Let's see NO WAY, would the United States government be involved in with letting 9/11 happen. If there was a real investigation that should have been demanded by the United States government after 9/11 had occurred. If we had legitimate investigation the information Condi Rice omitted about the July 10, 2001 meeting concerning Al-Cia-Da that is a serous crime and only implicates the United States government as will full co-conspirators by failure of omission. (AKA FRAUD)
Yet failing to stop 9/11 is a FREE pass for this United States government to implement a predetermined plan to where we are at now.
I think you fellows should just keep whistling threw the facts of the milieu of 9/11.
Let's connect the dots with the facts that the government omitted.
The ape boy got the infamous PDB written notice on August 6, 2001 that bin laden determined to strike U.S. There is NO excuse by the United States Military to have such massive drills on 9/11/2001 when there was a pending or the possibility of a threat that existed. This decision to hold all the military exercises on 9/11 is surly an indictment of the leadership with in the United States Government.
Of course I know that the drills were just a cover for the people behind the attacks.
Now who received the written notice bin laden determined to attack the United States on August 6, 2001 and who all knew that these massive military drills were going to occur on 9/11? and who knew about both of these pieces of information? Once you have narrowed that group down with both pieces of information of that group who had the authority to stop or postpone the Military drills on 9/11? Now you have a very small group of people. From that group find out how many in that group were original signing members of The Project for a New American Century? (PNAC). At that point you have isolated the individual or individuals that had a plan in place for an incedent like 9/11 years prior to 9/11/2001 (Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney, Eliot A. Cohen, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Aaron Friedberg, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, [BI. Lewis Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Dan Quayle, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Donald Rumsfeld, Vin Weber, George Weigel, Paul Wolfowitz) that had enough information to be involved from the inside. Jeb Bush the ape boys brother and in charge of the State the Ape boy was in when the crime went down. Of course Ape boy too. Bin ladens family in florida with daddy bush watching USA-MA-de bin laden's handy work on the American people the morning of 9/11.
word game what can you make out of this name Zalmay Khalilzad da
Last edited by Jesse Hemingway; 10-02-2006 at 12:10 PM.
so lets just be clear your saying that Bush and company murdered those 3000+ people ????
if you want I can move this thread to the
speak your mind forum
so more people see it
I like this article because we were sold the Iraqi war on less facts, or about the same amount of lies, as the governments verison on 9/11 our government does not have the creditability to be trusted on anything they say.
Originally Posted by Tommy
Ah, Those Conspiracy Theories
by John Young
The nation’s foremost 9/11 conspiracy theorist was on “Meet the Press” Sunday. And we all thought conspiracy theorists got no face time in mainstream media.
Well, it helps when you are vice president of the United States.
That would be Dick Cheney. Next possibly to Fox News, he’s the chief agent behind the belief held by so many, including many in our fighting forces, that we attacked Iraq because it had something to do with 9/11.
Months after President Bush said that it wasn’t so, a Senate Intelligence Committee report said it again last week. Saddam Hussein not only detested al-Qaida but apparently tried to capture Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Pressed about this by NBC’s Tim Russert, Cheney said he hadn’t read the report. That’s amazing. Then again, it’s not.
When I mentioned 9/11 conspiracy theorists, you thought first about people who believe that the U.S. government was behind 9/11 or did nothing to prevent it.
These individuals are dismissed as kooks and crazies. But those who send young men and women off to war based on politically calculated leaps of reasoning get treated with deference and motorcades.
Time magazine had a story last week titled “Why the 9/11 conspiracies won’t go away.”
It wasn’t talking about Bush-Cheney’s explanations for going to war. It was talking about those who believe our government might have brought down the Twin Towers.
Time didn’t really say why those theories won’t go away. But a set of polls helped.
Stunningly, a Scripps-Howard Poll recently found that 36 percent of Americans —yes, more than one in three — don’t believe the established accounts of what happened on 9/11.
What else don’t they believe?
For one, a Time poll found that 54 percent believe the U.S. role in Iraq is “hurting, not helping” the “war on terrorism.” Implied: At least that many Americans don’t equate Iraq and the war on terrorism at all.
Fifty-three percent don’t believe Saddam had any connection to 9/11. This is in sobering contrast to a Zogby Poll that found as many as 85 percent of U.S. troops in Iraq in February said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9/11 attacks.”
Seventy-seven percent of those troops said they believe a major reason for the war was “to stop Saddam from protecting al-Qaida in Iraq.”
Like our vice president, they haven’t read the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee report, either.
All said, it should surprise no one to see the level-orange polling numbers showing distrust in our government.
Sunday, Cheney told Russert that the fact that no Americans have been killed on the homeland since 9/11 should “give some credence to the notion that maybe somebody did something right.”
That might be so, relative to the homeland. But many Americans would point out that the invasion of Iraq has resulted in almost as many American deaths as happened on Sept. 11, 2001, and made the Middle East far less stable than before.
This puts a gruesome twist on the throw-away line that “we’re fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them here.” What’s happened is that young Americans have died there to justify old men’s conspiracy theories.
Clinton will have kept the USA safer longer then bush I am no fan of clinton.
It is a fact that on clinton's watch he got hit a little over 30 days in office bush was nearly nine months so there is noway the republicans can use that excuse it is not a logicial answer.
Last edited by Jesse Hemingway; 09-15-2006 at 06:37 PM.
Some Americans would ask why would OBL want to attack us after we gave into his demands and removed our troops from Saudi Arabia?
Originally Posted by Jesse Hemingway
CIA Learned in '02 That Bin Laden Had No Iraq Ties, Report Says
Originally Posted by SirMoby
Washington Post/Walter Pincus | September 16 2006
The CIA learned in late September 2002 from a high-level member of Saddam Hussein's inner circle that Iraq had no past or present contact with Osama bin Laden and that the Iraqi leader considered bin Laden an enemy of the Baghdad regime, according to a recent Senate Intelligence Committee report.
Although President Bush and other senior administration officials were at that time regularly linking Hussein to al-Qaeda, the CIA's highly sensitive intelligence supporting the contrary view was apparently not passed on to the White House or senior Bush policymakers.
Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) and two GOP colleagues on the committee disclosed this information for the first time in the panel's report on Iraq released last week. They wrote in the "additional views" section of the report that the Cabinet-level Iraqi official "said that Iraq has no past, current, or anticipated future contact with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda" and that the official "added that bin Laden was in fact a longtime enemy of Iraq."
On Sept. 25, 2002, just days after the CIA received the source's information, President Bush told reporters: "Al-Qaeda hides. Saddam doesn't, but the danger is, is that they work in concert. The danger is, is that al-Qaeda becomes an extension of Saddam's madness and his hatred and his capacity to extend weapons of mass destruction around the world. . . . [Y]ou can't distinguish between al-Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror."
Rest of the story:
As my little say on the matter, I would have to say YES.
Originally Posted by Tommy
It's not as if crooks and liars and murderers were an uncommon thing in national governments of nations. ANY NATION.
I can back what I say with more quotes, sources, links, math, videos, etc....
9/11 was a cover-up for a secret coup behind the scenes.
and that's according to Russian military inteligence and the intelligence agencies of several nations.
The WTC buildings were brought down by controlled demolitions, and that is verifiable and provable. Yes, there were planes, but they were only cover for the explosions and to provide a "believable cause".
If this seems fantastic to you, then you are now in the minority internationally.
Last edited by Lovelynice; 09-18-2006 at 07:33 AM.
911: The German Intelligence Report
On Monday August 6, 2001, at 17:50, [German] Ambassador Ischinger personally notified the President of the United States that information developed by the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz [German domestic secret service] as well as the BND [Bundesnachrichtendienst, German foreign secret service] indicated clearly that an attack by a radical Arab group partially based in Germany was to occur on September 10-11, 2001. The President was at that time in residence at his farm in Texas. Our [German] Ambassador was acting in direct response to instructions from Foreign Minister Fischer.
The rest of the story: