[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker Opens More Migrant Shelters in Chicago Ahead of Democrat National Convention

CNN doctor urges neurological testing for Biden

Nashville Trans Shooter Left Over 100 GB Of Evidence, All To Be Kept Secret

Who Turned Off The Gaslight?

Head Of Chase Bank Warns Customers: Era Of Free Checking Is Likely Over

Bob Dylan - Hurricane [Scotty mar10]

Replacing Biden Won't Solve Democrats' Problems - Look Who Will Inherit His Campaign War Chest

Who Died: Late June/Early July 2024 | News

A top Russian banker says Russia's payment methods should be a 'state secret' because the West keeps shutting them down so fast

Viral Biden Brain Freeze During Debate Sparks Major Question: Who’s Really Running the Country?

Disney Heiress, Other Major Dem Donors: Dump Biden

LAWYER: 5 NEW Tricks Cops Are Using During DWI Stops

10 Signs That Global War Is Rapidly Approaching

Horse Back At Library.

This Video Needs To Be Seen By Every Cop In America

'It's time to give peace another chance': Thousands rally in Tel Aviv to end the war

Biden's leaked bedtime request puts White House on damage control

Smith: It's Damned Hard To Be Proud Of America

Lefties losing it: Rita Panahi slams ‘deranged rant’ calling for assassination of Trump

Stalin, The Red Terror | Full Documentary

Russia, Soviet Union and The Cold War: Stalin's Legacy | Russia's Wars Ep.2 | Documentary

Battle and Liberation: The End of World War II | Countdown to Surrender – The Last 100 Days | Ep. 4

Ethereum ETFs In 'Window-Dressing' Stage, Approval Within Weeks; Galaxy

Americans Are More Likely To Go To War With The Government Than Submit To The Draft

Rudy Giuliani has just been disbarred in New York

Israeli Generals Want Truce in Gaza,

Joe Biden's felon son Hunter is joining White House meetings

The only Democrat who could beat Trump

Ukraine is too CORRUPT to join NATO, US says, in major blow to Zelensky and boost for Putin

CNN Erin Burnett Admits Joe Biden knew the Debate questions..


9/11
See other 9/11 Articles

Title: 9/11: Conspiracy of Incompetence
Source: http://www.opednews.com
URL Source: http://www.opednews.com/articles/op ... 61115_the_911_conspiracy_o.htm
Published: Nov 16, 2006
Author: R O Connor
Post Date: 2006-11-19 07:16:17 by Kamala
Ping List: *9-11*     Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: 911
Views: 948
Comments: 104

November 16, 2006 at 09:45:58

9/11: Conspiracy of Incompetence

by Rory OConnor

http://www.opednews.com

What if I told you that a member of Osama bin Laden's inner circle operated with impunity within the United States for years before September 11? That despite being an ardent and avowed jihadi, he managed to become a naturalized citizen, to join the US Army, to get posted to the Special Warfare Center where Green Berets and Delta Force train, and to work with both the CIA and the FBI? And all the while he was a top al Qaeda operative, hosting its second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri when he traveled to the US in the 1990's to raise money, and training both bin Laden's personal bodyguard and radical Muslims who would go on to assassinate Jewish militant Meir Kahane and detonate a truck bomb at the World Trade Center?

Would you take it as evidence that our so-called intelligence community was abjectly incompetent and dysfunctional in the months and years before 9/11? Or would you see it as further proof that the powers-that-be were the powers behind 9/11, either "making it happen on purpose?" Or alternately: "letting it happen on purpose?"

With time running out on the lame duck Bush Administration (now well on its way to becoming a "comma," as the President might phrase it), our chances of getting to the bottom of the signal event of the Bush years -- the unsolved murder of nearly three-thousand people, the worst terror attacks ever on US soil, the "day that changed everything," the iconic 9/11 -- are also rapidly fading.

Even as the misnamed "war on terror" continues to heat up, the crime that precipitated it has somehow become a cold case. The only federal prosecution directly associated with the attacks -- that of Zacarias Moussaoui -- ended in a plea bargain and with an FBI agent accusing his superiors of "criminal negligence." Meanwhile, in the absence of a truly unfettered investigation, amidst calls from victims' families for a reopened, non-partisan inquiry, and with many major questions still unanswered more than five years after the fact, it is unsurprising that faith-based theories continue to pour into the information vacuum and assume, at least for some, an aura of truth.

Numerous polls indicate that few Americans now believe they have been told the truth about 9/11. According to one poll conducted recently for the New York Times and CBS News, more than eighty percent think the Administration is either "mostly lying" or at least "hiding something." Before it becomes too late, and the case too cold, is it still possible to determine what happened on 9/11 -- and why?

Did some version of the MIHOP or LIHOP conspiracy theories actually take place? Or were our leaders and their minions in the intelligence community simply so incompetent that they missed dozens, if not hundreds, of pre-attack "threat assessments," warnings, signs and indications that, as the notorious PDB of August 6, 2001 bluntly informed the president, Osama Bin Laden was "Determined to Strike in US?" If so, did they then conspire to cover up their "criminally negligent" incompetence?

Count author Peter Lance, an Emmy-winning former reporter and producer for ABC News, among those who believe in the "9/11 Incompetence Conspiracy Theory." Lance's new book, "Triple Cross," tells the amazing story of an al-Qaeda superspy named Ali Mohamed. As Lance writes, "In the annals of espionage, few men have moved in and out of the deep black world between the hunters and the hunted with as much audacity as Ali Mohamed."

Mohamed's fundamentalist proclivities were no secret to US intelligence. As early as 1989, he turned up in FBI surveillance photos, conducting weapons training of followers of the Omar Abdel Rahman, the "blind sheikh" now imprisoned for his role in a plot to blow up the United Nations and several bridges and tunnels into Manhattan. The sheikh's followers would later be involved in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, but Ali Mohamed not only avoided arrest but managed to become an FBI informant, even while smuggling bin Laden in and out of Afghanistan, writing much of the al Qaeda terrorist manual and helping to plan attacks on American troops in Somalia and U.S. embassies in Africa.

''The FBI allowed the chief spy for al Qaeda to operate right under their noses,'' Lance says in amazement. ''They let him plan the bombings of the embassies in Africa right under their noses. Two hundred twenty-four people were killed and more than 4,000 wounded because of their negligence."

While some contend that Mohamed's intimate relations with the FBI and CIA are proof of government involvement in a 9/11 plot, Lance says that it was instead embarrassment and ass-covering on the part of Justice and Pentagon officials over the mishandling of Ali Mohammed that led first to a conspiracy of silence and then to a conspiracy to cover up their incompetence and deception. He believes that chagrin over the fact that bin Laden's spy stole top-secret intelligence (including, for example, the positions of all Green Beret and SEAL units worldwide) led to a decision on high to bury the entire Able Danger intelligence program, which identified the al Qaeda cell active in Brooklyn months before the 9/11 attacks, and also identified Ali Mohamed as a member of bin Laden's inner circle as early as March 2000. Lance further states that then-Assistant US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was "hopelessly outgunned by Mohamed," and covered up key al Qaeda intelligence as far back as 1996.

Although Fitzgerald called Mohamed "the most dangerous man I've ever met," he left him on the street for years, which allowed Mohamed time to help plan the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania on August 7th, 1998, in which 224 died and more than 4,000 were injured. Fitzgerald, who later became both U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois and Special Prosecutor in the Scooter Libby/Valerie Plame CIA leak probe, finally arrested Ali Mohamed after the bombings in 1998. But Fitzgerald then cut a deal that allowed Mohamed to avoid the death penalty and enter witness protection. Although Mohammed was kept in federal custody for three years, Fitzgerald and his FBI and Justice Department associates were unable to extract any information from him about the looming 9/11 plot.

Finally, in October 2000, after having tricked the US intelligence establishment for years, Mohammed admitted in federal court his involvement in plots to kill US soldiers in Somalia and Saudi Arabia, US ambassadors in Africa, and American civilians "anywhere in the world." Despite these admissions, he has never been sentenced, the details of his plea agreement remain secret, and his whereabouts today are unknown to all but a few.

Given the many mistakes and apparent government deception obvious from even a cursory examination of the Ali Mohamed case, along with related miscues involving the Central Intelligence Agency (see "The Looming Tower" by Lawrence Wright, and "State of Denial" by Bob Woodward), the National Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and high officials at Special Operations Command, Central Command, and yes, the White House. it's no wonder that conspiracists see evidence -- if not outright proof -- for their "loose change" theories of what happened on 9/11.

But in writing his brilliantly researched, highly detailed, exhaustive (and at nearly 500 pages, exhausting!) account of how Osama bin Laden's master spy "triple crossed" the CIA, the Green Berets and the FBI, Lance has actually done the 9/11 truth movement a distinct service. The media and the government's national security apparatus may have failed to "connect the dots," but Peter Lance certainly has in "Triple Cross."

Was there a government conspiracy behind the attacks of 9/11? Or did the true conspiracy begin only after the attacks, in a desperate but thus far successful attempt to avoid scandal and obscure the truth that our intelligence agencies had suppressed critical intelligence and bungled their jobs? Whatever your faith and belief, the Ali Mohamed story seems key to understanding the full truth of 9/11. "Could the attacks have been prevented?" Lance asks. "If so, who in our government should be blamed for the failure?" And finally, and most importantly, "have our intelligence agencies undergone sufficient reform to prevent future assaults on America?"

http://www.roryoconnor.org

Filmmaker and journalist Rory O'Connor writes the 'Media Is A Plural' blog, accessible at http://www.roryoconnor.org.

Contact Author

Contact Editor

View Other Articles by Author


Poster Comment:

Peter Lance is a limited hangout writer. Throw out some truth, control the blame. He still contends 911 was just incompetence and bumbling, even though he has stated that WTC 7 was a demo job. You can't have it both ways. Subscribe to *9-11*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-33) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#34. To: Kamala (#27)

Are you still with us in calling for a new investigation or not?

No.....

The mechanics of 9/11 can be investigated and discussed til the end of time to no ones satisfaction.

The original concept and implementation by whom and for what goal of 9/11 would be far more interesting and satisfactory.

Whether the WTC buildings were blown down, burned down or fell down or whether termites did it really does not matter, the deed is done and over with. What matters is to expend energy to determine who originated the idea and who implemented it for what reason.

I suspect the culprits love to see people argue as to how it was done, when the real objective is to find out who and why.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-20   21:11:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: Cynicom (#34)

911 Truth isn't just calling for an investigation of just PHYSICAL evidence but ALL evidence. Wether it be people, paper or scientific.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-20   21:49:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: Kamala, bluedogtxn, swarthyguy, christine (#25) (Edited)

Get back to me when you explain evaporated steel, and streams and pools of molten iron under wtc 7 and the other towers.

Do you know anything about the steel business?

This is an example of people without any kind of scientific logic or common sense making the 9/11 truth movement look so foolish.

The statement above is used to claim that explosives were used to cut beams - in other words finding molten steel is a symptom high explosives were used to cut steel. The problem with this is that steel does not stay in a liquid state after an explosion - you don't get molten steel that stays molten after the explosion. The steel does not continue to melt and stay melted.

It is insanity this is being used as evidence of anything - a claim based on video footage of the excavation sight. If that was molten steel you could not get near it without a fire suit or all you skin would blister off.

Any evidence of pooled metal is probably of low melt pont metals in the building of that is what was seen. The buildings collapsed because the heated metal lost structural strength couples with the flawed design of the building.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   0:27:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: Cynicom, swarthyguy, bluedogtxn, christine, Kamala (#34)

Whether the WTC buildings were blown down, burned down or fell down or whether termites did it really does not matter, the deed is done and over with. What matters is to expend energy to determine who originated the idea and who implemented it for what reason.

I suspect the culprits love to see people argue as to how it was done, when the real objective is to find out who and why.

Is that not what I said on this website a while ago? What I described as the 'honey trap'.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   0:30:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: Destro (#21)

The physical evidence touted by the 9/11 truthers is based on an ignorance of science and what is even more scary - I see attempts to shoe horn evidence into a scenario and an unwillingness to throw out hypothesis if found to be in error.

That is dogmatic not scientific thinking.

I disagree about the ignorance of science part, but I agree with the dogmatic thinking. The ironic thing is that the 9-11 truthers have a fundamental point, which is a failure of the government to investigate and a lot of connections between the hijackers and our CIA. As far as the science part, as an attorney I can tell you that there is always a strong temptation to make the evidence say what you want it to say, and not to let the evidence take you where it logically goes; which is often a more compelling story.

I sometimes wonder if the "truth" movement itself is infiltrated with crackpots designed to discredit it.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   9:35:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Cynicom, Kamala (#34)

The original concept and implementation by whom and for what goal of 9/11 would be far more interesting and satisfactory.

This is where I come down. I have a real skepticism problem with the idea that a bunch of explosives were pre-planted in WTC7 or in either of the twin towers. Not saying it's not possible, but extremely unlikely, and that's coming out of a law enforcement, courthouse, physical evidence background. Even if that were the case (and I can't figure why it would be done that way), it doesn't answer the question of "who". "Who" and "why" are the critical questions here. This was our Reichstag Fire, not our Pearl Harbor, and I want to know if it was really "terrorists" or if it was "Nazis" who burned it down.

As long as we are bickering over pools of molten metals or what temperature things were at what time, we aren't looking at the basic fundamental things. Two planes flew into the WTC buildings. That much we know. Another plane hit the P-gone and another buried itself in a field in PA. What we should be trying to figure out is who hijacked the planes? Where were they from? Who did they know? Who paid for their trip? Where did they stay? Who did they talk to? Who did they live with in the ME? How were the attacks coordinated?

Many, many critical questions, and why are the investigators being stonewalled at certain places and fired at others, and why is nobody investigating the Saudi end, where Bush has his family connections and financial connections and where all of the hijackers supposedly were from (okay, we know why)?

The most likely thing in the world is that Bush I, who was a pal to the mujahideen, was a pal to Osama, who was the leader of the outfit (AQ) that was put together and funded by our CIA that he was the boss of. That's simple math, but nobody mentions it. Nobody mentions the fantastic wealth of the Bush family and the connection between Bush I's job in the CIA and that wealth. Who benefited the most from 9-11? His son and his business pals and his son's buddies, who happen to be buddies of the father...

Relationships are key. They point in key ways right back to the White House, the CIA, the Bush Family and the House of Saud/Bin Laden.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   9:51:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: Kamala (#30)

Strawman argument. The real researchers and scientists involved in credible 911 findings, do not discuss this.

Really? Who decides who the "real" researchers and scientists are? How do you get your bona-fides? Do you have to be fired from your university so that you can then show that you are on the "right track" or you wouldn't have been fired? Do you have to have a website? I can tell you that there are 9-11 truthers who will argue all day with you that the Pgon was hit by a cruise missile. No amount of eyewitness testimony or physical evidence will convince them otherwise. If dedication to a theory is a measure of its validity, then this is one of the strongest theories out there, despite its being patently ridiculous.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   9:54:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: bluedogtxn (#39)

I have a real skepticism problem with the idea that a bunch of explosives were pre-planted in WTC7 or in either of the twin towers.

Please watch this video and tell me if you are still skeptical.

911 Mysteries: Demolitions

christine  posted on  2006-11-21   10:34:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: bluedogtxn (#38)

I sometimes wonder if the "truth" movement itself is infiltrated with crackpots designed to discredit it.

Yes. I think so. It was a tactic used to discredit the peace movement in the 60s as well.

What I do find encouraging is that those that slammed me for saying so before seem to have taken up almost the same position on the matter as I espoused.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   10:41:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: christine, bluedogtxn (#41)

Please watch this video and tell me if you are still skeptical.

How can a non expert on demolitions watch a video and make a conclusion?

The USA has thousand of people employed in demolitions. Around the world tens of thousands employed in the field.

Not one of those has come forth and said that the fall of any of those buildings on 9/11 looked like the work of explosive demolitions.

That is how a court works - you bring in your experts - you just don't show a video to the jury no matter how they do it on Law & Order or Matlock.

Where are is the testimony of the explosive experts that support your position of demolition charges?

As for Blue's point about arguing over where a circle begins and ends, arguing about how the Towers fell is like looking at a murder victim who was shot and then claiming he was poisoned as well because you don't think the gun shot wound would have been fatal so we argue about death by gunshot wound over poisoning and ignore who pulled the trigger.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   10:49:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: Destro (#43)

As for Blue's point about arguing over where a circle begins and ends, arguing about how the Towers fell is like looking at a murder victim who was shot and then claiming he was poisoned as well because you don't think the gun shot wound would have been fatal so we argue about death by gunshot wound over poisoning and ignore who pulled the trigger.

This is my point precisely. And I also agree that I'm no expert on explosives, so I can't watch a video and come to a conclusion. I do note that in my field I've seen experts disagree on pivotal issues like whether a person is schizophrenic, and both experts made convincing cases that standing alone, an inexperienced juror would say, "yeah. Of course." When you put the experts side by side, however, you are stuck saying, "I don't know..."

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   11:03:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: Destro, christine (#43) (Edited)

oopsdupe.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   11:04:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: Destro, bluedogtxn (#43)

As for Blue's point about arguing over where a circle begins and ends, arguing about how the Towers fell is like looking at a murder victim who was shot and then claiming he was poisoned as well because you don't think the gun shot wound would have been fatal so we argue about death by gunshot wound over poisoning and ignore who pulled the trigger.

i don't agree. if you can see with the evidence presented in that video as well as numerous others (plus numerous accounts from eyewitnesses) that explosives could have been or were planted in the buildings, then you can conclude that it was absolutely a pre-planned inside job. we then know the WHO at least as far as our own government's involvement.

regarding WTC7, larry silverstein himself informed the firefighters to "pull it" and within minutes the building was brought down with pre-planted demolitions.

christine  posted on  2006-11-21   11:47:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: christine, bluedogtxn (#46)

regarding WTC7, larry silverstein himself informed the firefighters to "pull it" and within minutes the building was brought down with pre-planted demolitions.

I don't understand - therefore it drives me crazy - why you all hang your hat on that statement?

You make it sound that some watchful citizen intercepted Larry Silverstein on some secret radio band talking to his sapper squad.

He mentioned that in an interview for a PBS program! So the FDNY are now involved in demolition work? He slipped and let the cat out of the bag?

Pure nonsense.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   11:57:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: Destro (#47)

why you all hang your hat on that statement?

We don't. It's just one more nail in the coffin.

The symmetry and speed of the fall of all 3 buildings that just happened to all belong to Lucky Larry make powerful statements on their own.

The steel center core had no floors, so the pancake theory is just so much dough.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   12:00:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: Destro (#47)

You make it sound that some watchful citizen intercepted Larry Silverstein on some secret radio band talking to his sapper squad.

He mentioned that in an interview for a PBS program! So the FDNY are now involved in demolition work? He slipped and let the cat out of the bag?

Pure nonsense.

ditto.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   12:00:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: bluedogtxn (#44)

What I find telling is no expert on demolitions is supporting this theory - either American or foreign.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   12:01:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: robin (#48)

It's just one more nail in the coffin.

What nail?

You make it sound that some watchful citizen intercepted Larry Silverstein on some secret radio band talking to his sapper squad. He mentioned that in an interview for a PBS program! So the FDNY are now involved in demolition work? He slipped and let the cat out of the bag?

Pure nonsense.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   12:02:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: Destro, christine (#50)

What I find telling is no expert on demolitions is supporting this theory - either American or foreign.

What I saw, that morning, live, was an airplane hit the second tower right after I'd heard that an airplane had hit the first tower. I also watched the towers collapse, one after the other. I watched the towers burning before they collapsed, and I thought to myself, "Why haven't they just fallen in? I've seen arson investigations and the buildings always fall in, leaving (sometimes) a brick shell, but the cieling always falls in..." Then they fell in, and I said to myself, "Of course they fell in...."

When the planes hit it was like a game of Jenga, and you knock out a whole layer of wooden sticks at the level where the planes hit... The thing's gonna topple... I don't need to be convinced that airliners hitting the side of skyscrapers will knock them down. It doesn't seem odd at all to me. The buildings also didn't collapse "in their own footprint" as has been said. I watched the way they fell, and I know fire companies were buried in debris and rubble. That debris and rubble was in the street hundreds of feet from the edges of the buildings themselves.

It is a fascinating forensic puzzle, to be sure, but to what end? You indicate that "proving" explosives were planted will establish it to be an inside job. Really? You mean Al Qaida, the worldwide terra network with access to all kinds of goodies like Plastique and sophisticated IEDs and whatnot couldn't plant explosives? They'd already planted them in the WTC before.

Connecting AQ to the CIA establishes the "inside" nature of the job. Connecting agents to Osama will connect it, too.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   12:14:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: bluedogtxn (#52) (Edited)

Connecting AQ to the CIA establishes the "inside" nature of the job. Connecting agents to Osama will connect it, too.

Some in this demolitions in the Towers movement will tell you that there were no Arabs or al-Qaeda nor any hijackers on the planes and it was the CIA with men dressed as janitors or contractors gained access to the buildings and long before planted - unseen- explosives on almost every floor.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   12:36:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: Destro (#53)

Some in this demolitions in the Towers movement will tell you that there were no Arabs or al-Qaeda nor any hijackers on the planes and it was the CIA with men dressed as janitors or contractors gained access to the buildings and long before planted - unseen- explosives on almost every floor.

Well that's just silly. Why go to all that expense when you've got a pet nutjob you paid to install, and he's got a bunch of lunatic followers fully willing to commit any crime in the name of Allah and die doing it?

When you have a cadre of Kamikazes, that's a hell of a lot cheaper, simpler and easier than trying to conduct some elaborate scheme, cover story and cover up...

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   12:46:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: Destro (#51)

Have you read Larry's feeble attempts to rewrite and explain away what he said? He goofed-up, got caught and tried to wiggle out of it.

Then he sued and collected on TWO terrorist attacks for billions.

Anyone who wants to absolve Larry of anything is a fool.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   13:10:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: bluedogtxn, Destro, robin (#54)

Assume the entire demolition scenario is valid.

What it does is expand the scale of the setup, but it does not bring you closer to the motives - who and why. It distracts from the military exercises, the virtual 'stand-down', the cherry picking of info from the 119 commission and connections between the Bush family, the Saudis, the Jihad against Communism and all the rest.

And disputes about demolition focus attention away from so much info available - my pick for most ignored is the role of PTECH.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   13:16:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: swarthyguy, christine, Kamala, BTP Holdings, SKYDRIFTER (#56)

What it does is expand the scale of the setup, but it does not bring you closer to the motives - who and why.

I disagree.

PNAC's "new Pearl Harbor" event was planned years in advance. Whoever did this had access to all 3 buildings, and a great deal of technical coordination and sophistication.

Certainly al-CIA-duh employed some Saudis as window dressing (don't forget the Saudi passport that was found), but there's nothing new about that.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   13:24:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: robin (#57)

Nobody who expounds the demolition scenarion postulates any substantial info beyond the destruction of those buildings.

In fact, the noise drowns out other info and doesn't lead anywhere.

Who does that benefit?

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   13:28:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: swarthyguy (#58)

Nobody who expounds the demolition scenarion postulates any substantial info beyond the destruction of those buildings.

Some have been careful not to make statements beyond proving that the official govt version of 9/11 is laughable.

Others make an excellent case that the NeoCons, as described in the PNAC report, planned this "Pearl Harbor" event as one they very much wanted.

Who benefits by our presence in the ME that 9/11 led to? Ask the Five Dancing Israelis who were taping the fall of the towers and giving each other high-fives. So out-of-place was their behavior, they were arrested that day.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   13:47:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: robin, bluedogtxn (#55) (Edited)

Have you read Larry's feeble attempts to rewrite and explain away what he said? He goofed-up, got caught and tried to wiggle out of it.

The only feebleness is trying to link Silverstein's words used in a televised interview with proof that he was the demolitions mastermind team leader.

Some commando you guys picked out for your imagined sapper team leader.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   14:15:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: robin (#59)

Who benefits by our presence in the ME that 9/11 led to

America has. A strategic imperative since 1945, helping the US keep the Soviets out of that area and providing America with cheap oil that was partially responsible for the post World War Two boom; the entire car and highway culture.

We are there because it helped us. Whether it still does is another whole matter.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   14:18:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: robin, swarthyguy, bluedogtxn (#59)

Who benefits by our presence in the ME that 9/11 led to? Ask the Five Dancing Israelis who were taping the fall of the towers and giving each other high-fives. So out-of-place was their behavior, they were arrested that day.

Easy.

Every intel agency worth their salt knew of the plot. Putin even warned Bush personally beforehand. The Israelis probably learned of the plot and were waiting for events to play out. Maybe like like how Churchill may have danced when he heard Japan attack the USA? Would you suggest Britain carried out Pearl Harbor?

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   14:20:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: swarthyguy (#61)

Who else?

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   14:21:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: Destro (#62) (Edited)

Would you suggest Britain carried out Pearl Harbor?

The New Pearl Harbor Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11 Updated Edition with a New Afterword by David Ray Griffin

The raid on Pearl Harbor took the U.S. Pacific Fleet by surprise, but back in Washington, the Roosevelt administration was fully aware of the coming onslaught.

Don't forget that before America entered WWI, there was discussion about which side we should support.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   14:24:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: robin (#63) (Edited)

You want to think of America as an impotent giant being manipulated by the wily clever Israelis, be my guest.

It is a psychologically beneficial scapegoat, a red herring that absolves America and her citizens of all responsibility for policies implemented by America, a useful pinata.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   14:27:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: swarthyguy (#65) (Edited)

It is psychologically beneficial scapegoat, a red herring that absolves America and her citizens of all responsibility for policies implemented by America.

Americans are the ones that are tired of having Israel raid our pockets each and every year.

If they want war in the ME, then so be it, just leave Americans out.

I can undersrtand how America haters would not agree.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-21   14:30:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#67. To: Cynicom (#66)

HAHAHA! So, now I'm an America hater because I don't buy that Israel rules America.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   14:34:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#68. To: swarthyguy (#65) (Edited)

You want to think of America as an impotent giant being manipulated by the wily clever Israelis, be my guest.

It is a psychologically beneficial scapegoat, a red herring that absolves America and her citizens of all responsibility for policies implemented by America, a useful pinata.

Come on - you know Larry Silverstien - an old Jew New York landlord went to Mossad commando school like all Jews and was personally leading sabotage brigades on 9/11 - though he is not all that clever and let the fact slip while being interviewed for television for PBS.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   14:34:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#69. To: swarthyguy (#65)

You want to think of America as an impotent giant being manipulated by the wily clever Israelis, be my guest.

I see it as a very unhealthy symbiotic relationship betwixt Zionists (or ZioNazis) and the fascist NeoCommies; among whom are purely opportunistic thugs like Cheney who have eyes/heart/mind only for their private and rapidly (I just mistyped this "rabidly", that may be more correct) growing offshore bank accounts.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   14:35:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#70. To: Destro (#68)

old and arrogant, bound to have a "senior moment" or two

But his lawyer managed to sue for TWO terrorist attacks, Lucky Larry walked away with billions.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   14:37:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#71. To: swarthyguy (#67)

HAHAHA! So, now I'm an America hater because I don't buy that Israel rules America.

Read carefully. You included yourself in that group, not me.

Guilty conscience or poor comprehension?

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-21   14:38:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#72. To: robin (#70)

old and arrogant, bound to have a "senior moment" or two

But not on that night, eh?

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   14:38:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#73. To: Destro (#72) (Edited)

Post deleted by dummy.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-21   14:42:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#74. To: Cynicom (#71)

Oh, please, such silly semantic games.

The implication is clearly there.

Guilty conscience AND poor comprehension? Izzat better for you. My, you are so clever. Sure you're not Jewish, a little hanky panky in the family past?

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   14:42:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (75 - 104) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]