9/11 thermite theories pt. IV

96 posts / 0 new
Last post
Fidel

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Notice the link between 911 and crop circles, with both being discussed in the same show.  Is it a coincidence that Ground Zero should be discussed alongside these other unexplained phenomena? I think not.  After all, what is Ground Zero but a circle in an urban environment?  Those aliens have all the angles covered.

 

As for 2012, the last year in the Mayan calendar, it's being noticed more and more as the year approaches. 

 

That's interesting, al Qa'bong. Tell us, do you think crop circles and the Mayan holocaust of the 1980's are related in some way? Did US guvmints and a string of US-backed military dictatorships in Guatemala perpetrate Guatemala's 9/11? Spooky

al-Qa'bong

That'd be Chile's September 11 you're probably thinking about.

Fidel

al-Qa'bong wrote:

That'd be Chile's September 11 you're probably thinking about.

Somewhere up there you thought you'd make jest of this whole thread with smart remarks about Mayans and crop circles. And I thought I'd bring you back to your senses with mention of how the imperial master nation played important part in the mass murder of over 100, 000 indigenous people in Guatemala and Chiapas in the latter half of the last century. You must remember now those wonderful people claiming al Qaida dunnit it on 9/11? Ring a bell? It's either that or you werent thinking very hard about that off-hand post meant as a diversion

 

ReeferMadness

I can't see it happening but say Obama ordered a second investigation.  What's to investigate?  It's 8 years later, some of the people are dead (like Barry Jennings), and is there any physical evidence remaining?  I understood that FEMA trucked everything off for recycling as fast as they could.

Fidel

It's true that much evidence has been destroyed. There needs to be a sub investigation just to find the [url=http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/evidence.html]missing evidence[/url]. And some evidence was deliberately withheld from the Commission for so-called reasons of national security. Iow's, too much of the American inquisition's case for 9/11 requires a certain amount of faith to be believed.

al-Qa'bong

Quote:
And I thought I'd bring you back to your senses with mention of how the imperial master nation played important part in the mass murder of over 100, 000 indigenous people in Guatemala and Chiapas in the latter half of the last century.

 

And your kooky conspiracy theories aren't an insult to their memory?

Fidel

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Quote:
And I thought I'd bring you back to your senses with mention of how the imperial master nation played important part in the mass murder of over 100, 000 indigenous people in Guatemala and Chiapas in the latter half of the last century.

 And your kooky conspiracy theories aren't an insult to their memory?

Well no, because I made no mention of Mayans who were about a hundred thousand less in number as a direct result of several very brutal US-backed military dictatorships in Central America.

But you did mention Mayans without any thought to how Murder Inc. might have an established and notorious history of conspiring and supporting mass murder in just about every corner of the world from WW II through 9/11 and continuing today.  So thanks very much for pointing out that tidbit of US involvement in mass murder of not just 3,000 mostly white people in NYC on 9/11 but several tens of thousands in this very hemisphere in relatively recent times and adding to the neocon's culpability for conspiring with Islamic gladios to wreak havoc on 9/11. Youve helped establish that Truthers are more than likely dealing with a bunch of megalomaniacal psychopaths obstructing justice since this latest excuse for warfiteering took those warmongering plutocrats, who just happened to be laying in wait for such a business opportunity in Iraq and Central Asia, by complete surprise. You, sir, are a genus among murder mystery crime sleuths.

al-Qa'bong

You got all that out of my telling remind that 2012 is a reference to the Mayan calendar?

 
In another thread you blamed the CIA for the baseball players' strike.  For what it's worth, my interest in Major League baseball ended with that strike too. 
The Expos had the best team in baseball that year, and they also had the lowest-paid team in baseball.  They were poised to win the World Series. The players' union couldn't let that happen, so they struck, wiping out the Expos' season and killing the Montréal franchise.
It wasn't a CIA conspiracy, M. Poirot, it was the player's union, taking care of business.
 

Quote:
You, sir, are a genus among murder mystery crime sleuths.

Your praise phylums me with pride.

Fidel

The bit about CIA and the '94 baseball strike was meant to be a joke... in that other thread. And I'll apologize now for having left you in suspenders. And I'm sorry if you dont make the connection between US-backed carnage in Central America and the hawks' culpability in 9/11. That they are an established empire with a notorious history for fomenting mass murder and warfiteering seems to have fallen on deaf ears. But let's not swerve this thread into the rhubarb any further because of it.

 

Jacob Two-Two

ReeferMadness wrote:

I can't see it happening but say Obama ordered a second investigation.  What's to investigate?  It's 8 years later, some of the people are dead (like Barry Jennings), and is there any physical evidence remaining?  I understood that FEMA trucked everything off for recycling as fast as they could.

Yes, much physical evidence is gone, but that was the case at the time of the first investigation too. It's more a matter of giving the evidence that we do have a reasonable look. The original commission was given too little time and too few resources to do their job (something they complained about personally) and the evidence that wasn't withheld due to "national security" was stonewalled until the last minute, giving them no time to process it or look into inconsistencies. The whole thing was a sham to create the appearance of an investigation while ensuring that no actual investigating took place.

Remember as well that the administration tried to prevent any investigation from happening, period. They only relented after months and months of pressure from people who had lost family in the attack. Then they tried to head it with Henry Kissinger, of all people. A man infamous for covering government atrocities. That folded under public outrage, but their intent was clear and their aim successful. If there has to be an investigation, make sure it doesn't investigate anything. It makes me suspicious, personally. How about you?

Fidel

[url=http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13488]9/11: Say It Ain't So, Howard Zinn![/url] Searching for the truth about what happened on 9/11 "is a diversion."  - Richard Cook

Quote:

Howard Zinn, 86-year old folk hero, activist, professor, historian, and author of one of the great books of American popular literature, A People's History of the United States, is telling people that searching for the truth about what really happened on 9/11 "is a diversion."

 

Say it ain't so, Howard Zinn!

 

He used the word "diversion" several times during an interview on The Real News Network with senior editor Paul Jay.

http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=3553 . . .

 

It reminds me of another famous 9/11 conspiracy debunker, Professor Noam Chomsky. On October 6, 2006, Chomsky said on ZNet: "One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis." http://www.oilempire.us/chomsky.html

 

It would be easy to criticize Zinn for failing to be consistent. He knows how important the study and writing of history really is. In his People's History of the United States he set out to correct the record about the role of the labor movement, U.S. imperialism in Latin America and around the world, the violence of our culture, and many other issues.

 

Zinn knows, as we all do who have worked in the genre, that the writing of history is about discovering the truth. We know that absolute truth about the past is an impossibility. But we can try to get close, because the truth matters. A good historian is a scientist, attempting to draw conclusions from factual data. A good historian knows that even small discoveries, properly validated, can change the way we view the past and make decisions in the present.

I think the 9/11 Truth movement, in a surreptitious way, is actually helping to achieve exactly what Noam Chomsky says the left should be focussed on, which is exposing the empire and crimes of the US state. Truthers tend to be relentless in their internet search for the truth. And it does lead them to various truths about the vicious empire whether related directly to 9/11 or not. The Truth is infectious.

jas

Re: above two posts, it certainly makes me think; I wouldn't know much about how criminal investigations are done beyond what I've seen on TV, but it seems to me that one of the first, most spectacular international crimes/mass murders of the new century would warrant an immediate and extensive investigation. For U.S. officials to just look at the planes, look at a passport that supposedly floated down onto the rubble, and then some homemade video claiming responsibility, and say "that's it, we don't need to look at anything else," and to ignore all the other missing pieces which would probably lead you to a different conclusion, just insults common intelligence. And we know that's not really how the U.S. government operates anyway, or any other government for that matter, so the whole premise behind the official story just seems to be at a kind of child-like level, and it's for that reason as well, that many want the truth to be proven beyond doubt, because they don't like being lied to, especially not in a way that insults their intelligence and asks them to believe stories that do not jibe with common understandings of these kinds of events.

 

siamdave

Coming late to this, just found it, but one thing I would like to comment on:

Unionist, you write earlier ( http://rabble.ca/comment/1013545/Michelle-wrote-%C2%A0-I )

"...
I do want to discuss the topic. I have discussed it many times, offering my view that the conspiracy theories:

1. Are premised on the omnipotence and omniscience of the U.S. ruling elites.

2. Are contemptuous of the view that a handful of adventurers could actually wreak damage on the colossus.

3. Are often inherently chauvinistic, by stressing that the deaths of Americans going about their business is some world-changing catastrophe, by contrast with the deaths of Amerika's victims around the world.

4. Are major distractions from the worst crimes of the U.S. against its own people and people abroad.

I make serious points, and I also ridicule the most exaggerated and ludicrous paranoid claims of some of the truthers.....
..."

- well, if you are actually being serious rather than trolling, you should get your feet on some more solid ground than the above reasons for your continual quarrelling with those who do not believe the story we are fed about 911.

To begin, one serious point needs to be cleared up, as not enough people seem to understand this. You begin by talking about the 'conspiracy theories' of those who disagree with the official story - but actually, au contraire my friend - I believe the 911 official story is pretty much complete BS, but after that I have no real 'theories' about anything, although if we start from the assumption the official story is a pack of lies certain paths become strongly indicated. But given this, I don't see how you can seriously label me the 'conspiracy theorist'. This is not a trivial point - it relates to that not-well-understood but quite true wisdom about not letting the enemy control the field of battle, as if you do, especially unwittingly, at that point you have lost the battle before it even begins. And you, and the many others who have been attacking those of us who look for the truth behind the 911 attacks, are being allowed to control the field when those of us who question the 'Official Conspiracy Theory' (hereinafter referred to as the OCT) are labelled the automatically suspicion-engendering 'conspiracy theorist! (snicker snicker), when quite obviously the reverse is the case - it is you and those other followers of the Bush et al people who are pushing some wild conspiracy theory about some shadowy 'terrorist' group operating from various locations in the world, led by a scary, hard-to-pin-down bearded Muslim guy of the comicbook 'evil genius' type, standing down the entire US defence system for a couple of hours at a very crucial time, allowing them to hijack several planes and fly them unhindered into various targets, which then very mysteriously and hollywoodFX-like 'fall down go boom!!!', and then although the US gov et al apparently had no idea at all this whole evil nefarious plan was in the works prior to the actual attacks, within minutes of the towers falling had leaped into action a la Jack Bauer and identified the perps and were spreading the word far and wide, etc etc. My opposition to this Official Conspiracy Theory, which you seem to support, is that, as far as I can see, it is full of holes and inconsistencies and things that really defy belief to one who does not get their sense of 'reality' from tv or hollywood FX. I don't pretend to know what happened that day, it just seems to me the official story cannot be true, and thus I am of the opinion we really need some kind of credible investigation into it all. I don't really hold my breath expecting one, but it is encouraging that those who feel as I do seem to be growing in number, as the high improbability of the OCT seems to be becoming recognized by more and more people.

So - when you say '.. the conspiracy theories' are based on one thing and another, to be more accurate you really ought to be saying something like 'those who question the Official Conspiracy Theory', and etc.... (after all, you are talking about a 'conspiracy', and it is a 'theory' as long as it has never been properly investigated nor proven in any court of law at an open and fair trial). This is not a trivial point, as noted, when accepting this terminology allows you to encumber those who disagree with you as loons of one sort or another right from the starting gate. But it is actually YOU, my friend, who are defending a wild (to many of us) conspiracy theory - I and others are trying to tell you and the rest why it has been tried by some (actually, I guess, quite a few by now, and more every day) skeptics, and found wanting. Very wanting. Loose Change, or the books of writers like David Ray Griffin, aren't big collections of 'conspiracy theories' - they are examinations by some very intelligent and inquisitive people who are not inclined to believe everything the American government or the controlled media says of YOUR conspiracy theory, with a lot of points and questions about things in YOUR theory that just do not add up. That, in fact, either defy rational examination and consideration, or are obvious nonsense. (such as, for instance, the theory that the plane impact and resulting small, localized fires led to the spectacular collapses we saw that day of WTC1 and 2 - my own 'feet on the ground, let's look at this calmly and think about it a bit' examination of these collapses can be read here - 911 Thought Experiment http://www.rudemacedon.ca/lgi/911-thoughtex.html - I was suspicious of this from the first time I saw those buildings going down exactly like many vids of controlled demolitions we have all seen - and the 'news' people not even mentioning this, but right from the getgo telling everyone that those plane impacts weakened the structure and the fires melted the steel and down they came!!! - )

Briefly on the actual points you say are the main reasons you support the OCT, or try to mock and belittle those who question it -

1. The first point you make in mocking <those not believing the OCT etc> is that their/our points "...are premised on the omnipotence and omniscience of the U.S. ruling elites.." - I don't really see where you get this notion. I have no belief in the omnipotence of the US gov (I noted above I do not know what happened that day, but assuming my disbelief in the OCT is correct, then it would follow that at least parts of senior levels of the US gov (which is controlled of course by the wealthy elite in that country, as the Cdn gov is controlled by the wealthy elite here in Canada, and the same in most countries of the world) would have to have been involved in what happened that day, and the subsequent coverup) - they are certainly very powerful, and powerful people can do a lot of stuff you and I never could, but that is a long ways from 'omnipotent'. I suppose you might be referring to the idea a lot of OCT supporters raise that the US gov could not have been involved in any 'conspiracy' because thousands and thousands of people would have had to be involved, and there is no way they could have kept all of this secret, no way!! (unless they were omnipotent, I guess) - but this (like pretty much every other aspect of the OTC) simply does not stand up to some reflective 'realpolitic' thought, on various levels (although it is probably convincing to people who have simplistic and naive ideas about how the world works, good guys in white hats and bad guys in black hats, etc) - most obviously, there have indeed been whistle blowers, but they are gagged (Sibel Edwards and others) or have 'unfortunate accidents', or are otherwise mocked and marginalized by the Am gov, and the obviously controlled media, and OCT-supporters such as yourself; there would not have to be that many involved at all to carry these things out, and it would not be a problem to recruit some psychopaths or other ideologues to do the main parts of the dirty work (you don't get people with healthy psyches signing up as the real-life James Bonds and Lt Calleys of the world, who thrive on violence and domineering others); there are a lot of very clueless people in America and elsewhere who could be roped into helping do this, with no clue at all of what they had done but they like powerful people patting them on the head and saying 'nice work Rover'; the great majority of western populations are well-indoctrinated by now (50 years of 6-hrs-per-day-of-tv) and who only believe what they are told on television, which, in the controlled media, is obviously the OCT, and mocking those who question it; and there are undoubtedly a lot of people who may wish to speak but are kept quiet through one means or another.

2 - secondly, you say you support the OTC because those of us questioning it "...Are contemptuous of the view that a handful of adventurers could actually wreak damage on the colossus.." - that is a pretty obvious logical fallacy, really, and one of your intelligence really should know better - actually, I do believe a handful of adventurers were responsible, somehow - just not the ones your OCT is pointing at. This is actually kind of Basic Criminality 201 - when you do a job, plant some evidence pointing elsewhere!! (and it really helps if you are actually in charge of the investigation, and the media, and have created a highly credulous population through many years of fantasyland television that almost all of your people are addicted to, and immediately use that 'evidence' to shut down any further 'investigations' and ignore or mock those who aren't convinced, because such further investigation is obviously not required if you know who the perps are, geez!! Damned conspiracy theorists haha!! )

3. Your 3 and 4 quoted at the first are equally fallacious - nobody I know of is saying the 911 crime overshadows the past 50 or 100 or 500 years of atrocities of the American government at home and around the world so we should forget about them - we are saying this is a massive crime apparently involving the very highest levels of government in our 'democracies' that is apparently being covered up, and our few remaining freedoms are being taken from us in the name of this crime, and it is a very dangerous time for us all.

Well, enough for now. There's not really much new to be said, apparently - but as I said, I find it encouraging that more and more people are starting to actually look into the whole 911 crime, look behind the patent nonsense of the OCT and start asking some hard questions. Blowing this crime open, and shining a light into these very slimy hidden places at the center of western power, may be one of the few chances we have left to stop the road to despotism we seem to be on, as this is only going to be stopped by a massive popular protest, the kind of protest that could be catalysed by masses of people seeing how corrupt and criminal their governments really are.

 

Fidel

Quote:

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum."
- Noam Chomsky

"That's an internet theory and it's hopelessly implausible. Hopelessly implausible. So hopelessly implausible I don't see any point in talking about it."
- Noam Chomsky, at a FAIR event at New York's Town Hall, 22 January 2002, in response to a question from the audience about US government foreknowledge of 9/11

I think we have to keep in mind that people like Noam Chomsky and others like him have earned a fair bit of money from book sales. And as Gore Vidal has said about it, nobody reads thick books anymore for lack of time and various other reasons. This is  the information age, and people want to absorb as much as they can when they can. The internet is filling the void for what mainstream news hasnt been providing for too long.

Rouge (AKA No Yards)

I think many people who dismiss the truthers off hand are just as "deluded" as the truthers. They seem to accept, without question, the narative that this was planned by a couple of people in a cave in Afghanistan, and executed by a totally isolated group of about 20 people. There is no consideration that there could be any body else involved.

 

Just take the 9/11 report and the issue of all the "shorts" put against the Airlines ... in the report they dismiss this issue:

 

Quote:
There also have been claims that al Qaeda financed itself through
manipulation of the stock market based on its advance knowledge of the 9/11
attacks. Exhaustive investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission,
FBI, and other agencies have uncovered no evidence that anyone with advance
knowledge of the attacks profited through securities transactions.

In the notes for that comment you will find the following statement as part of an explanation:

Quote:
highly suspicious trading on its face.Yet, further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11.A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no
conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10.

Their assumption seems to be that since there is no connection to Al Qaeda, then they couldn't know anything about the upcoming attack .... but, we don't even need to be an Al Qaeda insider to have some advanced knowledge of a potential attack ... one could just be a White House insider (or a friend) and been somehow privy to things like the President's Daily Briefings that suggested that Al Qaeda was determined to attack, and some other memos and reports that suggested that they were going to crash airplanes (they didn't even have to know that it was going to be crashing into building, as I recall one report suggested that they were going to crash loaded airliners into the sea.)

They also seem to ignore that the trading activity wasn't just suspicious because it came so near 9/11, it was also suspicious because it was 25 times the normal "put option" rates (and also because it wasn't just the two specific airlines stock that had unusual trading, but several other companies that would be hurt, or could benefit, by such a terrorist action.)

The investigators went into this with some pretty serious preconceptions, and seem to have at many times, bent the evidence to fit their preconceptions.

This doesn't mean that the government had a hand in the attacks, but it does beg the question of why this highly questionable coincidence was explained away with such little actual explanation.

No Yards No Yards's picture

Sorry ..my post above ... somehow my old temp account (created a while back when I lost my original accounts password) got used when I again forgot my password and gave the wrong email address to request a new one.

 

Fidel

Quote:
Their assumption seems to be that since there is no connection to Al Qaeda, then they couldn't know anything about the upcoming attack .... but, we don't even need to be an Al Qaeda insider to have some advanced knowledge of a potential attack ... one could just be a White House insider (or a friend)

 

I think it depends on which Truth groups among a fractious bunch are posing the questions. Certain intellectuals for Truth are saying the FBI and CIA didnt just simply prpvide warnings about al-Qa'eda attacks in the months and weeks leading up to 9/11 and failed to convince Bush's people that the warnings were serious. Some people are saying that the FBI and CIA created intimate covert relationships with known al-Qa'eda - well known of since WTC truck bombing in 1993 as well as terror attacks on US soldiers in Africa and embassy bombings. Not just knew about them but held face-to-face meetings with them for years and years! Where is Ali Mohamed today? They still havent charged him with anything, and his wife, Linda Sanchez says she cant talk about it either! He's simply "disappeared"

 

 

Quote:
This doesn't mean that the government had a hand in the attacks, but it does beg the question of why this highly questionable coincidence was explained away with such little actual explanation

 

Plausible deniablity for the cosmetic government. That's what theyve been playing at since Pentagon capitalists transformed that country into a national security state in 1947. Coup d'etats are at least as old as the Roman empire. Remember Gulf of Tonkin - a colossal lie that that led to sacrificing 58000 American live$ in Vietnam.

al-Qa'bong

Today I heard that right-wing Evangelist wackos are all juiced about 2012 because they see it as a definitive date for the end time.  I'm sure that if I tune into "Coast to Coast" or "The Spaceman" I'll hear all about this, along with the usual stuff about the Illuminati and thermite dust in the World Trade Centre.

Fidel

And that was al-Qa'bong speaking for the crazy George II regime's American inquisition sigh regarding the offical 9/11 coverup. Thanks for that.

al-Qa'bong

Why not leave these conspiracy theories to the right-wing cornballs?  There are enough legitimate areas upon which the left can criticise US imperialism without us having to appear to be in league with the tinfoil-hat brigades.

Fidel

Because it's the tinfoil hat right-rightist nut jobs who want you to believe the crazy Jorge de la Yayo regime's lies regarding 9/11? HEL-lo?

al-Qa'bong

No.  Their position is the same as yours, with a little added millenarianism.  There isn't much difference in the level of fervency either.

Fidel

al-Qa'bong wrote:

No.  Their position is the same as yours, with a little added millenarianism

 

So who supports Crazy George's and Dick Cheney's version of events surrounding 9/11 besides al-Qa'bong? Not some members of the 9/11 Commission themselves including the chair of the slip-shod investigation. Not a third of Americans numbering more than three times as many people in Canada.

And if the survey is accurate, more than 800 million Chinese have no reason to believe crazy George's version of events surrounding the Reichstag fire, and that Islamic gladios acted alone.

 

The results of a survey conducted around the world, those believing "al-Qaeda" dunnit are in [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_opinion_polls]are in the large minority[/url]

 

And I think it's safe to say that the large majority of people in the world have no reason to believe in this phony-baloney global war on terror as a direct result of 9/11. But apparently you do. Why? Where's your evidence? Because crazy George and his team of megalomaniacal psychopaths would also like to know what evidence you have in order to support their flimsy case against the CIA's-ISI's Islamic gladios trained and educated in terrorism by US taxpayers for years and years leading up to 9/11.

 

 

al-Qa'bong

Quote:
And I think it's safe to say that the large majority of people in the world have no reason to believe in this phony-baloney global war on terror as a direct result of 9/11. But apparently you do. Why?

  • .............................................................................
  • ..............................................................................
  • ..................................................................
  • .
  •  

 

 

    You have a curious tendency to reduce any issue ("if one isn't a Habs fan, one must necessarily hate Canadian hockey teams" is another example) to a false binary; a tendency you seem to share with - dare I say it - the recently-retired head of state of the Great Satan.

    al-Qa'bong

    Are there still tech people on rabble.ca?  This programming bug that prevents one from posting in a normal-sized text following a quote, despite fiddling around with spacing, fonts and anything else makes babble look like a decidedly bush-league organization.

     

    Or maybe that's the plan.

    Fidel

    So, are you saying it's all of crazy Jorge's, and now crazy John McCain's supporters who dont believe the crazy Jorge narrative on 9/11 - that 36% or so of registered voters polled who say they support the Republican Party? I'm just not seeing consistent support for the American inquisition, even in that last bastion of rightwing conservatism in the world, the USsA. They are pondering criminal charges against certain lead inquisitors as we speak. Not that it will lead to any significant change in that country where the economy is based largely on warfiteering mind.

    al-Qa'bong

    Quote:
    So, are you saying it's all of crazy Jorge's, and now crazy John McCain's supporters who dont believe the crazy Jorge narrative on 9/11

     

    No. That isn't the issue. I don't really care what the Bushniks say about 911. The crimes they've committed against Iraq and Afghanistan in the wake of 911 stand on their own. We don't need to be sidetracked with speculation that sounds like looney-tune conspiracy theories. There are chalk outlines all over the planet that are evidence enough to have Bush, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz, Perle and Powell hanged as war criminals.

    Fidel

    al-Qa'bong wrote:

    Quote:
    So, are you saying it's all of crazy Jorge's, and now crazy John McCain's supporters who dont believe the crazy Jorge narrative on 9/11

     

    No. That isn't the issue. I don't really care what the Bushniks say about 911. The crimes they've committed against Iraq and Afghanistan in the wake of 911 stand on their own.

    Well youre wrong, because 9/11 was the pretext for those fascist attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan.

    The phony global war on terror,  and the events of 9/11 preceding phony global war on an unseen enemy without borders,  are directly related.

    And so I was just wondering what evidence you might have that al-Qa'eda dunnit? Because so far, the American inquisition has the tortured confessions of Khalid Sheik Mohammed and a few others who held out almost as long as KSM did at Gitmo. You either accept the inquisition's evidence or you dont. So I guess I should ask, which side of the inquisitors' illegally obtained confessions do you lean toward? And we're not even gettin to the crazy stuff yet.

    al-Qa'bong

    What terrorist attacks preceeded the 1953 coup of the Iranian government, the Bay of Pigs invasion, or the war on the peasants of the Dominican Republic, Vietnam, Guatemala, El Salvador or Nicaragua?

     

    911 is irrelevant.  The empire is the problem.

    Fidel

    The atrocities committed in "the backyard" occurred during the cold war, and they took place in tiny countries far from sight of the American taxpayer. With US support and military aid, rightwing death squad governments did their dirty work for them. Luis Posada Carriles wasnt the first murdering terrorist to work for the CIA and be given sanctuary from justice in the US.

    But Gladio was a story that didnt break in Europe until 1991, at the end of cold war. And even though European parliaments denounced the NATO stay behinds, the USsA officially denied the existence of false flag terrorism. [url=http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13603]Big increases for black ops in 2010[/url]

    jas

    al-Qa'bong wrote:

    911 is irrelevant.  The empire is the problem.

    See, I don't buy this as some excuse not to do further investigation. The push behind 9/11 truth is not so much to put Bush or Cheney behind bars - any number of other crimes they've committed would accomplish that, a few times over.

    If you can show mainstream America, beyond reasonable doubt, that it was their gov't that committed this crime, or had a hand in it, or was complicit in it, then you've won the mind-fuck battle that was being waged in the years after this event. Once it's been shown - to middle America - that this is what a U.S. gov't is capable of, then anytime in the future some president wants to pull some amateur bullshit or orchestrate some catastrophic event and say, "you're either with us or against us.... questioning the official story is unpatriotic..." then the American public, and the rest of the world, will have this historical precedent to look to. We'll be able to say, without speculation, "No. you did this in 2001. You're capable of doing it again."

    Of course, people in activist circles know that they are capable of doing something like this, but "middle" America doesn't. They believe, and want to believe, what their government tells them. They want to believe that it's outsiders doing this, and that the outsiders need to be punished. And it's middle America that rules the airwaves and mainstream opinion. So if you can put a crack in that fortress of blind assumption, then it will be harder for gov'ts in the future to justify these measures against "terrorism". You would also be putting in doubt that notion of terrorist cells around the world just waiting for the next action. You might actually, over time and education, start fomenting a belief in peace again. If we can see that it's usually forces in gov't pulling this shit, then we might allow ourselves to begin believing that, actually, most of us are pretty peaceful beings, after all, and that that's the world we want, and those are the people we want serving us in government.

     

    Fidel

    Right on, jas! I think some of the non-truthers have the false impression that the Truth movement is out to expose just the neocon war criminals in the Republican Party. That's not the case. The so-called Liberal Democrats are equally as guilty in aiding and abetting the Islamic gladios through the 1990s with the Cheney gang taking over after losing the popular vote count in 2000, and right up to 9/11. Plutocrats are backsliding on democracy with standing by that half-hearted, slip-shod 9-11 investigation and report. Non-truthers cant seem to fathom the idea that there was an American inquisition created by these events, and that has no place in a legitimate democracy either.

    Fidel

    [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/08/AR200905... source of info for 9/11 Commission was himself tortured into saying he was not[/url]

    Have non-truthers heard any good torture jokes lately?

    ===

    [url=http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13645]Buyer's Remorse: Is it too late to swap Obama for McCain?[/url]

    Quote:
    Let's just forget about the fact that Obama never lifted a finger to stop Israel's two week rampage through Gaza which killed 1,100 unarmed civilians and destroyed much of the critical infrastructure. And let's give him a pass for equivocating on Iran, Georgia, missile defense in East Europe, Cuba, NAFTA, FISA, torture, war crimes, the Employee free Choice Act (EFCA) and any other issue that's important to liberals, progressives, leftists or anyone else who eats with a fork or walks on two legs. And let's excuse Obama for stepping up the air war in Afghanistan even though another 140 Afghan villagers were blown to bits 10 days ago while sitting in their schools, sleeping in their beds or having dinner with their families. (After all, Obama did say he was sorry, didn't he?) ... I don't know about you, but I believe that America is based on the idea that every man has certain basic rights, and the most fundamental of all those rights is the right to know why the state has thrown your ass in jail. That's numero uno! It's called habeas corpus and the whole judicial system rests on that one foundation stone. People like Obama, who don't believe in habeas, shouldn't even call themselves "American" in my book because they don't believe in the underlying principles. Does Khalid Sheik Mohamed--the so-called "9-11 mastermind"-- deserve his day in court? You're damn right he does! That's how the system works. Deal with it.

    al-Qa'bong

    Geez, I forgot all about this thread. 

     

    Things haven't improved much around here.

    Fidel

    al-Qa'bong wrote:
    Geez, I forgot all about this thread.

    Imagine that the Nuremberg trials never happened. The allies just kinda forgot that there were any crimes committed. The truth about the Gleiwitz incident and the series of false flag attacks along the Polish border leading to Nazi Germany's invasion of Poland probably would not have been discovered without a trial with people held accountable. The world would go on believing that Nazi Germany acted in self defence. Bygones?

     

    NDPP

    911: Explosive Evidence and the War in Afghanistan - Special Lectures by Dr. David Ray Griffin and Richard Gage AIA

    7-10 PM, Sunday May 2nd, 2010, 80 Queen's Park, U of T, Toronto - further info and tickets (10$) 416-978-8849

    http://www.911blogger.com/node/23138

    al-Qa'bong

    Quote:

    Imagine that the Nuremberg trials never happened.

     

    What a brilliantly apt analogy: remembrance of the Nuremberg trials and remembering that this thread existed.

    Quote:

    The truth about the Gleiwitz incident and the series of false flag attacks along the Polish border leading to Nazi Germany's invasion of Poland probably would not have been discovered without a trial with people held accountable. The world would go on believing that Nazi Germany acted in self defence.

     

    Now that's just silly. Do you really believe anyone outside of Germany thought the nazis atacked Poland, Holland, Denmark, Belgium, France, England, Jugoslavia, Greece and the Soviet Union out of self-defence?

    Cueball Cueball's picture

    Well. In point of fact, England and France declared war on Germany, in retaliation for the invasion of Poland. Ribbentrop indeed advised Hitler that he did not think that the western Allies would go to war for the sake of Poland.

    al-Qa'bong

    What, they didn't think Poland attacked Germany first?

    Cueball Cueball's picture

    I don't think that was relevant to the decision, really. I mean they declared on the 3rd, right? And Poland was invaded on the 1st, so I doubt they had time to investigate any claims.

    al-Qa'bong

    Of course they didn't.  Would London Bobbies have been able to investigate the crime scene? 

    Cueball Cueball's picture

    I just want to dispose of the idea that Germany attacked England and France. That didn't happen.

    Fidel

    al-Qa'bong wrote:

    Quote:

    Imagine that the Nuremberg trials never happened.

    What a brilliantly apt analogy: remembrance of the Nuremberg trials and remembering that this thread existed.

    Hang on now. Someone did revive this thread. And we can only assume he must be somewhat interested in the subject in general.

    al-Qa'bong wrote:
    Now that's just silly. Do you really believe anyone outside of Germany thought the nazis atacked Poland, Holland, Denmark, Belgium, France, England, Jugoslavia, Greece and the Soviet Union out of self-defence?

     It didn't matter what the French or Danes, Brits or anyone else outside of Germany thought at the time. The purpose of the false flag propaganda was to instill fear of Polish attack among the German people, but also to convince German soldiers and air force pilots that the attack on Poland was justified. Imagine ordering the military to attack another country without any justification whatsoever in these modern times with established international laws as a direct result of WW II.

    There was no United Nations or International Court of Justice then in 1939. The Red Cross did send a handful of people into concentration camps in Germany and occupied nations at the start of the war, like the one at Gliwice. And from all outward appearances, Red Cross officials found everything to be satisfactory. Nazi officials showed them everything they wanted the outside world to know about - that the Nazis were treating Jewish detainees with dignity and respect. And that was a terrible lie, too. We're only interested in truth in these threads, al-Qa'bong. Will you oblige us?

    Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

     

    Is there any technical information as to the size and how many "termite" charges it took to make the towers fall as they did, what would their placement have to be and how would they could hide the placement of such charges before the attack?

     

       

    Fidel

    HeywoodFloyd wrote:
    I'm willing to listen to a theory verifiable by the evidence. A complete theory. Not one that is based on thousands of pounds of super explosives installed in secret before the day and which had absolutely no other signs of exploding (windows breaking, an audible "boom", etc).

    You mean like Daniel Rivera heard as he walked toward the south tower and heard sounds like, [url=http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/oralhistories/explosions.html]"pop, pop, pop, pop, pop"[/url]?

    Some of the less naive of us don't wonder how a determined group of people might have entered three WTC buildings and rigged them up with cutter charges. New York City has been home to some of the most notorious gangs of thieves and criminal elements for a long time. One gang of garment thieves eluded the FBI for years breaking into warehouses and department stores in broad daylight and sometimes at night and stealing millions of dollars worth of high end clothing. They even dress as cops to fool the cops sometimes. You might be surprised with how clever people can be when breaking the law.

    But once you realize just how absurd the theory is that says two amateur Cessna pilots dominated NORAD airspace for almost an hour and brought down not two but three steel frame buildings, your inner detective may be awoken from slumber.

    Pages