9/11: PNAC Motive and Opportunity as evidence of an inside job

Status
Not open for further replies.

lee h oswald

Banned
Banned
Plausibly deniable lies, unfortunately. I'd love to see Cheney et al in court, but I don't think it's very likely.

And it's not likely because...? These people have the power; and the judiciary in their pocket; and own the media (or friends do); and the law enforcement agencies - of which there are quite a lot in your country - puts the Nazi and The NKVD to shame.....? Something like that?
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
You want to read some apologia...

check this bad boy out...its pretty ridiculous :

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraq-042005.pdf

umm...not so much.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
And it's not likely because...? These people have the power; and the judiciary in their pocket; and own the media (or friends do); and the law enforcement agencies - of which there are quite a lot in your country - puts the Nazi and The NKVD to shame.....? Something like that?

Corruption probably plays a part, and not wanting to rock the boat - but largely it's more like why Mafia bosses don't get arrested, and why energy investment scams don't get prosecuted. You can't get arrested for something someone else did if there's no direct evidence linking you, and you can't get arrested simply for making a "mistake".
 

Grieves

Senior Member
If someone is not to be trusted, and even if they benefited from some nefarious act, then it does not automatically mean that they are behind that act.
Agreed. But it does warrant a level of scrutiny and investigation. When those are lacking, suspicion is inevitable. When those appear to be not just lacking, but actively suppressed and opposed, what is one supposed to think? Apparently not much. The media, the authorities, all were loudly espousing this idea it was Osama Bin Laden and his nefarious band of cave-dwellers solely responsible for the attack as though it were undeniable fact only a couple of days after the attack, long before the rubble had even cooled. Money-trails weren't investigated, investigations of 'insider-trading' were called off, and the Administration took very strange precautions in evading the answering of questions on the record. There's a great deal of highly suspicious behaviors and choices surrounding 9/11, both prior too and in the wake of the event.

Just because these highly suspicious actions don't mean those who perpetrated them were 'automatically responsible' for 9/11, don't they at least warrant some consideration? Are you able to concede that investigations surrounding the potential complicity if not direct participation of Americans in the attacks failed to take place to the degree which they should have?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Agreed. But it does warrant a level of scrutiny and investigation. When those are lacking, suspicion is inevitable. When those appear to be not just lacking, but actively suppressed and opposed, what is one supposed to think? Apparently not much. The media, the authorities, all were loudly espousing this idea it was Osama Bin Laden and his nefarious band of cave-dwellers solely responsible for the attack as though it were undeniable fact only a couple of days after the attack, long before the rubble had even cooled. Money-trails weren't investigated, investigations of 'insider-trading' were called off, and the Administration took very strange precautions in evading the answering of questions on the record. There's a great deal of highly suspicious behaviors and choices surrounding 9/11, both prior too and in the wake of the event.

Just because these highly suspicious actions don't mean those who perpetrated them were 'automatically responsible' for 9/11, don't they at least warrant some consideration? Are you able to concede that investigations surrounding the potential complicity if not direct participation of Americans in the attacks failed to take place to the degree which they should have?

I think there was a huge, extensive, detailed investigation into who was responsible. Thousands of FBI agents were involved, and I feel very sure that they were all strongly motivated to discover who was responsible.

It was obvious very quickly who the hijackers were. Things followed fairly quickly from there:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_for_the_September_11_attacks

 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Do they have a catalogue??

They have a whole department:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor.../1406725/Al-Qaeda-may-hit-nuclear-target.html
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
No, it's a failure to understand, which is almost the same. People only change their own minds - others should refrain from trying to push views onto people in order to make them think 'like you do'.
I want you to want to change your own mind, then. Try to avoid being hypocritical by quoting people whose actions you don't follow, for instance.

Being lectured on rudeness by you? Good one!
It would be if you ever listened.

I love you really, brother
You lie.

you just can't understand, but it doesn't matter - that's the most important bit to remember.
That's what everyone says when they've spent a week in the cooler.
 

lee h oswald

Banned
Banned
They have a whole department:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor.../1406725/Al-Qaeda-may-hit-nuclear-target.html

Lol!!!!! You couldn't make it up - except someone did!
 

lee h oswald

Banned
Banned
Corruption probably plays a part, and not wanting to rock the boat - but largely it's more like why Mafia bosses don't get arrested, and why energy investment scams don't get prosecuted. You can't get arrested for something someone else did if there's no direct evidence linking you, and you can't get arrested simply for making a "mistake".

Surely 'design', not just plain old corruption?
 

lee h oswald

Banned
Banned
I think there was a huge, extensive, detailed investigation into who was responsible. Thousands of FBI agents were involved, and I feel very sure that they were all strongly motivated to discover who was responsible.

It was obvious very quickly who the hijackers were. Things followed fairly quickly from there:

The FBI never wanted OBL for 911. So how come there were Bin Laden 'Wanted' posters put up in New York within hours of the attacks? - presumably an act by emerging US citizen Sherlocks who'd worked out the whole ghastly wheeze straight off the bat. Bravo!
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The FBI never wanted OBL for 911. So how come there were Bin Laden 'Wanted' posters put up in New York within hours of the attacks? - presumably an act by emerging US citizen Sherlocks who'd worked out the whole ghastly wheeze straight off the bat. Bravo!

A combination of the same reason people put flags everywhere, and the same reason that Sikhs we being beaten up in smalltown America. People were angry. There was a great sense of jingoism and mighty vengeance at the time. If someone heard the "arabs" were responsible, then that was all they needed. OBL was already on the FBI most wanted list.



That poster was published in The Post on Sept 18th, 2001.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/poster_boy_for_evil_gets_boot_2jfZvAl0uE16GLOD1TpeEP
 
Last edited:

Grieves

Senior Member
I mean investigation into the potential for complicity in the attacks within the united states, Mick. Indeed authorities were extremely rapid in their investigation where identifying the terrorists as AlQueda and Bin Laden as their ringleader was concerned. Given the nature of the attacks, the extremely suspicious activity on the stock market, and the evasive behavior of many individuals, one would think rooting out who might have been betting/working against America from within would be of near paramount importance.
 

lee h oswald

Banned
Banned


That poster was published in The Post on Sept 18th, 2001.

Another sample of press/establishment goals being inextricable....more falsehoods - it's the currency.

Here's a senior member of the US govt at the time being questioned by a real journalist - and in denial, at best.

Feith was a signatory to PNAC, wasn't he? Either he has the intellect of a lychee - or he's lying. Hard to tell. I've seen the interview.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

lee h oswald

Banned
Banned
I mean investigation into the potential for complicity in the attacks within the united states, Mick. Indeed authorities were extremely rapid in their investigation where identifying the terrorists as AlQueda and Bin Laden as their ringleader was concerned. Given the nature of the attacks, the extremely suspicious activity on the stock market, and the evasive behavior of many individuals, one would think rooting out who might have been betting/working against America from within would be of near paramount importance.

In any 'right' thinking world, G, ofcourse you're right. Unfortunately, the naked ape hasn't managed to scale those dizzying heights of common sense just yet.
 

lee h oswald

Banned
Banned
No, not a signatory, but some kind of bridge between them and the Israel lobby.



Handy snippet from http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Project_for_the_New_American_Century
Their Dr Strangelovesque dream came true!
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Another sample of press/establishment goals being inextricable....more falsehoods - it's the currency.

Here's a senior member of the US govt at the time being questioned by a real journalist - and in denial, at best.


Feith was a signatory to PNAC, wasn't he? Either he has the intellect of a lychee - or he's lying. Hard to tell. I've seen the interview.

32:25 and 40:10 into this. There's a bit more from him at 42:40 as well, where he tries to explain himself, and then his minder stops the interview.
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
That's a first then. Do you think you'll ever run out of excuses?

Its not an "excuse"- its simply points out the fact that the "wanted posters" were merely the typical of the over-the-top tactics of tabloids catering to populist themes to attract readers.

The FBI never wanted OBL for 911

..and he was wanted by the FBI for 9/11 - even if the Most Wanted List wasn't updated to include that event.

So, once again, you are wrong.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/27/AR2006082700687.html


 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
Don't forget about the REAL Iraqi crime... selling oil in Euro's. I mean... who would be dumb enough to do that... Oh yeah, Iran.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar_warfare
http://falkvinge.net/2012/10/06/the-us-invaded-iraq-because-it-wouldnt-have-survived-otherwise/
 

lee h oswald

Banned
Banned
Feith at 35:25. 40:00 (but worth watching for one minute before too, for context) and 43:20, when a colonel sitting in ends the interview when Feith is pressed on civilian casualties!

Also - 20:00 - 22 mins is Pilger talking to William Kristol, one of the founders of PNAC, which gets a mention -

A must watch!
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Bolton at least is not pretending to be anything other than an arrogant nationalist. He lets his evil just shine though and does not care who knows it.

I wish the conspiracy theorists would not waste time with the silly stuff, and actually focus on real issues like this.

It's almost as if conspiracy theories are spread to suck up some of the the naturally distrustful, and delegitimize them.

But that's just a conspiracy theory :)
 

xenon

Active Member
Don't forget about the REAL Iraqi crime... selling oil in Euro's. I mean... who would be dumb enough to do that... Oh yeah, Iran.

This was a "conspiracy theory" until it was declassified. Imagine that- Koppel babbled on for 444 days and never once mentioned the elephant in the room. Who says the Feds can't keep a secret?

1953 US/UK Iran Coup (4 min)

http://youtu.be/ZNCE6qFHi18

Oh- and here's another thing that isn't talked about so much in this country (think they talk about it in Iran?)-- but it isn't a "Conspiracy theory":

Iran Air Flight 655 was a civilian jet airliner shot down by U.S. missiles on 3 July 1988 as it flew over the Strait of Hormuz at the end of the Iran–Iraq War. The aircraft, an Airbus A300 B2-203 operated by Iran Air, was flying from Bandar Abbas, Iran to Dubai, United Arab Emirates. While flying in Iranian airspace over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf on its usual flight path, it was destroyed by the United States Navy guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes (CG-49). All 290 onboard including 66 children and 16 crew perished. The incident is ranked ninth among the deadliest disasters in aviation history. It was the highest death toll of any aviation incident in the Indian Ocean and the highest death toll of any incident involving an Airbus A300 anywhere in the world. The Vincennes had entered Iranian territorial waters after one of its helicopters drew warning fire from Iranian speedboats operating within Iranian territorial limits http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

If no one talks about it, did a Jet really crash? Did a Coup really happen?
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
It was ALL over the news when it happened. It was an tragic mistake by an over aggressive captain.---It isn't talked about now because it happened over 20 years ago.

I wonder why you choose only that part of the Wikipedia article? Not quite as devastating to the US if you post all the facts?

"The Flight 655 incident was a year after the 17 March 1987, Iraqi Air Force attack on the U.S. Navy guided-missile frigate USS Stark (FFG-31). U.S. naval forces had also exchanged gunfire with Iranian gunboats in the fall of 1987, and the U.S. Navy guided-missile frigate USS Samuel B. Roberts (FFG-58) had struck an Iranian sea mine in April 1988. Two months before the incident the US had engaged in Operation Praying Mantis resulting in the sinking of the Iranian frigate Sahand. Tensions were therefore high in the Strait of Hormuz at the time of the incident with Flight 655.

In 1996, the United States and Iran reached "an agreement in full and final settlement of all disputes, differences, claims, counterclaims" relating to the incident at the International Court of Justice.[5] As part of the settlement, the United States agreed to pay US$61.8 million, an average of $213,103.45 per passenger, in compensation to the families of the Iranian victims. However, the United States has never admitted responsibility, nor apologized to Iran"



Why don't folks talk about this one?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_Cathay_Pacific_Douglas_DC-4_shootdown

I had cousins that died on that one.
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
Why don't folks talk about this one?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_Cathay_Pacific_Douglas_DC-4_shootdown
I had cousins that died on that one.
Here's some historical context, thanks to WIKI.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airliner_shootdown_incidents
Using deadly weapons to shoot down passenger aircraft is like stamping on a puppy. "Fire and forget"?



IMO the captain was wrongly decorated for his part which was valorously carried out, but in a situation of his own making. However the system he was in was fatally flawed. Those mostly responsible (ship's system and battle orders) apparently evaded any recrimination.

I hope and expect that this event had beneficial repercussions, for we are all responsible in the end.
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
Corruption probably plays a part, and not wanting to rock the boat - but largely it's more like why Mafia bosses don't get arrested, and why energy investment scams don't get prosecuted. You can't get arrested for something someone else did if there's no direct evidence linking you, and you can't get arrested simply for making a "mistake".

I think it is exactly the same as why Mafia bosses don't get arrested. But obviously the Mafia bosses are the very ones who should be arrested.

If someone hires an assassin they are as guilty as the assassin. War by proxy is as bad as direct war. Installing puppet governments to oppress the people is no different to U.S forces doing it.

The American people as well as people in Europe and Commonwealth are routinely lied to in order to demonise the 'enemy' and justify the atrocities carried out in our name.
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
The American people as well as people in Europe and Commonwealth are routinely lied to in order to demonise the 'enemy' and justify the atrocities carried out in our name.
That's because they are human, and this state of affairs is part of the human condition.

People everywhere are routinely lied to. It happens, or has happened in Germany, Russia, Italy, Japan, China... in fact could you tell me where it hasn't happened? Perhaps Switzerland or Sweden?

You are quixotically railing against your surroundings, aren't you? Can you cure the human condition?

Correctly observing this, of course, offers no insight to the thread. But your slanted one-sided view does worse.
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
That's because they are human, and this state of affairs is part of the human condition.

People everywhere are routinely lied to. It happens, or has happened in Germany, Russia, Italy, Japan, China... in fact could you tell me where it hasn't happened? Perhaps Switzerland or Sweden?

You are quixotically railing against your surroundings, aren't you? Can you cure the human condition?

Correctly observing this, of course, offers no insight to the thread. But your slanted one-sided view does worse.

I wouldn't significantly disagree with what you say here... but 'we' are supposed to be the good guys. Yes I am railing against the wrongs that our governments do and it is probably futile, so in that sense it is somewhat quixotic but the 'monsters' are real and not windmills. I don't like it and at least I can say that I think it wrong.
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
I wouldn't significantly disagree with what you say here... but 'we' are supposed to be the good guys. Yes I am railing against the wrongs that our governments do and it is probably futile, so in that sense it is somewhat quixotic but the 'monsters' are real and not windmills. I don't like it and at least I can say that I think it wrong.
Well, I agree with you. But it doesn't get us anywhere.
 
U

Unbiased

Guest
Those who refuse to question the gaping holes in the official 9/11 story, whether the overall story be true or not, and the obvious inconsistencies in Larry Silversteins revelations, whether he is trying to state the truth or not, do not deserve the liberty that they do not fight for. Also those who do not seek the truth, be it different from the official narrative or not, are part of the problem, as opposed to part of the solution, and at the same time are possibly doing the many victims of 9/11 a disservice by possibly allowing the deaths of these people to be in vain.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top