrected Your basic premise is wrong: redacted information does not mean information embarrassing to the government. Information may be redacted to protect intelligence assets, to protect innocent third parties, and other reasons."
Which is false, since no one here has corrected anything i posted in regards to the redacted areas of the 28 pages. Its plain as day, right in front of your very own eyes and even from the mouth of Bob Graham himself, that there was a deliberate effort to keep Saudi Arabia from being sued/held responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
" If W.'s regime tried to pull some nonsense, all of these people had the chance to expose it"
False. Meanwhile the Democratic base was far worse in terms of using the U.S military to destablize the Middle East, as well as using the Intelligence Community to expand on its services against the citizenry of the United States here and abroad. Obama himself added to the war in the Middle East by bombing Syria, Libya and kept troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is no different than Bush, as all these politicians answer to the Pentagon and Foreign Lobby institutes. The real powers. Its ignorant folk such as yourself who are no different than say those you despise "truthers" who defend a certain narrative and ar unmoved by evidence.
"You're just injecting fantasy into blank spaces the way your brain injects dreams into your head when you go to sleep and deprive it of input. That's not being a skeptic. A skeptic believes that for which there is evidence. You're claiming a lack of evidence leads to a preferred belief."
Nothing i said, was fictional actually. In fact nothing you said "ever" to me on here was even coherent. Now if you had anything, and i mean anything, to contradict any of my points made above you would have done it already to show where im wrong. Again, i ask you, point out to anything where im wrong and lets discuss it coherently. Or maybe you should refrain from even posting in the first place if all you have is false innuendos.
Plus i'm not even adding the fact that the Central Intelligence Agency also withheld information from the FBI at Alec Station which would have had Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi monitored and or detained by authorities inside the United States. Tenet basically committed perjury before the Joint Inquiry in regards to who read information at Alec Station as well. Sow e have a "cover-up" in regards to the CIA as well. Not to mention the Bush Administration didnt even want an independent inquiry to investigate the 9/11 attacks to begin with.
Last edited:
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist., Moderator
See, that would be an example of you injecting your own fantasies into a narrative that doesn't need them.
The CIA, FBI, DIA, NSA and INS didn't effectively share information, that's true. But that was the whole point of the 9/11 report - it identified intelligence failures. In the intervening years, they've developed ways of pooling information, to the point where INS doesn't even exist anymore. That was one of the weaknesses the hijackers exploited.
You assigning some sort of motive to it all is just speculation at best. And your willingness to create your own story marks you as a truther.
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
You are repeating yourself here. Im not interjecting anything, the mere fact that you simply cannot grasp (which isnt my problem) is that there are two foreign Lobbys which have major influences in our government in both Partys, The Israeli and Saudi (Arab) Lobby. Yes, they do have wide influences on how our Foreign Policy is governed. Wether you accept this or not, matters not. But im not expecting any actual productive dialogue with you here, i will continue to ignore your petty insinuations. You share more qualities with those of the Jim Fetzer crowd the quasi-truthers i call them with your inane posts.
no body is like Jim Fetzer, you don't know Jim Fetzer - weak personal attack at that, a clownish attack, if you knew Fetzer
Yes, Saudis had to fund some of 9/11 murderers, the same as someone funded my college, or your college, or not. Does funding gullible idiots like 19 nut for UBL mean the funders knew the plot? Nope
BTW, now there are no rational lobbies, read the news, ask the Kurds about foreign policy
Is there a reason to redact that is not related to what you think, or are you lie trump, and want to go all french revolution on all
Are you talking NRA or russia/putin, with respect to foreign Lobbys(aka lobbies)/lobbies (maybe ...)
Last edited:
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
Jim Fetzer is a remarkable fraud of the highest order. He doesnt believe planes crashed anywhere on 9/11. No children died at Sandy Hook. Yes i say again, he is an imbecile and fraud.
That he is and he's managed to fool academia and truthers!
Axxman300
Philosopher
And yet everyone knows there was Saudi money going to Al Qaeda (probably still is), and even if they name those Saudis tomorrow our relationship with the Saudi Kingdom will not change for a long list of uncomfortable reasons chief of which is that Putin is happy to step in to the void we'd create by sanctioning the Saudis. Sure, it's nice to get names on the record but we won't do anything about it.
This statement is devoid of context.
We were already in Saudi Arabia patrolling the No-Fly Zone on 9-11.
The "Intelligence Community" has less information on American citizens than what American citizens willingly give to Facebook, Twitter, and the companies who make a variety of apps for our smartphones. In the nearly 18 years since 2001 technology has evolved to the point where information acquired under surveillance is indistinguishable from information willingly given away.
Obama kept forces in Afghanistan because during his campaign he said that was where the fight was. He pulled our forces out of Iraq in August 2010 leaving behind a small logistical force. The Iraqi's asked us to return when the ISIL/ISIS threat overwhelmed their constantly worthless army. And yes, ISIS was formed at Abu Griab by AQI extremists in US custody.
Syria was the last link in the "Arab Spring" chain which began in Tunisia, spread to Egypt, and Lybia with mixed results. The Obama Administration got burned in Libya and dragged their feet in Syria until it was too late, and couldn't run the risk of sitting back and watching the Russian kill indiscriminately.
While it is in vogue to say that the US Government is in the pocket of powerful lobbyists the truth is that we can't just pick up and leave a war that we started. Even an unpopular one.
We knew this on 9/12/2001. Hardly a revelation.
They felt it was a waste of time, and in a way it was since it didn't reveal anything we didn't already know. I point to the Hart/Rudman Commission who began their work in 1998 and published their report in late September, 2001, and the Report of the National Commission on Terrorism published in June, 2001. What we learned was that nobody in the relevant agencies read those reports, or took them seriously.
Plus you're claiming it was a white-wash which technically makes the Bush Admin right.
Plus, you have joined the long list of "researchers" continue to ignore the actions of Sandy Berger, Clinton's National Security Adviser, who stole- AND DESTROYED - documents related to actions related to Al Qaeda. If you are looking for a SMOKING GUN this is where a SMART investigator would start. But no, you rail on the CIA and Bush, while here you have the man in charge of US National Security, the guy who read all the intel, the guy who directed actions taken by the CIA committing a federal crime to protect...what? Look, it's your right to hang out in the kiddie pool of those "seeking truth", but why is it too much to ask guys like you to step up their game and look into actual conspiracies to cover up actions taken by the Executive Branch in the late 1990's and not just start after January 20, 2001?
Last edited:
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 26, 2006
- Messages
- 22,306
Does anybody know when he really started to go off the rails? Was he involved in the CTs about OKC and Waco or JFK?
I ask because some of the older academic troofers had shown a few mild signs of excessive credulity in the past. David Ray Griffin, before he became the "guru" of the 9-11 Truthers, wrote a book on parapsychology. I remember in one passage he estimated (well, pulled out of his ass) that the odds were 50% that there was life after death. Steven Jones became interested in the Burrows Cave hoax shortly before he wrote the infamous What Indeed" paper.
Jones was also involved tangentially in the whole cold-fusion furor back in the 1980s; he was a researcher working on the concept himself and thus was chosen to peer-review the article the other team was submitting. There was some indication that Jones tried to get in on the credit for the research, but the whole thing blew up when the results couldn't be duplicated and Jones escaped with his reputation intact. Hilariously, some Truthers found out about the whole episode and claimed that Jones had stifled cold fusion.
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 26, 2006
- Messages
- 22,306
Just a minor point about this. People seem to forget that Osama had cultivated an image of being a great fighter for Islam against the Russian imperialists. This, plus his father being one of the wealthiest non-royalty in Saudi Arabia, gave him huge credibility when he started his charity, which he called "Social Services." Millions of dollars a year flowed through Social Services, from many sources. This is the real reason why Kean noted the dollar amount being about $500,000 and saying it was impossible to trace. I'm assuming that none of the Saudi royals or other donors to Social Services wrote in the memo section of their check "for terrorism only."
Axxman300
Philosopher
Yes, this is correct.
In Afghanistan and the Sudan his men helped build, repair, or improve local roads. When bin Laden set up shop the first thing he did was set up a medical clinic for the locals. He could tell his Saudi donors that he was vaccinating kids, saving babies, and making it easier for small farmers to get their goods to market without lying about it. If you ask any of the surviving AQ leadership who split from the program in 2001 they'll tell you that bin Laden's obsession with the US ruined what could have been the most successful Islamic insurrection in history, even dwarfing the Iranian revolution.
The struggle (jihad) seems to have given is 9/11
"Jihad (English: /dʒɪˈhɑːd/; Arabic: جهاد jihād [dʒɪˈhaːd]) is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.[1][2][3][4] In an Islamic context, it can refer to almost any effort to make personal and social life conform with God's guidance, such as struggle against one's evil inclinations, religious proselytizing, or efforts toward the moral betterment of the ummah,[1][2][5] though it is most frequently associated with war.[6] In classical Islamic law, the term refers to armed struggle against unbelievers,[2][3] while modernist Islamic scholars generally equate military jihad with defensive warfare.[7][8] In Sufi and pious circles, spiritual and moral jihad has been traditionally emphasized under the name of greater jihad.[9][3] The term has gained additional attention in recent decades through its use by terrorist groups."
Many cultures in history have tried to impose their beliefs on those they conquered militarily... The Christians are no angels here.
The question which needs to be addressed is why can't different cultures and religions co exist in close proximity?
"Jihad (English: /dʒɪˈhɑːd/; Arabic: جهاد jihād [dʒɪˈhaːd]) is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.[1][2][3][4] In an Islamic context, it can refer to almost any effort to make personal and social life conform with God's guidance, such as struggle against one's evil inclinations, religious proselytizing, or efforts toward the moral betterment of the ummah,[1][2][5] though it is most frequently associated with war.[6] In classical Islamic law, the term refers to armed struggle against unbelievers,[2][3] while modernist Islamic scholars generally equate military jihad with defensive warfare.[7][8] In Sufi and pious circles, spiritual and moral jihad has been traditionally emphasized under the name of greater jihad.[9][3] The term has gained additional attention in recent decades through its use by terrorist groups."
Many cultures in history have tried to impose their beliefs on those they conquered militarily... The Christians are no angels here.
The question which needs to be addressed is why can't different cultures and religions co exist in close proximity?
The Common Potato
Muse
Adam Fitzgerald,
I grasp that the redacted parts might well show evidence of SA guilt. Without seeing them there's no evidence that supports your claim that they surely must. Or course, the formerly-redacted-now-revealed parts of the 28 pages were gong to be a revelation would show, once and for all, that the truthers were correct, after all.
Indeed, had truthers concentrated on this sort of thing 18 years ago they might have been taken more seriously. SA involvement is not beyond the realm of possibility.
I grasp that the redacted parts might well show evidence of SA guilt. Without seeing them there's no evidence that supports your claim that they surely must. Or course, the formerly-redacted-now-revealed parts of the 28 pages were gong to be a revelation would show, once and for all, that the truthers were correct, after all.
Indeed, had truthers concentrated on this sort of thing 18 years ago they might have been taken more seriously. SA involvement is not beyond the realm of possibility.