Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Facts Speak For Themselves

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 10:15 PM
Original message
The Facts Speak For Themselves
Edited on Mon Nov-10-08 10:30 PM by seemslikeadream
http://www.911blogger.com/node/17949

Permission to reprint granted


Jon Gold
9/25/2008

Before I begin, I would like to say that theorizing about what happened on 9/11, when you're not being given answers to your questions about that day by the people who SHOULD be able to do so, is PERFECTLY normal. As is suspecting that the reason these answers aren't being given is "sinister" in nature. As Ray McGovern said, "for people to dismiss these questioners as "conspiratorial advocates", or "conspiratorial theorists"... that's completely out of line because the... The questions remain because the President who should be able to answer them, WILL NOT." When you think about everything this Administration has done in almost 8 years, the idea that they might not be giving us the answers we seek because of something "sinister" is not crazy. In fact, it's the most logical conclusion one can come to at this point. After seven plus years of obfuscation, spin, lies, and cover-ups regarding the 9/11 attacks, it is unavoidable to think that criminal complicity is the reason why.

That being said, we have not proven it beyond the shadow of doubt. We do not have documentation that shows they planned it. We do not have a signed confession from someone. We have pieces of the puzzle, and to most of us that have been doing this a long time, those pieces point to more than just Osama Bin Laden, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and 19 hijackers. If we could somehow download all of our knowledge to every person on the planet, this fight would be over tomorrow. However, we can't do that. I wish we could. I wish the media would DO THEIR JOB. But, they're not. Therefore, we have to be smart with how we approach people. This is America, and in America, you are innocent until proven guilty.

As I have often said, we don't need to come up with a narrative (theory) because our facts speak for themselves. I am going to do my very best to prove my point. A lot of these facts are from mainstream news outlets. Yes, they do report the news, but they DO NOT put the pieces together, they DO NOT ask the tough questions over and over again until they get an answer, they DO NOT give these facts the atte ntion they should, reminiscent of the attention that Britney Spears, Scott Peterson, The Aruba Murders, and The Swift Boat Veterans got, and they DO NOT portray us in any other light except as "Conspiracy Theorists."

Fact #1
The Bush Administration was predominantly made up of members of an organization called "The Project For A New American Century." This group produced a document entitled, "Rebuilding America's Defenses" that said the "process of transformation" they wanted our military to undertake would take an excessively long time, unless there was a "catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor." That document was written in September 2000. This document even cited that "advanced forms of biological warfare that can "target" specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool." A lot of the same people were part of a group that wrote a report entitled, "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" that advocated an aggressive Israeli policy in the Middle East.

Fact #2
The Bush Administration came into office wanting to go to war with Iraq. This is so heavily documented that Veteran White House reporter Helen Thomas asked the President about it. He denied it of course, and used 9/11 as the justification for what he and his administration have done.

Fact #3
Dick Cheney was the CEO for a company called Halliburton. During his tenure there, he gave a speech at the Institute of Petroleum that said, "while many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies, even though companies are anxious for greater access there, progress continues to be slow." On 10/11/2005, it was reported that the shares that Dick Cheney claimed he no longer had with Halliburton, rose 3281% in one year.

Fact #4
In early 2001, Dick Cheney was put in charge of The National Energy Policy Development Group, or "Energy Task Force" for short. He prepared for this during the transition between the Clinton and Bush administrations. The task force met with what appears to be every oil executive in existence, even though they denied it before Congress. It was eventually discovered that one of the topics of discussion during these task force meetings was Iraq's oil fields. Five months before 9/11. The Vice President's office fought long and hard to make sure the information from those meetings never saw the light of day. They even took the fight to the Supreme Court. Many were suspicious of the hunting trip that Antonin Scalia, and Dick Cheney went on prior to the Supreme Court hearing the case. Scalia was proud of the fact that he didn't recuse himself from the hearings. Ultimately, they sent the fight to an appeals court, and it was decided that Cheney's Task Force documents may remain secret.

Fact #5
In the months leading up to 9/11, there was an unprecedented amount of warnings that "Al-Qaeda" was about to conduct an attack. So many that CIA Director George Tenet was said to be running around with his "hair on fire," and so many that a lot were not taken seriously "because of "warning fatigue" arising from too many terror warnings." One of those warnings came in the form of a Presidential Daily Briefing entitled, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." that was initially hidden by the White House. Another came on July 10th, 2001 that spoke of an "imminent threat," that was completely omitted from the 9/11 Report, and then lied about after it became public knowledge. Condi even had the audacity to ask "does anybody really believe that somebody would have walked into my office and said, oh, by the way, there's a chance of a major attack against the United States and I would have said, well, I'm really not interested in that information?" Cheney said that his "Democratic friends in Congress... need to be very cautious not to seek political advantage by making incendiary suggestions, as were made by some today, that the White House had advance information that would have prevented the tragic attacks of 9/11."

Fact #6
There are indications that military action in Afghanistan was planned before 9/11. On 3/7/2001, the New York Times reports that Deputy National Security Advisor Steve Hadley chairs an informal meeting to discuss Al-Qaeda. The approach is "two-pronged and included a crisis warning effort to deal with immediate threats and longer-range planning by senior officials to put into place a comprehensive strategy to eradicate al-Qaeda." On 3/15/2001, Jane's Intelligence Review reports that the U.S. is working with India, Iran, and Russia "in a concerted front against Afghanistan’s Taliban regime." General William Kernan, commander in chief of the Joint Forces Command said that "the details of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan which fought the Taliban and al-Qaeda after the September 11 attacks, were largely taken from a scenario examined by Central Command in May 2001." On 6/26/2001, it is reported that "India and Iran will ‘facilitate’ US and Russian plans for ‘limited military action’ against the Taliban if the contemplated tough new economic sanctions don’t bend Afghanistan’s fundamentalist regime." In late Summer 2001, the Guardian will report that "reliable western military sources say a US contingency plan exist on paper by the end of the summer to attack Afghanistan from the north." In early August, a senior Taliban official in the defense ministry will tell journalist Hamid Mir that "e believe Americans are going to invade Afghanistan and they will do this before October 15, 2001, and justification for this would be either one of two options: Taliban got control of Afghanistan or a big major attack against American interests either inside America or elsewhere in the world." The President had plans for the invasion of Afghanistan on his desk on 9/9/2001. They "outlined essentially the same war plan that the White House, the CIA and the Pentagon put into action after the Sept. 11 attacks. The administration most likely was able to respond so quickly to the attacks because it simply had to pull the plans “off the shelf." On 7/21/2001, three former American officials, Tom Simons, Karl Inderfurth, and Lee Coldren met with Pakistani and Russian intelligence officers in a Berlin hotel. At the meeting, Coldren passes on a message from Bush officials. He later says, "I think there was some discussion of the fact that the United States was so disgusted with the Taliban that they might be considering some military action." Former Pakistani Foreign Secretary Niaz Naik later says he is allegedly told by senior American officials at the meeting that military action to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan is planned to "take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest."

Fact #7
On the day of 9/11, a number of key personnel were "scattered" across the country, and the world. With few exceptions, including Dick Cheney. The President of the United States, at a time when America was "under attack" from kamikaze hijackers in commercial airliners, in a highly publicized location, 5 miles away from an international airport, in a classroom full of children, was not whisked away by the Secret Service. His conduct on the morning of 9/11 changed on the first anniversary.

Fact #8
On the morning of 9/11, there were several military exercises taking place, some of which allegedly mirrored the events taking place that day. A lot of different people didn't know whether or not the hijackings were "real-world or exercise." The 9/11 Report only mentioned one of these wargames, and in a footnote in the back of the book.

Fact #9
From the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC), Dick Cheney allegedly monitored Flight 77 from 50 miles outside of Washington D.C. This, according to Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta. According to Mineta, "during the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, "The plane is 50 miles out." "The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to "the plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the Vice President, "Do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" The 9/11 Report states that Cheney didn't arrive in the PEOC until 9:58. No video conferences from within the PEOC have been made available. No personnel records for who was in the PEOC have been made available. The "young man" Norman Mineta mentioned has never been named, and was never brought before the 9/11 Commission to testify.

Fact #10
On the day of 9/11, Donald Rumsfeld started planning the Iraq War. DoD Staffer Stephen Cambone took down several notes with regards to what Rumsfeld was saying. "Best info fast... judge whether good enough hit S.H. at same time - not only UBL " <...> "Go massive... Sweep it all up. Things related and not." <...> "Hard to get a good case."

Fact #11
Between 9:30pm and 10:00pm on 9/11/2001, Bush says, "this is a great opportunity. We have to think of this as an opportunity." He does so again during his State Of The Union speech on 1/29/2002. Karl Rove said, "sometimes history sends you things and 9/11 came our way."

Fact #12
In the days and months following the attacks, several people within the administration and elsewhere tried to tie Iraq to 9/11. General Wesley Clark said, "there were many people, inside and outside the government, who tried to link Saddam Hussein to Sept. 11." According to George Tenet, shortly after 9/11, Richard Perle said, "Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday, they bear responsibility." Former CIA Director James Woolsey said, "ntelligence and law enforcement officials investigating the case would do well to at least consider another possibility: that the attacks-whether perpetrated by bin Laden and his associates or by others-were sponsored, supported, and perhaps even ordered by Saddam Hussein," he writes. "As yet, there is no evidence of explicit state sponsorship of the September 11 attacks. But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Dick Cheney claimed the bogus Atta-Iraqi spy meeting had been, "pretty well confirmed, that he did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack." Since that time, they have done so again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and even Hillary did it.

Fact #13
The heads of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11, Sen. Porter Goss, and Sen. Bob Graham, along with Sen. John Kyl, met with an alleged financier of the attacks on the day of 9/11.

Fact #14
The Joint Congressional Inquiry, which both Bush and Cheney tried to "limit the scope" of, released a report with 28 redacted pages. Apparently, those 28 pages talk about "possible Saudi Arabian financial links." In 2004, Sen. Bob Graham says that the Bush White House is covering up Saudi Arabia's possible connection to the two hijackers that lived in San Diego. He said the information about them, "present a compelling case that there was Saudi assistance." He also says that the Bush Administration directed the FBI to "to restrain and obfuscate" any investigations into the connection. The landlord of the two hijackers was Abdussatar Shaikh, an FBI asset handled by agent Steven Butler. The FBI originally tried to prevent Butler from testifying before the Congressional Inquiry, but when he finally did, he said that he may have been able to uncover the 9/11 plot if the CIA shared their information on the two hijackers. He said, "it would have made a huge difference." <...> "We would have immediately opened... investigations. We would have given them the full court press. We would... have done everything-physical surveillance, technical surveillance, and other assets."

Fact #15
The Bush Administration was the families' "biggest adversary" when it came to the creation of a so-called Independent 9/11 Commission. The families had to fight "tooth and nail," and lobby to get an investigation because the Bush Administration clearly did not want one. Dick Cheney and George Bush refused to testify under oath before select individuals of the 9/11 Commission even though the families wanted them to. They testified together, not in public, and no recordings were allowed. The families requested the transcripts of their meeting, but were denied. They made it difficult for the commission to get funding. They tried to make Henry Kissinger the Chairman of the commission, but he resigned after the families started asking too many questions. Alberto Gonzales "stonewalled" the 9/11 Commission's access to the White House. They appointed Thomas Kean as Chairman, someone "who will be easily controlled by the administration," and Lee Hamilton, a long time friend of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld to be the co-chair. Hamilton participated in two inquiries that resulted in cover-ups. The Iran/Contra Affair inquiry, and the October Surprise inquiry.

Fact #16
Philip Zelikow was the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission. Paul Sperry explained, "though he has no vote, (Zelikow) arguably has more sway than any member, including the chairman. Zelikow picks the areas of investigation, the briefing materials, the topics for hearings, the witnesses, and the lines of questioning for witnesses... In effect, he sets the agenda and runs the investigation." In 1995, Zelikow wrote a book with Condoleezza Rice called, "Germany Unified and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft." While at Harvard, "he worked with Ernest May and Richard Neustadt on the use, and misuse, of history in policymaking. They observed, as Zelikow noted in his own words, that "contemporary" history is "defined functionally by those critical people and events that go into forming the public's presumptions about its immediate past. The idea of 'public presumption'," he explained, "is akin to William McNeill's notion of 'public myth' but without the negative implication sometimes invoked by the word 'myth.' Such presumptions are beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community." Between 1997 and 1998, Zelikow helped to write a report that said "Long part of the Hollywood and Tom Clancy repertory of nightmarish scenarios, catastrophic terrorism has moved from far-fetched horror to a contingency that could happen next month. Although the United States still takes conventional terrorism seriously... it is not yet prepared for the new threat of catastrophic terrorism." They predict the consequences of such an event: "An act of catastrophic terrorism that killed thousands or tens of thousands of people and/or disrupted the necessities of life for hundreds of thousands, or even millions, would be a watershed event in America's history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented for peacetime and undermine Americans' fundamental sense of security within their own borders in a manner akin to the 1949 Soviet atomic bomb test, or perhaps even worse. Constitutional liberties would be challenged as the United States sought to protect itself from further attacks by pressing against allowable limits in surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects, and the use of deadly force. More violence would follow, either as other terrorists seek to imitate this great 'success' or as the United States strikes out at those considered responsible. Like Pearl Harbor, such an event would divide our past and future into a 'before' and 'after.'" In 1997, Zelikow and Ernest May wrote a report about John F. Kennedy that is "riddled" with errors. Zelikow wrote the pre-emptive war strategy for the Bush Administration. Zelikow said that the "real threat" with regards to Iraq's WMD was to Israel. Zelikow tried to prevent the 9/11 Commission staffers from talking to the Commissioners. Zelikow tried to insert a false connection between Iraq and 9/11 into the 9/11 Report, but the families, and the staffers fought against it. It has been alleged that he may have taken direction from Karl Rove who, according to Philip Shenon, was concerned about the 9/11 Commission because "in the wrong hands... could cost President Bush a second term." The allegation regarding Rove drove the September Eleventh Advocates (formerly known as "The Jersey Girls") to call for an entirely new investigation. Only Rawstory.com covered that story. In early 2003, Philip Zelikow and Ernest May wrote a complete outline of the final 9/11 Report. Zelikow, Kean, and Hamilton decided to keep this outline a secret from the commission staffers. When "it was later disclosed that Zelikow had prepared a detailed outline of the commission's final report at the very start of the investigation, many of the staff's investigators were alarmed." He rewrote the 9/11 Report to be more favorable of Condoleezza Rice. During the time of the 9/11 Commission, the families called for the resignation of Philip Zelikow, but were denied that request. After the 9/11 Commission was finished, Philip Zelikow was given a job with Condoleezza Rice at the State Department.

Fact #17
NORAD gave three different timelines with regards to their response on the day of 9/11. Sen. Mark Dayton slammed the 9/11 Commissioners for what the 9/11 Report said about NORAD. On 8/2/2006, the Washington Post reported that "the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public" and that "the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation." Later, it was reported that NORAD's mistakes were due to "inadequate forensic capabilities" and "poor record-keeping." William P. Goehring, a spokesman for the Inspector General's office, said that "the question of whether military commanders intentionally withheld the truth from the commission would be addressed in a separate report that is still in preparation." To my knowledge, that report has not been released as of this date. On 9/17/2001, NORAD gives a briefing to the White House. 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey will say "it feels like something happened in that briefing that produced almost a necessity to deliver a story that's different than what actually happened on that day."

Fact #18
Different pieces of evidence have been destroyed or is being withheld from the public. Kevin Delaney, the quality assurance manager for the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center, destroyed a tape recorded by six Air Traffic Controllers on the morning of 9/11 "by breaking up the plastic housing and cutting the tape into small fragments, depositing the remnants in trash cans throughout the Center. 2.5 terabytes of information regarding Able Danger was destroyed in April/May 2000. The CIA destroyed interrogation tapes. In 2003, a book was written by Gail Swanson entitled, "Behind-the-Scenes: Ground Zero" that is a "collection of personal accounts" from people that were at Ground Zero on that day. In that book, Firefighter Nicholas DeMasi says "at one point I was assigned to take Federal Agents around the site to search for the black boxes from the planes. We were getting ready to go out. My ATV was parked at the top of the stairs at the Brooks Brothers entrance area. We loaded up about a million dollars worth of equipment and strapped it into the ATV. When we got into the ATV to take off, the agent accidentally pushed me forward. The ATV was already in reverse, and my foot went down on the gas pedal. We went down the stairs in reverse. Fortunately, everything was okay. There were a total of four black boxes. We found three." The 9/11 Commission says those black boxes were not found. Most of the steel from the WTC was removed, cut into smaller sections, and either melted at a recycling plant or shipped out of the U.S. Fire Engineering magazine wrote, "We are literally treating the steel removed from the site like garbage, not like crucial fire scene evidence."

Fact #19
Several Whistleblowers have come forward over the years with information pertinent to the 9/11 attacks. Most were ignored or censored by the 9/11 Commission. Some of these people are John M. Cole (Senior Counterintelligence Operations Manager-FBI), Bogdan Dzakovic (Former Red Team Leader-FAA), Sibel Edmonds (Language Specialist-FBI), Behrooz Sarshar (Language Specialist-FBI), Melvin A. Goodman (Former Senior Analyst/ Division Manager-CIA), Gilbert Graham (Retired Special Agent, Counterintelligence-FBI), Coleen Rowley (Retired Division Counsel- FBI), John Vincent (Retired Special Agent, Counterterrorism-FBI), Robert Wright (Veteran Special Agent, Counterterrorism-FB), Mark Burton (Senior Analyst- NSA), Mike German (Special Agent, Counterterrorism-FBI), Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, and Scott Philpott. 9/11 Family Member Patty Casazza said "Sibel came to, actually, the four widows, and asked us if she could get a hearing with the Commission because nobody of the Commission was responding to her requests to testify. And part of the problem with testifying, um... as someone who's working for one of the agencies, is that, they have to be careful with state secrets, what they reveal. And, in order to be a whistle-blower, and not be retaliated against, most whistle-blowers need to be subpoenaed, cause then their co-workers, and those who might retaliate against them, know that under penalty of, ya know, law, they could be... um... ya know, accused of being traitors and what not, and put in jail, or executed. So, most whistle-blowers were... did not come forward on the basis of what happened to Sibel Edmonds. Um, Sibel brought us many whistle-blowers, and I submitted them personally to Governor Kean, who was the Chairman of the Commission. And I said, "these people are not being subpoenaed. They will not come before the Commission voluntarily unless they are subpoenaed." And, he promised me... to my face that "every whistle-blower would be... indeed heard." And, most were not heard. Sibel was only heard because we dragged her in and surprised the Commission on one of the days we were meeting with them... that we had her with us. Um, we met other whistle-blowers on the side of the road in Maryland, ya know, to hear what they could tell us. None of them revealed state secrets to us by the way (laughs)... um, but, they had information... and basically, the Government knew... ya know, other than the exact moment... they knew the date, and the method of which the attacks were supposed to come. (pauses) And none of this made it to mainstream media. None of it made it into the Commission. And yet, again, all of your Representatives, on the day that the Commission book came out, were on their pulpits saying, "What a fabulous job this Commission has done. A real service to this nation." And it was anything but a service. It was a complete fabrication." Within the last year, Sibel Edmonds agreed to break the gag order that was placed on her, and tell her entire story to the media. The only paper to take the challenge was the Sunday Times. The media in this country did not give her the time of day with one exception that I know of, and it wasn't prominently displayed. Sibel's story mentions the same alleged financier of the 9/11 attacks that Sen. Porter Goss, Sen. Graham, and Sen. Kyl met with on the morning of 9/11.

Fact #20
Apparently, Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed, the head of the Pakistani ISI, someone who met with U.S. elected and appointed officials in the weeks before 9/11, on the day of 9/11, and in the days after 9/11, ordered possible MI6 Agent Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh to wire transfer $100,000 to Mohammad Atta. The 9/11 Families' submitted a question to the 9/11 Commission about this incident. Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI's Counterterrorism Division, John S. Pistole stated that their investigation "has traced the origin of the funding of 9/11 back to financial accounts in Pakistan, where high-ranking and well-known al-Qaeda operatives played a major role in moving the money forward, eventually into the hands of the hijackers located in the US." In January 2002, during a visit to India, FBI Director Robert Mueller was told about Saeed Sheikh's involvement in the 9/11 attacks by Indian Investigators. Apparently, "on the eve of the publication of its report, the 9/11 Commission was given a stunning document from Pakistan, claiming that Pakistani intelligence officers knew in advance of the 9/11 attacks."

Fact #21
On the morning of 9/11, shortly after the first impact, a homemaker by the name of Maria will get a phone call from her neighbor. "She grabbed her binoculars and watched the destruction unfolding in lower Manhattan. But as she watched the disaster, something else caught her eye." She notices a group of people sitting on top of a white van. She says, "they seemed to be taking a movie."She calls the police. At 3:31pm on 9/11, the FBI issues a BOLO (be on the lookout) that says, "White, 2000 Chevrolet van...with 'Urban Moving Systems' sign on back seen at Liberty State Park, Jersey City, NJ, at the time of first impact of jetliner into World Trade Center.... Three individuals with van were seen celebrating after initial impact and subsequent explosion. FBI Newark Field Office requests that, if the van is located, hold for prints and detain individuals." At 3:56pm on 9/11, these individuals are arrested. On 9/14/2001, the owner of Urban Moving Systems flees to Israel. Because of great pressure in late October 2001, the arrested men, allegedly Israeli spies, are released in November 2001. One of the men claims "our purpose was to document the event."

Fact #22
No one has been held accountable, and instead, people that don't deserve it, have been promoted.

Fact #23
On 9/11/2006, 9/11 Family members Donna Marsh O'Connor, Michele Little, and Christina Kminek, along with Kyle Hence (Executive Producer of 9/11: Press For Truth), and Paul Thompson (www.historycommons.org, author of "The Terror Timeline"), called for a new investigation (RealPlayer required) at the National Press Club in Washington D.C. I believe this is the only news outlet to cover it. Over the years, different family members like Bob McIlvaine, Lorie Van Auken, Daniel Wallace (RIP), Barry Zelman, Manny Badillo, and Patrick Welsh have spoken out for the truth. The September Eleventh Advocates have released letter after letter after letter after letter after letter after letter after letter after letter after letter after letter after letter trying to get some truth. The media has been silent.

Fact #24
The United States Government has not fully cooperated with international investigations into 9/11. With regards to Abdelghani Mzoudi, the United States "would not allow Mzoudi’s defense to cross-examine bin al-Shibh," and as a result he was acquitted. During an appeal, "Kay Nelm, Germany’s top federal prosecutor, again appeals to the US State Department to release interrogation records of bin al-Shibh to the court. However, the US still refuses to release the evidence, and a list of questions the court gives to the US for bin al-Shibh to answer are never answered." With regards to Mounir El-Motassadeq, his conviction having to do with the 9/11 attacks was overturned after finding that "German and US authorities withheld evidence." He was later convicted for his "Al-Qaeda" membership, but not for 9/11.

Fact #25
As I mentioned in the introduction, the Mainstream Media has not covered the questions concerning the 9/11 attacks as they should, and for the most part, with the exception of small town news, have attacked those that do. According to James Goodale, the founders of the United States "enacted the First Amendment to distinguish their new government from that of England, which had long censored the press and prosecuted persons who dared to criticize the British Crown." On 10/31/2005, Reporters Without Borders reported that the United States ranked 44th in the world for Freedom Of The Press "mainly because of the imprisonment of New York Times reporter Judith Miller and legal moves undermining the privacy of journalistic sources." At the recent RNC, several journalists, including Amy Goodman of DemocracyNow were arrested. Over the years, the Mainstream Media has essentially used George Bush's policy of never tolerating "outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11th - malicious lies that attempt to shift blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty." At first, and still, they have referred to anyone that questions the events of 9/11 as "Conspiracy Theorists." They have done so again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again. The Mainstream Media has also repeatedly focused on what is considered the "fringe" of the 9/11 Truth Movement, and has ignored the more credible researchers. Several celebrities have spoken out for 9/11 Truth. Each time one has done so, almost in unison, the Mainstream Media has attacked them. They have done so again, and again, and again, and again, and again. They have portrayed those who question the official account as "unpatriotic," and also as "terrorist sympathizers." As pointed out in Fact #23, the media has also ignored the 9/11 Family Members who question the official account, but they have also given a lot of attention to people like Ann Coulter that have attacked some of those family members again, and again, and again. The September Eleventh Advocates responded to Coulter's remarks. The media has heavily promoted movies like "Path To 9/11" which are factually incorrect, and ignored movies liked "9/11: Press For Truth," which calls into question the entire 9/11 Report, and is endorsed by the family members that fought for it. The MSM have also repeatedly said that if you question the official account of 9/11, you are dishonoring the family members.

Fact #26
The 9/11 Commission was mandated to give a “full and complete accounting” of the attacks of September 11, 2001 and recommendations as to how to prevent such attacks in the future." The 9/11 Commission had the power of subpoena, but rarely used it. Instead, they used what were called "document requests" which could be, and were ignored. As mentioned in Fact #19, several whistleblowers were brought forward, but were either censored or ignored by the 9/11 Commission. Early on, the 9/11 Commission didn't hold people under oath. At one point, an advertising campaign was started that asked for people to be held under oath. The following are some quotes from 9/11 Commissioners Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton from their book "Without Precedent." "The two sides decided to split the difference, allowing eighteen months for the inquiry—a period of time that proved insufficient" <....> "The White House also suggested some candidates for executive director for our staff. The importance of this position cannot be overstated" <...> "…we seriously only considered one candidate: Philip Zelikow…. Zelikow was a controversial choice. In the 1990s, as an academic, he had co-authored, with Condoleezza Rice, a book about German unification, and he later assisted Stephen Hadley in running the National Security Council transition for the incoming Bush administration in 2000-2001" <...> "After Philip Zelikow came on board as executive director, he began recruiting and interviewing candidates…. Zelikow was selected with little consultation with the rest of the committee, but several commissioners had concerns about the kind of inquiry he would lead" <...> "We soon encountered problems, both in obtaining information and with the laborious conditions placed on our access to some information" <...> "We decided against an aggressive use of subpoenas for several reasons…. Furthermore, we knew that many of the most important documents we sought were potentially the subject of an executive privilege claim—meaning that the president might not be legally compelled to share that material with another branch of government, even with a subpoena" <...> "We were supposed to be independent, not necessarily confrontational. We were investigating a national catastrophe, not a White House transgression; this was 9/11, not Watergate" <...> "Senior officials from the FAA and NORAD—Jane Garvey and Craig McKinley—made statements about the timeline of 9/11 that were later proven to be inaccurate" <...> "Many interviews were recorded, though we were not permitted to record those conducted with current officials from the Executive Office of the President" <...> "We were set up to fail." The 9/11 Family Steering Committee was made up of 12 family members, including the "Jersey Girls." They monitored the commission, they worked with the staffers of the commission, and they provided 100's of well researched questions for the commission to answer. According to 9/11 Commission Chair Thomas Kean, "They monitor us, they follow our progress, they've supplied us with some of the best questions we've asked. I doubt very much if we would be in existence without them." The 9/11 Commission only answered 30% of the families questions.

Fact #27
The level of fear that resulted from the attacks of 9/11 was nourished and maintained, and still is to this day. Reich Marshal Hermann Goering once said "of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." On 6/23/2007, Glenn Greenwald wrote about how insurgents in Iraq were being referred to as "Al-Qaeda" more frequently. He states, "what makes this practice all the more disturbing is how quickly and obediently the media has adopted the change in terms consciously issued by the Bush administration and their military officials responsible for presenting the Bush view of the war to the press." Fox News once suggested "Al-Qaeda" was responsible for starting California Wildfires. Keith Olbermann ran two stories that I know of regarding the political usage of "terror threats." The New York Times recently ran a massive story on how military analysts with "ties to military contractors" were being used by the Pentagon to "shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks." They "have echoed administration talking points, sometimes even when they suspected the information was false or inflated."

Fact #28
The 9/11 Report was, and is promoted as a triumph. The Washington Post reported that it is "a useful analysis of the changes that have taken place since, as well as the changes that have not taken place, " and calling the commission's unanimity and comprehensiveness "impressive." WaPo also reported that "the final report is a document of historic sweep and almost unprecedented detail, offering the sort of examination of a highly classified subject that customarily would not be possible for decades after the fact. From the findings of spy agencies to the tactics of fighter pilots, from the conversations of heads of state to the verbatim texts of secret presidential briefings, this is the government laid bare." The New York Times reported that it was "uncommonly lucid, even riveting," and is an "improbable literary triumph." Time Magazine said the report was "meticulous in its reconstruction of the attacks and unflinching in its conclusions about why the government failed to stop them." The 9/11 Commission's report was nominated by the National Book Foundation in 2004 for best in Non-fiction. Former Representative Katherine Harris referred to the 9/11 Report as "one of the most important publications of our age." Senator Hillary Clinton said the 9/11 Commission's report was "a great testimony to the their willingness to search hard for the truth, to get at the facts." Senator Charles Schumer said the 9/11 Commission did an "incredible job." In 2004, Bush's Presidential Campaign said "the Commission's report makes the case for the policies that U.S. President Bush has been pursuing in the War on Terror and eliminates any doubt that the best defense against the threat of global terror is a strong offense." Bush said, "I agree with their conclusion that the terrorists were able to exploit deep institutional failings in our nation's defenses that developed over more than a decade." A different kind of praise for the 9/11 Report has come in the form of requests for "9/11-Type Commissions" for other horrible events in America's history such as Katrina and the recent "financial crisis."

Fact #29
Osama Bin Laden has not been indicted for the 9/11 attacks. Some time before 9/26/2001, FBI spokesman Rex Tomb says, "there’s going to be a considerable amount of time before anyone associated with the attacks is actually charged." He continues, "To be charged with a crime, this means we have found evidence to confirm our suspicions, and a prosecutor has said we will pursue this case in court." On 9/23/2001, then Secretary of State Colin Powell is asked, "will you release publicly a white paper which links and his organization to this attack to put people at ease?" He responds by saying "we are hard at work bringing all the information together, intelligence information, law enforcement information. And I think in the near future we will be able to put out a paper, a document that will describe quite clearly the evidence that we have linking him to this attack." The following day, then White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer when asked about Powell's statement says "I think that there was just a misinterpretation of the exact words the secretary used on the Sunday shows.… I’m not aware of anybody who said white paper, and the secretary didn’t say anything about a white paper yesterday." On 10/4/2001, Tony Blair will present a paper that makes the case for Osama Bin Laden's involvement before Parliament. It says, "this document does not purport to provide a prosecutable case against Osama bin Laden in a court of law.” Nevertheless, it continues, “on the basis of all the information available is confident of its conclusions as expressed in this document." On 6/6/2006, Rex Tomb will say, "the reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11." This according to Ed Haas of the Muckraker Report. On 8/28/2006, the Washington Post will report about this story. They state "from this point of view, the lack of a Sept. 11 reference suggests that the connection to al-Qaeda is uncertain. Exhaustive government and independent investigations have concluded otherwise, of course, and bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders have proudly taken responsibility for the hijackings." They speak to Rex Tomb who says "There's no mystery here" <...> "They could add 9/11 on there, but they have not because they don't need to at this point. . . . There is a logic to it." According to David N. Kelley, a former U.S. attorney, "It might seem a little strange from the outside, but it makes sense from a legal point of view," said Kelley, now in private practice. "If I were in government, I'd be troubled if I were asked to put up a wanted picture where no formal charges had been filed, no matter who it was." Contrary to WaPo's claim that "bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders have proudly taken responsibility for the hijackings," Osama denied any involvement in the attacks on three separate ocassions. On 9/16/2001, he says, “I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons.” On 9/28/2001, he says, "I have already said that I am not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other human beings as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of battle.… The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; the people who are a part of the US system but are dissenting against it. Or those who are working for some other system; persons who want to make the present century as a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity so that their own civilization, nation, country, or ideology can survive. They may be anyone, from Russia to Israel and from India to Serbia. In the US itself, there are dozens of well-organized and well-equipped groups capable of causing large-scale destruction. Then you cannot forget the American Jews, who have been annoyed with President Bush ever since the Florida elections and who want to avenge him.… Then there are intelligence agencies in the US, which require billions of dollars worth of funds from Congress and the government every year.… They needed an enemy.… Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United Sates? That secret government must be asked who carried out the attacks." On 12/26/2001, Bin Laden releases a tape that says the U.S.'s invasion of Afghanistan is "a vicious campaign based on mere suspicion." On 9/10/2008, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino will be asked a question. "But Osama bin Laden is the one that — you keep talking about his lieutenants, and, yes, they are very important, but Osama bin Laden was the mastermind of 9/11 –" Her response is to say that "No, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the mastermind of 9/11, and he’s sitting in jail right now."

Fact #30
The authenticity of video and audio recordings that have been released over the years allegedly from Osama Bin Laden have been disputed. On 10/29/2007, MSNBC reported about a "running debate among video analysts about whether al-Qaida faked" a video that was released on 9/7/2007. The so called "confession video" has been disputed from three different points of view. The translation of the tape was disputed. Professor Gernot Rotter from the University of Hamburg says, "this tape is of such poor quality that many passages are unintelligible. And those that are intelligible have often been taken out of context, so that you can’t use that as evidence. The American translators who listened to the tape and transcribed it obviously added things that they wanted to hear in many places.” The date the video was made is disputed by analyst Maher Osseiran. Several commentators questioned whether the person depicted in the video is actually Osama. According to CNN, Bush was asked about the authenticity of the tape, but "scoffed" at the idea "that the videotape of Osama bin Laden discussing the September 11 terrorist attacks might not be authentic." He said, "It is preposterous for anybody to think that this tape is doctored" <...> "That's just a feeble excuse to provide weak support for an incredibly evil man."

Fact #31
The majority of the testimony from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged "mastermind" of the 9/11 attacks, something the 9/11 Report is heavily based on, was gotten through torture, and "third-hand - passed from the detainee, to the interrogator, to the person who writes up the interrogation report, and finally to staff in the form of reports, not even transcripts." Because of the latter, the 9/11 Commission decided to add a disclaimer to the chapters that are heavily based on detainee interrogations. The disclaimer says, "Chapters 5 and 7 rely heavily on information obtained from captured al-Qaeda members. A number of these ‘detainees’ have firsthand knowledge of the 9/11 plot. Assessing the truth of statements by these witnesses—sworn enemies of the United States—is challenging. Our access to them has been limited to the review of intelligence reports based on communications received from the locations where the actual interrogations take place. We submitted questions for use in the interrogations, but had no control over whether, when, or how questions of particular interest would be asked. Nor were we allowed to talk to the interrogators so that we could better judge the credibility of the detainees and clarify ambiguities in the reporting. We were told that our requests might disrupt the sensitive interrogation process. We have nonetheless decided to include information from captured 9/11 conspirators and al-Qaeda members in our report. We have evaluated their statements carefully and have attempted to corroborate them with documents and statements of others. In this report, we indicate where such statements provide the foundation for our narrative. We have been authorized to identify by name only ten detainees whose custody has been confirmed officially by the US government." The 9/11 Commission became unhappy because the government's investigators were "not asking the detainees the kinds of questions answered.” On 8/6/2007, the New Yorker reports that a former CIA official estimates that about "ninety percent of the information was unreliable." KSM's interrogations are mentioned as a source in the 9/11 report 211 times.

Fact #32
The Military Tribunals taking place at Guanatanamo Bay are a slap in the face to those seeking justice for the crimes of 9/11, as well as to the rest of the world. The level of secrecy is counterproductive. As the September 11th Advocates state, "prosecuting these men within a system that is secretive in nature and lacking in due process, and which uses evidence tainted by questionable interrogation methods and possibly even torture, is a dangerous endeavor." Several other family members have voiced their concerns about the secrecy. Unlike U.S. Federal courts, "the Guantanamo tribunal permits hearsay evidence as well as information gleaned from coercion and makes no guarantee that the accused will be able to confront his accusers or know all the evidence against him." As far as the media goes "only a handful of journalists will be allowed in the courtroom, confined to a glass enclosed booth where they can be shut off from hearing testimony on the judge's instructions." <...> "Audio recordings and pictures of the proceedings are barred." The ACLU charged that "the U.S. government is blocking the American Civil Liberties Union from paying attorneys representing suspected terrorists held here, insisting that the ACLU must first receive a license from the U.S. Treasury Department before making the payments." Once the Supreme Court ruled that detainees "have the right to challenge their detention in civilian court," the Bush Administration decided "to rewrite the official evidence against Guantanamo Bay detainees, allowing it to shore up its cases before they come under scrutiny by civilian judges for the first time." A propaganda film was shown to the court room. "The video is entitled "The Al Qaeda Plan," an echo of "The Nazi Plan" made by Oscar-winning director George Stevens as evidence in the Nuremberg war crimes trials of German leaders after World War II." Judge Keith Allred approved the video, but said, "The planes crashing into the towers and the people screaming doesn't prove anything." Army Brig. Gen. Gregory Zanetti said that Brig. Gen. Thomas Hartmann, the Pentagon official who oversees the Guantanamo war crimes tribunals, was "abusive, bullying, unprofessional." Detainee lawyers say that "political interference taints the proceedings." On 4/18/2008, it was reported that the families would be able to watch the trials. According to Army Col. Lawrence Morris, "we're going to broadcast in real time to several locations that will be available just to victim families." Later, the military decided against that. However, they were going to allow Debra Burlingame, a 9/11 Family Member that happens to be pro-Bush to attend. Several family members released a statement that said, "selectively inviting only 9/11 family members whose views are in alignment with those of the Bush administration is only one example of the repeated attempts to infuse politics into what should be an impartial process that has the goal of achieving justice." On 10/27/2008, it was reported that "the Pentagon has made plans to bring victims of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks -- chosen by lottery -- to watch a hearing of reputed al Qaeda kingpin Khalid Sheik Mohammed's death penalty trial." Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England said, "Soon, some of those victim families will have the opportunity to see firsthand the fair, open and just trials of those alleged to have perpetrated these horrific acts." The Miami Herald cites, "a long-promised victims witness program, which will enable thousands of family members of the Sept. 11 dead to watch the eventual trial through satellite feeds to four U.S. military bases."

Fact #33
The resulting dust from the collapse of the buildings on 9/11/2001 was toxic, and people like Condoleezza Rice and Christie Todd Whitman lied about it so things like Wall Street could reopen. As a result, several 1000 9/11 First Responders, and residents of New York are sick and dying. Both local and Federal Governments have ignored them in their time of need.

Fact #34
Suspicious trading in the world markets took place before 9/11/2001. On or around 8/6/2001, what appear to be "suspicious" put option purchases are made. According to one analyst, "from what I’m hearing, it’s more than coincidence." In early September 2001, "suspicious" short selling of reinsurance company stocks take place. Also in September 2001, suspicion of insider trading takes place in many other countries, resulting in the creation of several investigations. The countries mentioned are Belgium, France, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Monte Carlo, Cyprus, U.K., Italy, and Japan. On 10/3/2001, the San Francisco Chronicle will report that the NYSE sees "unusually heavy trading in airline and related stocks several days before the attacks." Some of those companies are American, Continental, Delta, Northwest, Southwest, United, and US Airways. In early September 2001, there is a sharp increase in short selling of American and United Airlines stocks. Between 9/6/2001, and 9/10/2001, suspicious trading of put options on American and United Airlines occur. Ernst Welteke, the President of a German central bank, says that his bank has done a study. "There are ever clearer signs that there were activities on international financial markets that must have been carried out with the necessary expert knowledge." His researchers have found "almost irrefutable proof of insider trading." During the time of the 9/11 Commission, the families pressed for answers about this suspicious trading. The 9/11 Report states, "highly publicized allegations of insider trading in advance of 9/11 generally rest on reports of unusual pre-9/11 trading activity in companies whose stock plummeted after the attacks. Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation." <...> "The SEC and the FBI, aided by other agencies and the securities industry, devoted enormous resources to investigating this issue, including securing the cooperation of many foreign governments. These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous."

Fact #35
The 9/11 Report says, "to date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. Ultimately the question is of little practical significance. Al Qaeda had many avenues of funding. If a particular funding source had dried up, al Qaeda could have easily tapped a different source or diverted funds from another project to fund an operation that cost $400,000–$500,000 over nearly two years." The 9/11 Commission repeats this in a document entitled, "The Financing of the 9/11 Plot." "To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. As we have discussed above, the compelling evidence appears to trace the bulk of the funds directly back to KSM and, possibly, Qatari, but no further. Available information on this subject has thus far has not been illuminating. According to KSM, Bin Ladin provided 85–95 percent of the funds for the plot from his personal wealth, with the remainder coming from general al Qaeda funds. To the extent KSM intended to refer to wealth Bin Ladin inherited from his family or derived from any business activity, this claim is almost certainly wrong, because Bin Ladin was not personally financing al Qaeda during this time frame. Ultimately the question of the origin of the funds is of little practical significance. Al Qaeda had many avenues of funding. If a particular source of funds dried up, it could have easily tapped a different source or diverted money from a different project to fund an attack that cost $400,000–$500,000 over nearly two years."

Fact #36
"Al-Qaeda" has curious connections to intelligence agencies all over the world. Wikipedia defines "Al-Qaeda" as "an international Sunni Islamist movement founded in 1988. Al-Qaeda have attacked civilian and military targets in various countries, the most notable being the September 11 attacks in 2001. These actions were followed by the US government launching a military and intelligence campaign against al-Qaeda called the War on Terror." On 9/28/2006, the Washington Post reported that "a leaked document accuses Pakistan's intelligence agency of indirectly supporting terrorist groups including al-Qaida and calls on Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf to disband the agency." <...> "Indirectly, Pakistan (through the ISI) has been supporting terrorism and extremism _ whether in London on (July 7, 2005) or in Afghanistan or Iraq." The BBC reports that " turned a blind eye towards existing instability and the indirect protection of Al Qaeda and promotion of terrorism." On 9/30/2006, the BBC reported Mumbai Police Commissioner AN Roy's statement that, "We have solved the 11 July bombings case. The whole attack was planned by Pakistan's ISI and carried out by Lashkar-e-Toiba and their operatives in India." On 10/7/2006, the Sunday Times reports that "captured Taliban fighters and failed suicide bombers have confirmed that they were trained by the Pakistani intelligence service, known as the ISI." In March 2001, Selig Harrison, a "long-time regional expert" says, "the CIA still has close links with the ISI." Harrison is said to have "extensive contact with the CIA and political leaders in South Asia." In 2000, "Ahmed Rashid, longtime regional correspondent for the Financial Times and the Daily Telegraph" referred to the U.S. as "Pakistan’s closest ally, with deep links to military and the ISI." On 10/19/2007, B. Raman reported that "Brig Ejaz Shah, a former officer of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence" <...> "used to be the handling officer of Osama bin Laden and Mulla Omar, the amir of the Taliban." When I asked Mr. Raman "What does it mean to be Osama Bin Laden's "Handling Officer" for the Pakistani ISI? What is the responsibility of the person that has this particular job?" his response was, "The handling officer of a source in Indian and Pakistani intelligence agencies is the person who looks after the welfare of the source, keeps him motivated and uses him as needed. The source cannot meet anybody else other than his handling officer except the head of the agency. One source--one handling officer is the general rule. This is to prevent the exposure of the operation and maintain its deniability. I understand in the CIA they call him the Running Officer of a source." On 10/31/2001, Le Figaro reports that while staying in the American hospital in Dubai, he is treated by Dr. Terry Callaway. "He is possibly accompanied by Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri (who is said to be bin Laden’s personal physician as well as al-Qaeda’s second-in-command), plus several bodyguards. Callaway supposedly treated bin Laden in 1996 and 1998, also in Dubai. Callaway later refuses to answer any questions on this matter." "During his stay, bin Laden is visited by “several members of his family and Saudi personalities,” including Prince Turki al-Faisal, then head of Saudi intelligence." "On July 12, bin Laden reportedly meets with CIA agent Larry Mitchell in the hospital. Mitchell apparently lives in Dubai as an Arab specialist under the cover of being a consular agent. The CIA, the Dubai hospital, and even bin Laden deny the story. The two news organizations that broke the story, Le Figaro and Radio France International, stand by their reporting." "The Guardian claims that the story originated from French intelligence, “which is keen to reveal the ambiguous role of the CIA, and to restrain Washington from extending the war to Iraq and elsewhere.” The Guardian adds that during his stay bin Laden is also visited by a second CIA officer." "In 2003, reporter Richard Labeviere will provide additional details of what he claims happened in a book entitled “The Corridors of Terror.” He claims he learned about the meeting from a contact in the Dubai hospital. He claims the event was confirmed in detail by a Gulf prince who presented himself as an adviser to the Emir of Bahrain. This prince claimed the meeting was arranged by Prince Turki al-Faisal. The prince said, “By organizing this meeting…Turki thought he could start direct negotiations between and the CIA on one fundamental point: that bin Laden and his supporters end their hostilities against American interests.” In exchange, the CIA and Saudis would allow bin Laden to return to Saudi Arabia and live freely there. The meeting is said to be a failure." "On July 15, Larry Mitchell reportedly returns to CIA headquarters to report on his meeting with bin Laden." "French counterterrorism expert Antoine Sfeir says the story of this meeting has been verified and is not surprising: It “is nothing extraordinary. Bin Laden maintained contacts with the CIA up to 1998. These contacts have not ceased since bin Laden settled in Afghanistan. Up to the last moment, CIA agents hoped that bin Laden would return to the fold of the US, as was the case before 1989." "A CIA spokesman calls the entire account of bin Laden’s stay at Dubai “sheer fantasy." Luai Sakra, an alleged CIA informant is said to have trained 6 of the 9/11 hijackers. Ali Mohamed has connections to both the FBI and the CIA. On 3/17/2007, Seymour Hersh reported that, "Iran-Contra veterans working out of Dick Cheney's office are using stolen funds from Iraq to arm al Qaeda-tied groups and foment a larger Sunni-Shia war." On 4/3/2007, ABCNews reported that, "a Pakistani tribal militant group responsible for a series of deadly guerrilla raids inside Iran has been secretly encouraged and advised by American officials since 2005.” <…> “Pakistani government sources say the secret campaign against Iran by Jundullah was on the agenda when Vice President Dick Cheney met with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf in February." As I pointed out in Fact #20, "Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed, the head of the Pakistani ISI, someone who met with U.S. elected and appointed officials in the weeks before 9/11, on the day of 9/11, and in the days after 9/11, ordered possible MI6 Agent Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh to wire transfer $100,000 to Mohammad Atta." I refer you back to Fact #35.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. continued
Fact #37
Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland had a lot of interesting things to say. Between January and July of 2003, the Bush Administration delayed the release of the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry Report until after the start of the Iraq War. Max Cleland says, "The administration sold the connection (between Iraq and al-Qaeda) to scare the pants off the American people and justify the war. There’s no connection, and that’s been confirmed by some of bin Laden’s terrorist followers… What you’ve seen here is the manipulation of intelligence for political ends. The reason this report was delayed for so long—deliberately opposed at first, then slow-walked after it was created—is that the administration wanted to get the war in Iraq in and over… before (it) came out. Had this report come out in January <2003> like it should have done, we would have known these things before the war in Iraq, which would not have suited the administration." After 1/27/2003, Max Cleland is disappointed with the start of the 9/11 Commission's investigation. Specifically, he is not happy that the Commission "will not issue subpoenas for the documents it wants and will have a single non-partisan staff headed by executive director Philip Zelikow, who is close to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice." In May 2003, Max Cleland wanted the 9/11 Commission to investigate the false claims tying Iraq to 9/11 made by the Bush Administration. He says, "they were focused on Iraq, they were planning a war on Iraq, they were not paying attention to the business at hand." Zelikow, Kean, and Hamilton opposed this. Phil Shenon will write, "even some of the Democrats were distancing themselves from him. Cleland knew he was quickly becoming a pariah." Cleland will say, "it was painfully obvious to me that there was this blanket over the commission" <...> "Anybody who spoke out or dissented, whether against George Bush, the White House, or the war against Iraq, was going to be marginalized." In November 2003, the Commission, and the White House were battling over how much access the Commission would have to Bush daily briefings. Cleland says, "all ten commissioners should have full, unfettered, and unrestricted access to all evidence." In December 2003, Max Cleland is offered a "position on the board of the Export-Import Bank." He accepts. Before leaving the Commission, he calls the Bush Administration's stonewalling of the Commission a "national scandal," and says "I’m not going to be part of looking at information only partially. I’m not going to be part of just coming to quick conclusions. I’m not going to be part of political pressure to do this or not do that. I’m not going to be part of that. This is serious." On 10/26/2003, Cleland tells the New York Times "as each day goes by, we learn that this government knew a whole lot more about these terrorists before Sept. 11 than it has ever admitted."

Fact #38
Over the years, several polls have been conducted that show a majority of people are concerned about this issue. In August 2004, 911Truth.org commissioned Zogby International for a poll that concluded "half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act." In May 2006, 911Truth.org commissioned Zogby International for a poll that concluded 45% of voting Americans think "Congress or an International Tribunal should re-investigate the attacks, including whether any US government officials consciously allowed or helped facilitate their success." In September 2007, 911Truth.org commissioned Zogby International for a poll that concluded "51% of Americans want Congress to probe Bush/Cheney regarding the 9/11 Attacks." In August 2006, Scripps Howard/Ohio University conducted a poll that concluded, "more than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East." In November 2007, Scripps Howard/Ohio University conducted another poll that concluded, "nearly two-thirds of Americans think it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warnings."

Fact #39
Several interesting and thought provoking quotes have been made by people over the years with regards to the 9/11 attacks. Sen. Patrick Leahy said, "the two questions that the congress will not ask, because republicans wont allow it, is why did 9/11 happen on George Bush's watch when he had clear warnings that it was going to happen? Why did they allow it to happen? And secondly, when they had Osama Bin Laden cornered why didnt they get him? Had there been an independent congress, one that could ask questions these questions would have been asked years ago." 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said, "By the way, there’s a credible case that the president’s own negligence prior to 9/11 at least in part contributed to the disaster in the first place. In the summer of 2001, the government ignored repeated warnings by the CIA, ignored, and didn't do anything to harden our border security, didn’t do anything to harden airport country, didn’t do anything to engage local law enforcement, didn’t do anything to round up INS and consular offices and say we have to shut this down, and didn’t warn the American people. The famous presidential daily briefing on August 6, we say in the report that the briefing officers believed that there was a considerable sense of urgency and it was current. So there was a case to be made that wasn’t made. The president says, if I had only known that 19 Islamic men would come into the United States of America and on the morning of 11 September hijack four American aircraft, fly two into the World Trade Center, one into the Pentagon, and one into an unknown Pennsylvania that crashed in Shanksville, I would have moved heaven and earth. That’s what he said. Mr. President, you don’t need to know that. This is an Islamic Jihadist movement that has been organized since the early 1990s, declared war on the United States twice, in ‘96 and ‘98. You knew they were in the United States. You were warned by the CIA. You knew in July they were inside the United States. You were told again by briefing officers in August that it was a dire threat. And what did you do? Nothing, so far as we could see on the 9/11 Commission." 9/11 Family Member Kristen Breitweiser said, "it is clear that should never have been permitted to be a member of the commission, since it is the mandate of the commission to identify the source of failures. We can now see that trail would lead directly to the staff director himself." On 7/22/2005, at the 9/11 Congressional Briefing chaired by then Rep. Cynthia McKinney, 9/11 Family Members Monica Gabrielle, and Mindy Kleinberg accompanied 9/11 Family Member Lorie Van Auken who said, "the 9/11 Commission’s report is one year old today. This report was supposed to provide the definitive account of what had transpired on September eleven, 2001. We hoped that our thousands of unanswered questions would be addressed and answered. Yet incredibly we have found that the Commission’s definitive final report has actually yielded more questions than answers." 9/11 Family Member Donna Marsh O'Connor said at the National Press Club on 9/11/2006, "This Government has made me a victim of Conspiracy Theories, because they haven't answered fully, or allowed anyone to ask the true questions of September 11th, and that's what I'm asking from you today. For exposure. We are not crazy. We have questions. We demand answers. <...> We're asking for a new investigation into the events of September 11th, and this time, a truly bipartisan, global, with families invested from the beginning, middle, and throughout the end."

Fact #40
A document entitled, "Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba" from 1962 proves BEYOND THE SHADOW OF DOUBT that elements within our Government are MORE THAN CAPABLE of devising a "9/11 Type" plan.

Fact #41
There are several indications that Osama Bin Laden has been protected, and even allowed to escape after the 9/11 attacks. On 12/24/1998, at the request of then CIA Director George Tenet, President Clinton signs an order authorizing the CIA to assassinate Osama Bin Laden. Philip Shenon will write that Clinton's authorization is "written in stark language” and it makes it very clear “that the president was telling the tribal leaders they could kill bin Laden." However, this order is "closely held within the CIA, and the 9/11 Commission will comment, “This intent at an abandoned air base in the desert 80 miles away, Franks and other commanders on three Afghan warlords and a small number of American, British, and Australian special forces to stop al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters from escaping across the mountains into Pakistan.” Military and intelligence officials warn Franks that the two main Afghan commanders cannot be trusted. This turns out to be correct, as the warlords accept bribes from al-Qaeda leaders to let them escape." On 12/5/2001, Brig. Gen. James N. Mattis "is convinced his forces can seal the Tora Bora area to trap bin Laden there. Around this date, Mattis argues strongly to his military superiors at Centcom that his troops should fight at Tora Bora, but he is turned down." Between December 8th - 14th, British special forces pursue Osama Bin Laden, and are reportedly "20 minutes behind" him but are "pulled off to allow US troops to go in for the kill.” However, it takes hours for the Americans to arrive, by which time bin Laden has escaped." On 10/6/2008, it is reported that "a team of elite Delta Force commandos was sent into Afghanistan with an assignment to find and kill Osama bin Laden at Tora Bora" but were stopped by U.S. officials. On 60 Minutes, the commando leader is asked by Scott Pelley, "how often does Delta come up with a tactical plan that's disapproved by higher headquarters?" His answer is "in my experience, in my five years at Delta, never before." Apparently, Cofer Black is fired on 5/17/2002. "Six anonymous US intelligence officials will claim that, in fact, Black is removed by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld because Black publicly revealed details of the US military’s failure to capture or kill bin Laden in Tora Bora, Afghanistan, in late 2001." On 3/13/2002, Bush says, "He’s a person who’s now been marginalized.… I just don’t spend that much time on him.… I truly am not that concerned about him.” Instead, Bush is "deeply concerned about Iraq.”

Fact #42
Over the years, there have been several reports indicating that Osama Bin Laden is dead. On 12/26/2001, Fox News reported that "Usama bin Laden has died a peaceful death due to an untreated lung complication." On 1/18/2002, President Pervez Musharraf says, "I think now, frankly, he is dead for the reason he is a ... kidney patient." On 7/18/2002, the FBI's counter-terroism chief Dale Watson says, "I am not really sure of the answer... I personally think he is probably not with us anymore but I have no evidence to support that." On 10/7/2002, President Hamid Karzai says that Bin Laden is probably dead. On 10/16/2002, Israeli intelligence sources report that Osama is dead. On 10/23/2005, a Multan newspaper reports that Osama Bin Laden, "died four months ago in a village near Kandahar of severe illness." On 3/15/2006, the Philadelphia Inquirer reports about a claim by then Rep. Curt Weldon that Osama Bin Laden died in Iran. On 9/23/2006, it is reported that "a French regional newspaper quoted a French secret service report on Saturday as saying that Saudi Arabia is convinced that al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden died of typhoid in Pakistan last month." President Chirac said this was "in no way whatsoever confirmed." Recently, former CIA official Robert Baer said that he thinks Osama is dead. On 6/30/2008, Time released an article entitled, "Is Osama bin Laden Dying ... Again?"

Fact #43
Several of the alleged hijackers should not have been given visas. Between April 3-7, 2001, three hijackers are given visas to the United States through the US Consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. They are Nawaf Alhazmi, Salem Alhazmi, and Khalid Almihdar. "Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi are already "al-Qaeda veterans" and battle-hardened killers." "All three men have indicators in their passports marking them as Islamist radicals. These indicators are used to track them by the Saudi authorities, but are apparently not noticed by US officials." According to Michael Springmann, someone who was the head US consular official in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia from Sept. 87 to March of 89, said that he was "repeatedly ordered… to issue visas to unqualified applicants." "He later learns that recruits from many countries fighting for bin Laden against Russia in Afghanistan were funneled through the Jeddah office to get visas to come to the US, where the recruits would travel to train for the Afghan war. According to Springmann, the Jeddah consulate was run by the CIA and staffed almost entirely by intelligence agents. This visa system may have continued at least through 9/11, and 11 of the 19 9/11 hijackers received their visas through Jeddah."

Fact #44
Footnote 44 of the 9/11 Report states, "CIA cable,“Activities of Bin Ladin Associate Khalid Revealed,” Jan. 4, 2000. His Saudi passport—which contained a visa for travel to the United States—was photocopied and forwarded to CIA headquarters. This information was not shared with FBI headquarters until August 2001. An FBI agent detailed to the Bin Ladin unit at CIA attempted to share this information with colleagues at FBI headquarters. A CIA desk officer instructed him not to send the cable with this information. Several hours later, this same desk officer drafted a cable distributed solely within CIA alleging that the visa documents had been shared with the FBI. She admitted she did not personally share the information and cannot identify who told her they had been shared. We were unable to locate anyone who claimed to have shared the information. Contemporaneous documents contradict the claim that they were shared. DOJ Inspector General interview of Doug M., Feb. 12, 2004; DOJ Inspector General interview of Michael, Oct. 31, 2002; CIA cable, Jan. 5, 2000; DOJ Inspector General report,“ A Review of the FBI’s Handling of Intelligence Information Related to the 9/11 Attacks,” July 2, 2004, p. 282." 9/11 Family Member Kristen Breitweiser referred to George Tenet as "Mr. "I failed to tell the FBI for 18 months that two known al Qaeda killers were living in San Diego and planning the 9/11 attacks."

Fact #45
NIST released a report about the collapse of building 7 that is in dispute. Recently, the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH) published comments critiquing NIST's report on building 7. The September Eleventh Advocates released a statement that cleverly mocked their report. There is an organization known as Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth that disputes this report. A physics professor formerly of Brigham Young University named Steven E. Jones, a whistleblower from Underwriters Laboratories named Kevin Ryan, and several others belong to a group called Scholars For 9/11 Truth & Justice that have written several critiques of NIST's reports from over the years that have been published. NIST's questionable report on building 7 caused people that were once on the fence regarding the collapse of those buildings on 9/11, to think that those advocating something different than NIST's conclusions, responsibly, might be right.

Fact #46
After the 9/11 attacks, George Bush's popularity ratings soared to record numbers. On 9/18/2001, the Washington Post reported that, "the country has rallied to the president's side. Even those who wished for a little more eloquence from him did not want to hear a word against him. Ask any journalist who raised questions about his initial handling of the crisis: They have been inundated with furious calls calling them a disgrace to their profession and even traitors. Congress is well aware that George Bush has become a colossus, surpassing his father's 90 percent approval rating after the Persian Gulf War. Congress has been more than satisfied with a supporting role in the wake of the horror. On Tuesday night members convened and sang "God Bless America" and pledged allegiance to Bush. Democratic consternation and misgivings have been expressed behind the scenes. When Bush requested blanket authority for retaliation, some remembered the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, which they unwarily gave to Lyndon Johnson during Vietnam and came to regret. They said the president's current powers give him all the authority he needed to punish the authors of the obscene attacks. But, as one Democrat said disconsolately, "No one wants to say no to Bush now."

Fact #47
The Moussaoui Trial had a lot of problems, and revealed a lot of information. On 3/7/2006, the Associated Press reported that "a defense lawyer got FBI agent Michael Anticev to admit that the FBI was aware years before Nine-Eleven that al Qaida planned to slam planes into prominent buildings." On 3/13/2006, AP reports that "an angry federal judge unexpectedly recessed the death penalty trial of al Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui to consider whether government violations of her rules against coaching witnesses should remove the death penalty as an option." Another AP report cites that a, "government lawyer who has jeopardized the prosecution of al-Qaida conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui used a transcript of the first day of the trial to try to shape future testimony to meet or deflect possible defense attacks, court documents indicate." <...> "Arguing that Martin's e-mails tainted three government and four defense witnesses beyond repair, the defense has asked the judge to dismiss the government's bid to execute Moussaoui, the only person charged in this country in connection with al-Qaida's Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon." This "outraged" the families. "I was really horrified and very outraged to hear that this type of mistake was made," Regenhard said. "This is probably one of the most important trials in the history of this country — how someone could put that at risk. She betrayed the families of the victims who certainly have been waiting nearly five long years to get some kind of scintilla of justice." On 3/15/2006, the Washington Post reports that "U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema decided yesterday to exclude all aviation security evidence after Martin violated a court order by e-mailing trial transcripts to seven witnesses and coaching them about their upcoming testimony." <...> "I am furious," said Rosemary Dillard, whose husband, Eddie, was killed on the plane that was hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon. "Aviation is a big part of this case. Aviation is what killed our loved ones. It was planes. You take aviation out . . . where do they go from here?" <...> "How are we supposed to get any new information now?" said Fiona Havlish, formerly of Buck County, Pa., whose husband was killed at the World Trade Center. "I think what all of us are looking for is the truth, and the truth has not been forthcoming out of Washington. I mean, I can only speak for myself, but I do not feel that the truth has come out no matter how hard we as family members have tried. And this was just one more avenue to find a particle of truth, and that is being thwarted." <...> "Some wondered whether she was being used as a scapegoat for other government officials who did not want the aviation security evidence to be made public." <...> "I don't think she is alone," Dillard said in a telephone interview last night. "I just don't think she could have gotten away with that. Somebody helped her or prompted her. It just makes me wonder whether this is one more thing where no one is going to be held accountable. . . . It's almost too clean. I wonder if there is more to the story than we know." <...> "I felt the government wasn't telling us all that it knew, and I do know that feeling is shared in the Massachusetts circle of families within which I travel," said Blake Allison, of Hanover, N.H., whose wife, Anna Allison, was killed on American Airlines Flight 11. "We talked about this the first day of the trial, the hope that the trial would bring some clarity to some of the circumstances leading up to 9/11." On 3/15/2006, the Sunday Times reports more about 9/11 Family Member Rosemary Dillard's anger about what happened. "I felt like my heart had been ripped out," said Rosemary Dillard, whose husband Eddie was killed aboard the plane that crashed into the Pentagon. "I felt like my husband had been killed again. I felt like the Government had let me down again." <...> "I don't think in the annals of criminal law there has ever been a case with this many significant problems," said Judge Brinkema, who considered abandoning the trial altogether but eventually decided to adjourn it until Monday." <...> "The missing testimony was expected to deal with how much the Federal Aviation Administration already knew about possible terror threats to airlines prior to 9/11, and what security measures were in place." On 3/16/2006, MSNBC reports that "the lawyer whose coaching of witnesses in the death penalty case of Zacarias Moussaoui caused his trial to be halted was placed on administrative leave from her job, the Transportation Security Administration said Thursday." On 3/17/2006, AP reports that "the judge has issued a written order that says prosecutors can present exhibits and a witness or witnesses if they are untainted by contact with Transportation Security Administration lawyer Carla Martin." On 3/20/2006, Reuters reports that "an FBI agent testified in the sentencing trial of September 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui on Monday that agency superiors repeatedly blocked his efforts to warn of a possible terror attack. Harry Samit, the FBI agent who arrested Moussaoui three weeks before the deadly airliner hijackings that killed 3,000 people, said he tried to tell his superiors that he thought a hijacking plan might be in the works. "You tried to move heaven and earth to get a search warrant to search this man's belongings. You were obstructed," defense attorney Edward MacMahon said as the trial resumed after a week's delay over improper witness coaching. "From a particular individual in the (FBI's) Radical Fundamentalist Unit, yes sir, I was obstructed," Samit said." Forbes reports that "MacMahon (Moussaoui defense attorney) introduced an Aug. 31 letter Samit drafted "to advise the FAA of a potential threat to security of commercial aircraft" from whomever Moussaoui was conspiring with. But Maltbie barred him from sending it to FAA headquarters, saying he would handle that, Samit testified. The agent added that he did tell FAA officials in Minneapolis of his suspicions." On 3/25/2006, the Washington Post reports that the families hope for answers at the Moussaoui Trial is "unfulfilled."

Fact #48
On 9/25/2006, former 9/11 Commission Richard Ben Veniste makes public knowledge a deal within the 9/11 Commission to keep Bush, Cheney, and Clinton's testimony classified until 2009. "BLITZER: Now, I read this report, the 9/11 Commission report. This is a big, thick book. I don't see anything and I don't remember seeing anything about this exchange that you had with the president in this report. BEN-VENISTE: Well, I had hoped that we had -- we would have made both the Clinton interview and the Bush interview a part of our report, but that was not to be. I was outvoted on that question. BLITZER: Why? BEN-VENISTE: I didn't have the votes. BLITZER: Well, was -- were the Republican members trying to protect the president and the vice president? Is that what your suspicion is? BEN-VENISTE: I think the question was that there was a degree of confidentiality associated with that and that we would take from that the output that is reflected in the report, but go no further. And that until some five years' time after our work, we would keep that confidential. I thought we would be better to make all of the information that we had available to the public and make our report as transparent as possible so that the American public could have that."

Fact #49
In the fall of 2003, former National Security Advisor to President Clinton, Sandy Berger, "removed classified documents from the National Archives, hid them under a construction trailer and later tried to find the trash collector to retrieve them, the agency’s internal watchdog said Wednesday.” <...> “Berger took the documents in the fall of 2003 while working to prepare himself and Clinton administration witnesses for testimony to the Sept. 11 commission. Berger was authorized as the Clinton administration’s representative to make sure the commission got the correct classified materials.” On 4/1/2005, it was reported that Berger “pleaded guilty yesterday to pilfering classified documents from the National Archives, saying he showed “very poor judgment” and that his actions were “wrong.” On 1/9/2007, Fox News reports that “some classified documents that were unlawfully removed from the National Archives three years ago may never have reached their intended destination — the Sept. 11 commission, a House Republican report concluded Tuesday.” <...> “Released by Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., the report said Berger could have taken White House staff working papers that never were inventoried by the archives. In that case, nobody would know they were gone, the report said.”

Fact #50
Several companies friendly to the Bush Administration as well as others, and several partners in the "War On Terror" have benefitted from the 9/11 attacks. A long time ago at the 2004 9/11 People's Commission, I asked ex-CIA Analyst Ray McGovern what he thought could be the possible motives (Quicktime required) for doing something as horrible as 9/11. He mentioned an acronym for "O.I.L." that he created. “O for oil, I for Israel, and L for the logistical bases necessary to exert (inaudible) military capability in that part of the world.” Before he answered my question, he spoke of the PNAC’s dream of invading Iraq. He spoke of eliminating any possible threat to the state of Israel. He spoke of what were considered then to be 14 permanent military bases in Iraq, and so on. Since 9/11, oil companies like Exxon, Shell, and Chevron have made massive fortunes. on 6/20/2008, the Guardian reported that "Iraq is preparing to allow four of the biggest western oil companies to renew exploitation of the country's vast reserves for the first time in almost four decades. Iraq's oil ministry stepped up talks with BP, Exxon Mobil, Shell and Total after the US vice-president, Dick Cheney, visited Iraq in March, where he also pressed the government to revive efforts to pass the hydrocarbon law that nationalist MPs were blocking. The first contracts are expected to be signed this month. Some 90% of Iraq's budget comes from oil revenues." Companies like Bechtel and Halliburton have made fortunes because of the "War On Terror." Granted, like most companies, they have lost some of those fortunes within the last two months. Since 9/11, the Bush Administration have made repeated claims that they will protect Israel. On 1/26/2006, the Mail & Guardian reports that Bush has committed to the "defence of Israel." On 2/1/2006, Reuters reports that Bush says the U.S. would defend Israel against Iran. On 5/23/2006, CNN reports that Bush promises to protect Israel if attacked by Iran. On 1/7/2008, AFP reports that Bush promises again to protect Israel if attacked by Iran. Haaretz reported about a possible pipeline of oil going from Iraq to Israel. On 5/24/2007, the Daily India reports that "a new study released by the Centre for Public Integrity, a non-profit organisation based in Washington, has said that Pakistan has been the largest recipient of anti-terror funds in the four years after 9/11." On 5/30/2007, publicintegrity.org reported that most of the money Pakistan received "came through a Defense Department program subject to virtually no congressional oversight." According to Spencer Ackerman, a lot of the money came in the form of "untraceable cash transfers." Both Pakistan and Israel are considered partners in the "War On Terror." If we're not staying in Iraq, we sure have a massive U.S. embassy, "the largest of its kind in the world, the size of Vatican City, with the population of a small town, its own defense force, self-contained power and water, and a precarious perch at the heart of Iraq's turbulent future." According to Wiki, Ray McGovern, "was a mid-level officer in the CIA in the 1960s where his focus was analysis of Soviet policy toward Vietnam. McGovern was one of President Ronald Reagan's intelligence briefers from 1981-85; he was in charge of preparing daily security briefs for Reagan, Vice President George H.W. Bush, the National Security Advisor, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Cabinet. Later, McGovern was one of several senior CIA analysts who prepared the President's Daily Brief (PDB) during the first Bush administration." It seems to me that he knows what he's talking about.

There are so many facts concerning the 9/11 attacks, that it is impossible to know them all. People like to laugh at, and mock our theories (that we all have) concerning the events of 9/11. However, they have a difficult time with the facts. I hope that I have proven my point.

In conclusion, I would like to say that I am convinced some elements within our Government, and others were complicit in the attacks of 9/11. As you can see above, the information that exists today clearly points in that direction. We have pieces to the puzzle, and we KNOW who refuses to give up the other pieces. However, as I said, this is America, and in America, you are innocent until proven guilty. Let's have a real investigation, be it a domestic or international one, and do what can only be described as the right thing. Holding those responsible for the 9/11 attacks, whoever they may be, accountable. It is long overdue. Justice has never been more needed. The perverse usage of that day can no longer continue. It is time to take away the "9/11 Card," and let those poor 2,973 souls finally rest in peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Twist_U_Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 05:49 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. Watch "them" attack one fact. Forgetting the rest.
the fake opposition pretends to be making genuine attempts to examine
the official story and to ferret out the truth but their real purpose (for whatever ultimate reason) is to obscure the truth,to make sure that it never comes out, and in effect to support the official story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PatrickSMcNally Donating Member (127 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. "attack one fact"
Some of the facts listed there are perfectly true, but are also too general to imply a conspiratorial scenario in themselves. For example, it should be easy to agree that the Bush administration came into office determined to make a war on Iraq. Paul O'Neill has described some of this since he left the Bush administration. It's also a fact that since at least the Reagan administration there's been a long-standing push for something like the PATRIOT Act and the preparation of the latter was not something done out of the blue in response to 911. However that in itself is still plausibly consistent with the scenario of an administration which takes advantage of events as they come along, and in this case used 911.

I focused in initially on the claim that exercises "mirrored" 911 because that would indeed have been quite intriguing if true. If a real exercise had occurred premised on a scenarion where several planes are hijacked by perpetrators with the intent of not of issuing political demands, as has been customary in traditional hijacking scenarios, but of crashing the planes into targets as weapons, then would be interesting evidence of how well anticipated the actual 911 had been. But there doesn't seem to be any evidence of an exercise modeled on a scenario which "mirrors" 911. Exercises which simply consider a general hijacking, exercises which simply consider a general plane crash, none of these can be properly described as "mirroring" 911. Hence none of the known exercises can be so definitively matched 911 to suggest that the whole thing had been figured out in advance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dubiosus Donating Member (120 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-28-09 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #8
142. just a thought
looked at from outside the internet is a matrix. And these people play the part of Mr. Smith. Their role is not to kill you but to keep you busy and feed your anger leading to some kind of exhaustion.

Love and Peace! That is their enemy :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #142
149. Interesting comment. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PatrickSMcNally Donating Member (127 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 11:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. "exercises taking place, some of which allegedly mirrored"
Allegedly? I thought this was supposed to be the page of known facts. In fact, no exercises on that morning actually mirrored 911.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. 6:10
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PatrickSMcNally Donating Member (127 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. There were a few exercises happening.
None of them mirrored 911 however.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNReformer Donating Member (187 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 03:47 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Scheduled exercise at the Pentagon for that morning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 05:21 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Scheduled != occured. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 05:41 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. “Is this real world or an exercise?”
The Vigilant Warrior and Vigilant Guardian Training Exercises
These were apparently a pair of war games (attacker versus defender) which involved live-fly simulations of hijackings. Both this pair of exercises and Northern Vigilance probably involved the use of "injects" into screens to simulate aircraft. These games apparently resembled the actual attack sufficiently to confuse military officers, as suggested by the following transcript.

FAA Boston Center contacts NEADS, saying, "We need someone to scramble some F-16s or something up there, help us out."

“Is this real world or an exercise?” asked the military liaison officer?

"No, this is not an exercise," responded the FAA official. "Not a test."


The only known source for the exercise named Vigilant Warrior is Richard Clarke's book, Against All Enemies. It is possible that the exercise referred to by Clarke was actually Amalgam Warrior, a NORAD field training exercise involving life-fly air interception, held twice yearly, in the spring on the East Coast and the fall on the East Coast.

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/defense/wargames.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PatrickSMcNally Donating Member (127 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. "These games apparently resembled the actual attack"
They apparently did not. A useful summary of the available information on Vigilant Guardian appears at:

http://911myths.com/html/operation_vigilant_guardian.html

It's not all that clear, but there may have been an exercise in process for a potential hijacking. However to say that exercises "mirrored" 911 implies much more than simply a test exercise for a hijacking. Traditional hijackings involved hostages, demands for a release of prisoners somewhere, or some other type of specific demand. An exercise scheduled prior to 911 which sought to test for responses to a hijacking would not have "mirrored" 911 where the hijacked planes were simply rammed into targets without any attempt made at political demands. I've also run across a story somewhere that some type of exercise may have been done somewhere for testing the case of an accidental plane crash. I can't find it right now and I'm not sure if it was just a rumor or maybe something real. But again, that would not "mirror" 911. An exercise which "mirrors" 911 should be designed around a scenario where multiple hijackings occur with an intent of using the planes as missiles to be crashed into selected targets of some type. The jets involved in the exercise are then required to swiftly track and shoot down the hijacked planes before they reach their targets. If you can find somewhere evidence of a real exercise on 911 which postulated this type of scenario specifically, then I'll accept the "mirrored" description. Until then, the desription is wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #9
27. Once again you prove that either english is your second language,
or your reading comprehension skills just really, really suck....

No one really gives a shit what *you* accept as "the "mirrored" description". Do you have an overinflated sense of self importance?

In case you missed it, I didn't respond to this point... I responded to something different. Please try to learn how to follow a thread and keep up....


Thanks,

Ghost

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PatrickSMcNally Donating Member (127 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 05:36 AM
Response to Reply #27
30. 'No one really gives a shit what *you* accept as "the "mirrored" description".'
Except that it was obvious that Jon Gold was manipulating the language in order to give a false argument. By saying that exercises "mirrored" 911 he was trying to lead the reader to believe that the nature of the exercises somehow showed that everything about 911 had already been figured out in advance to the point where it would seem suspicious that 911 wasn't stopped. If there's an exercise going on which sets up a scenario where several hijacked planes are to be used as missiles against targets and the USAF testing crews are assigned to stop this in accordance with an action-plan already laid out, then you may wonder why they didn't simply use that action-plan to stop the real 911. The moment that we realize that none of the actual exercises involved a scenario which actually "mirrored" 911, this argument falls flat. Gold was trying to imply something more than what the facts actually show by tossing in the word "mirrored" for the audience.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 07:17 AM
Original message
Have you got anything else this argument is getting tiresome?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
35. I have something else
The title of the post is a lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. enumerate the lies WS
Edited on Wed Nov-12-08 04:51 PM by seemslikeadream
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. 1. "The facts speak for themselves" (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #27
34. Once again you prove that you are an unending source of entertainment
> No one really gives a shit what *you* accept as "the "mirrored" description".

No one? Are you claiming to be a psychic, or ...

> Do you have an overinflated sense of self importance?

<snicker>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #9
44. the 9/11 Commission was mandated to give a "full and complete accounting" of the 9/11 attacks
There were multiple wargames taking place that day, only one was mentioned in the 9/11 Report, and in a footnote in the back of the book. The statements about "Real World or Exercise" were never investigated by the 9/11 Commission. Ralph Eberhart said they improved response, and yet, none of the planes were intercepted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
11. Thank you so much, "truth movement"
... for doing your part to make sure that all the serious questions about 9/11 get buried under a mountain of crackpottery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. What are YOUR serious questions about 9/11?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Asked before and answered (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. I guess I miss it
Edited on Tue Nov-11-08 11:44 AM by seemslikeadream
:eyes:

I thought you posted they were buried, hence not answered. Were they buried and not answered or buried and answered but can't find out cause their buried? If they were answered and buried please enlighten me I would love to know the answers




could you clarify please?

Thank you so much, "truth movement"
... for doing your part to make sure that all the serious questions about 9/11 get buried under a mountain of crackpottery.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Sure, I can clarify
... right after you address the point I made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. What point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Why is it...
... that you never seem to actually think very much about the stuff you copy-n-paste?

I (mostly) accept that list of facts (or at least see little point in nit-picking). Obviously, those facts raise serious questions about how our intelligence and defense could have failed so badly on 9/11, and why no one was ever held accountable for those failures, and about the defensive and secretive response of CheneyCo, and their misappropriation of the event to invade Iraq. Are those the issues that the vast majority of the "truth movement" focus on? No, not at all; they are simply pressed into duty as "circumstantial evidence" of their preferred explanation -- "9/11 was an inside job" -- and they proceed to buttress their case with crackpottery like controlled demolitions using nano-thermite and/or mini-nukes and/or "dustification beams" from outer space. Many go so far as to claim that all the plane crashes were completely faked and all the witnesses are lying. The negative reaction that most people have to that sort of nonsense is what I'm talking about, and if you don't understand my point, then there's no point in attempting a discussion with you.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Well I would have to be a mind reader to understand this post of yours
William Seger (1000+ posts) Tue Nov-11-08 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Sure, I can clarify
... right after you address the point I made.



WHAT POINT?




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Ordinary reading comprehension should do it
So, sorry...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-27-09 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #18
139. Gosh
I sure do miss you, SLAD
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-27-09 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #139
141. I miss her too! Any chance she'll be able to come back? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-28-09 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #141
143. Not likely...


Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-28-09 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #143
144. Are you sure this isn't...
a "psy-op" or some other kind of CIA "mindfuck"? I mean, how do we know there was ever even a SLAD to begin with?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-28-09 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #139
145. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
AZCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-28-09 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #145
146. How very hypocritical of them. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #13
22. Yes indeed, what serious questions about 9/11 do you have William?
Edited on Tue Nov-11-08 10:54 PM by wildbilln864
Do tell! :popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Sorry, once per thread is all you're going to get
Edited on Tue Nov-11-08 11:06 PM by William Seger
Maybe you'd care to respond to my point?

(Edit: I'm sure SLaD won't mind me borrowing this:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. I didn't see a point. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. Let me know when you get an answer
Edited on Tue Nov-11-08 11:46 PM by seemslikeadream
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. Or, you could just read post #17


... as if the point wasn't obvious enough. Equally obvious is your desire to avoid it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-27-09 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #11
140. you really think we "ruined" the movement to find out the truth????
I haven't seen you pining for answers-- nor do most people seem to be doing much.

I have followed the evidence, and reached some pretty startling conclusions that I never thought I would find. But the fact is 9/11 is just the tip of the iceberg, and the evil stretches WAY back.

THAT is why I don't put anything past the m$#%f@#$ing perps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
20. Oh, Christ...another ponderously long, incoherent post from SLAD...
Do you really expect people to slog through this????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. .........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. Oh, Christ...another whining, intellectually deprived, content free reply fromSDud
Did anyone really expect anything more???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #20
29. Another ponderously long incoherent thread from Jon Gold reproduced by SLAD
Please give the maniacal Jon Gold his due. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 07:15 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. WORLD COMES TO AN END BOLO STATES THE OBVIOUS
Edited on Wed Nov-12-08 07:20 AM by seemslikeadream
Jon Gold third line in OP





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. You seem to be confused. I didn't accuse you of concealing the identity of the author as you imply.
Only of boring us by reproducing the extremely long and obsessive rantings of Jon Gold.

WORLD COMES TO AN END SLAD LASHES OUT BASED ON HER MISUNDERSTANDING FILM AT YOUTUBE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU GrovelBot  Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 07:17 AM
Response to Original message
32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##
==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our fourth quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PatrickSMcNally Donating Member (127 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
37. "On the morning of 9/11, shortly after the first impact, a homemaker by the name of Maria"
This passage is misleading. If you go back to the original ABC transcript what Maria describes is that first a neighbor calls her and tells her to look at the twin towers, where the first has already been hit. Maria watches the smoke coming from the damaged tower for several minutes and then notices that white van is just now pulling up. FOX News misreported this (surprise!) with the story made to sound as Maria had seem them arrive before the actual attack occurred. That caused a rumor to spread that this van was known to have arrived at the scene prior to the attack. Gold has picked out a sufficiently accurate version of the story to avoid saying that directly, but he fails to mention that in Maria's own account she saw the van pull up several minutes after she had been talking with a neighbor who called after the first attack. Of course if we tell the story that way then it doesn't as much like clear evidence of foreknowledge, the way the version spread by FOX News made it sound.

Again, like with the "exercises mirrored 911" meme, this one of the few items in that list which might actually suggest conspiratorial foreknowledge. The stuff about Bush wanting to invade Iraq and set up the PATRIOT Act doesn't really imply conspiratorial foreknowledge by itself. This collection of 50 or so different points has a number of valid points which are perfectly reconcilable with a non-conspiratorial Blowback framework, but then there are several more questionable claims sprinkled through it to give it the conspiratorial sauce flavor on top. The fact that none of the exercises actually "mirrored" 911, and yet we're told they did, is one such dose of conspiratorial spice. Leaving out Maria's own story that she saw the white van arrive several minutes after the first hit is another.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. Excellent post, PSM...
Edited on Wed Nov-12-08 02:53 PM by SDuderstadt
and, in fact, what you describe is precisely one of my biggest problems with the "9/11 Truth Movement". I have no problem at all with anyone "asking questions". But, I also expect people to take the time to read the opposing view, fact-check as well as possible, then apply critical thinking skills before making silly claims/pronouncements that "9/11 was an inside job!", a charge that, I believe, smears hundreds, if not thousands,of dedicated career public servants.

In my view, if the "9/11 truth movement" would simply apply the same rigorous standards of evidence/proof they demand of the "official story", a lot of this nonsense would go away. Instead, we're dealing with people for whom any inconsistency or anomaly has to be interpreted as proving "9/11 was an inside job" when, in fact, in any large-scale catastrophic event, anomalies and incosistencies are unavoidable and, more likely, even abound.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. Where is the transcript?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #37
42. Could you give me a link please?
"she saw the van pull up several minutes after she had been talking with a neighbor who called after the first attack."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PatrickSMcNally Donating Member (127 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. There's a full transcript of the June 21, 2002, 20/20 ...
episode given here:

http://911myths.com/html/dancing_israelis.html

Feel free to go on researching the matter further. But at least avoid simply repeating stuff from 5 years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catnhatnh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-18-08 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #45
133. Wait Patrick....
Your profile says you've only been here less than two months. Repeating things from 5 years ago in this forum should be helpful to you, right? I mean being a new guy they should strike you as fresh. I mean it took me six months to figure out who was what here in the forum I refer to as "Through the Looking Glass". Are you a quick study or reincarnated by some neccesity?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-18-08 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #133
134. He didn't specify this forum anywhere. The claim has been debunked years ago, is the point. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catnhatnh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-18-08 03:42 AM
Response to Reply #134
135. Oh no....
The point is that he presents himself in fact and by his profile as being a "new guy". You cannot then whine about things argued before you arrived and present it as old stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #37
43. "She remembers a neighbor calling her shortly after the first plane hit the towers.
http://web.archive.org/web/20020802194310/http://abcnews.go.com/sections/2020/DailyNews/2020_whitevan_020621.html

"She remembers a neighbor calling her shortly after the first plane hit the towers.

She grabbed her binoculars and watched the destruction unfolding in lower Manhattan. But as she watched the disaster, something else caught her eye.

Maria says she saw three young men kneeling on the roof of a white van in the parking lot of her apartment building. "They seemed to be taking a movie," Maria said."





Inaccurate?








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #43
46. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. Who are you refering to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ObamaDaMan Donating Member (37 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Not you
The guy you're asking questions. I have seen you are female. Sorry for any confusion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. If Patrick S. McNally is indeed the poster PatrickSMcNally, then ban him.
It's a weird choice of name if he or she isn't Patrick, to tell the truth.

I'm sorry I didn't catch this, ObamaDaMan. I don't have every antiSemite in the world on a Rolodex in case they show up here at DU. Thank goodness you signed up here in time to notice and warn us all of the danger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #49
50. Patrick H. McNally?
Edited on Thu Nov-13-08 11:05 AM by William Seger
I see some Google references to Patrick S. McNally which appear to be actually talking about this guy:

(Edited to remove the link, which should be banned here if it isn't already. Just Google "Patrick H. McNally".)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #50
51. oh you made a mistake with a link?
I guess that can happen can't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #51
53. Yes, he did, but he corrected it himself.
When you post links to antisemitic sites and they get deleted by the moderators and then you POST THEM AGAIN, then you're not making a mistake. You're making a pretty clear statement about yourself.

That can happen, too, can't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #53
55. bullshit
Edited on Thu Nov-13-08 06:11 PM by seemslikeadream
you don't know what the fuck you are talking about
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #55
57. :rofl:
Hey, did you hear about Vreeland?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #57
58. You mean the guy that Andy stood up for?
Edited on Thu Nov-13-08 06:29 PM by seemslikeadream
Andy and I had a long conversation about him, did you ever talk with Andy? You really shouldn't speak about Andy and his motives, intentions and friends. You know nothing about his personal life and should refrain from pretending to know ANYTHING about Andy.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #58
62. Andy was human. Andy made mistakes like all of us.
I doubt very much that Andy would have considered Vreeland a friend after this latest revelation. 9/11 con artist is one thing, but kiddie porn producer is something else entirely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #53
59. If you have a problem with Skinner's decisions take it up with him
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #59
63. If you've got a problem with reality, I'll be here to remind you of it
And don't ever think you can get away with misrepresenting what you did and how it went down.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. I know your little mind needs inflatiing so go ahead with your crap
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. :rofl:
Please. You started it, you love it, you can't get enough of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #66
68. Yep I love that this thread is staying at the top
Edited on Thu Nov-13-08 06:43 PM by seemslikeadream
Thanks

1268 views


and every time you pull this shit with me I get so many emails from friends, you are always a source of amusement
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #68
69. :eyes:
You really have no concept of how little that means.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #69
70. Whatever sweetie
Edited on Thu Nov-13-08 06:46 PM by seemslikeadream
not from what I hear, they just can't make up their minds who is more amusing you or SD
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #70
71. No one cares what your "friends" think, SLAD....
I find it interesting that you had to drag me into this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #71
72. I do that's all that matters to me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #72
75. Someone who is using Andy Stephenson to help defend a child porno producer
should shut the fuck up, SLAD.

I don't see how you sleep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #75
76. Don't you dare accuse me of that You are the one that started talking about Andy and what he would
Edited on Thu Nov-13-08 09:05 PM by seemslikeadream
have thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #76
77. Everyone in this thread can look and see exactly who mentioned Andy first, SLAD -- Post #58
Edited on Thu Nov-13-08 09:16 PM by boloboffin
And exactly why you brought him up.

As you say, the FACTS speak for themselves.

I don't understand how you think you can say such BLATANT factual inaccuracy, EASILY PROVEN TO BE SO ON THE VERY PAGE YOU POST THEM ON, and think you can get away with it.

How do you sleep at night, using Andy to help defend a child pornographer? How do you do that? Shame on you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #77
78. Yes they can and here are the relevant posts, note time
Edited on Thu Nov-13-08 09:26 PM by seemslikeadream


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #78
79. Are you trying to pretend that the second post of mine you reproduce is from this thread?
How you heap up factual inaccuracy after factual inaccuracy to divert from your using a beloved member of this community to defend a child pornographer.

Shame, shame on you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #79
80. Shame shame on you bolo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #80
81. No reason for me to be ashamed here
Tell us all about your friends that like watching you use the memory of Andy Stephenson like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #81
82. You're the one that pretended to know his mind
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #82
83. So you, who DO know his mind, think he would have defended a child pornographer knowingly????
How do you sleep?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #83
84. No I don't of course not but you're the one spouting off about it not me.
Edited on Thu Nov-13-08 10:12 PM by seemslikeadream
Do you want to throw around any more labels tonight or are you satisfied with the shit you've posted.
already?




Maybe you should stick to one slur a night, people might think you're a bit obsessive
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #84
85. I don't fucking believe it.
So now YOU, who "knows Andy's mind," say the same thing about him as I have said all this time, that he would RECOIL from this animal now --

And yet you have been BLASTING me for daring to suggest such a thing, all the while using him to DEFEND Delmart Vreeland.

There are no labels for what you are, SLAD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #85
86. There once was a shepard boy who was very bored
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #86
87. There once was a member who kept posting links to hate sites
even after being told repeatedly to not do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-14-08 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #72
88. Be wary of "friends" who may egg you on because they enjoy the show. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-14-08 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #88
89. NOBODY eggs me on
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-14-08 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #89
90. Checked your cholesterol levels lately? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-14-08 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #90
91. Checked your face lately?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-14-08 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #91
93. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-14-08 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #89
92. More unintended irony from SLAD....
what a hoot!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #53
73. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #53
74. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #53
96. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #96
99. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #50
56. Oh, so it's just a case of mistaken identity?
I see. Maybe that's why the poster here is sure to put the S in his username.

Thanks, William.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #56
61. ..
Edited on Thu Nov-13-08 06:25 PM by seemslikeadream
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #61
65. Another contentless, fact-free post from SLAD
Thank you for your non-opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #65
67. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #49
52. I thought you did
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #52
54. Are you trying to make sense and not succeeding? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-13-08 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #54
60. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Realityhack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
94. Shockingly another Cut and Paste wall of text from SLAD... I did find...
one interesting entry before I stopped reading.
"Fact #7
On the day of 9/11, a number of key personnel were "scattered" across the country, and the world. With few exceptions, including Dick Cheney. The President of the United States, at a time when America was "under attack" from kamikaze hijackers in commercial airliners, in a highly publicized location, 5 miles away from an international airport, in a classroom full of children, was not whisked away by the Secret Service. His conduct on the morning of 9/11 changed on the first anniversary."

As far as I can tell the sentence in bold makes no fucking sense at all.
This is of course par for the course with SLAD's posts in general.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #94
95. Welcome to the club of four
Edited on Sat Nov-15-08 04:09 PM by seemslikeadream
Why is it that only the dungeon dwellers of four have this strange reaction. I NEVER gets this "cut and paste" thing in GD. And that's after 35,674 posts! And probably 80% are cut and paste. And let me repeat that for emphasis I have NEVER been critized for cut and paste in GD. Did you ever check out LBN? THE OP'S ARE ALL CUT AND PASTE :rofl:




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #95
97. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #97
98. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #95
100. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
go west young man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #95
101. Thanks for the comprehensive list.
It seems to me that the people that are constantly attacking you seem to have not rebutted anything seriously. The facts are very interesting to say the least and any reasonable person would have to seriously question them. Hopefully in the future there will be a proper investigation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #101
102.  Gangster Nature of the State
http://www.tucradio.org/0314parentijfkone.mp3
http://www.tucradio.org/0321parentijfktwo.mp3

To know the truth about the assassination of John Kennedy is to call into question the state security system and the entire politico-economic order it protects. This is why for over thirty years the corporate-owned press and numerous political leaders have suppressed or attacked the many revelations about the murder unearthed by independent investigators like Mark Lane, Peter Dale Scott, Carl Oglesby, Harold Weisberg, Anthony Summers, Philip Melanson, Jim Garrison, Cyril Wecht, Jim Marrs, Gaeton Fonzi, Sylvia Meagher, Michael Canfield, James DiEugenio, and many others.
These investigators have been described as "assassination buffs." The term "buff" is a diminishing characterization, describing someone who pursues odd hobbies. For the same reason that we would not refer to "Holocaust buffs:' so should we not refer to these serious investigators as "assassination buffs." Their efforts reveal a conspiracy to assassinate the president and an even more extensive conspiracy to hide the crime.
While ignoring their revelations, the media have given fulsome publicity to the likes of Gerald Posner, author of a grotesque whitewash of the assassination. Posner's book was not a sloppy, confused work but a deliberate contrivance that used outright untruths to conclude that Lee Harvey Oswald was a disgruntled lone leftist who killed Kennedy. Posner could get away with his misrepresentations because those who have written systematic exposures of his book were either ignored by the corporate-owned media or roughed up by unsympathetic reviewers and editors.'






"Inventing Reality - The politics of the News Media."
http://www.tucradio.org/081105ParentiMEDIA.mp3


CONSPIRACY & CLASS POWER
http://www.tucradio.org/081015_ConspiracyONE.mp3

http://www.tucradio.org/081022_ConspiracyTWO.mp3
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #102
103. Or, it could just be that Oswald did, in fact, kill JFK as shown so ably by...
Vincent Bugliosi, Dale Myers and many others. If you'd bother to read Bugliosi's book, you'd see the case against Oswald is overwhelming and that no amount of blustering by people like Mark Lane alters the factual evidence. It's truly amazing to me that people are obsessing with this stuff some 45 years after JFK's death. Many people cannot fathom the idea that a nobody like Oswald killed the most powerful man in the world, but that's what happened. JFK assassination conspiracy theories help some people make sense of an asymmetrical event by "balancing it out", but it is truly a fool's errand and JFK was (and still is) one of my heroes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Realityhack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #103
108. Same for 9-11
Some people have trouble believing that so much damage was done so easily. No real actual evidence to show it isn't possible or didn't happen... just a lot of innuendo thrown around trying to show it was some massive conspiracy or could only be pulled off by Americans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #101
104. Except that nearly everything on the "list" has been....
thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. Maybe you guys should try reading both sides.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
go west young man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #104
105. you guys spend so much time attacking that personally I just ignore your posts.
It's like kindergarden. SLAD would be better off ignoring you entirely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Realityhack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #101
107. Most of this has been debunked or shown to be irrelevant.
It is the same old stuff CTers have been posting for years. There are plenty of rebutles around.
Did you actually expect someone to do a point by point refutation of every huge list of junk SLAD pastes into the forum?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #107
110. Get busy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #110
111. How's about YOU do a little work for a change, instead of just copy-n-paste
Edited on Sun Nov-16-08 12:34 PM by William Seger
If these "facts speak for themselves" please do tell us what they say.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #111
112. Read
maybe you can't but plenty of others can, I don't pretend to be so above everyone else as the all knowing WS to tell people what to believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #112
113. That's what I thought
The Princess of Paste is an intellectual layabout.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #113
114. I only engage in meaningful conversation with someone I have respect for
Edited on Sun Nov-16-08 03:15 PM by seemslikeadream
I hold absolutely NO respect for The Club of Four and have no intention of having a dialoge with any of you, why would I when I am sure of your motives here. Do you really believe anything said to you here would change YOUR mind about anything? What a waste of time that would be.

I do spend more than enough time on replying to personal attacks and that is all I get from The Club of Four, The Club's only intention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #114
115. I love the smell of haughty self-righteousness in the morning.
Too bad you posted in the afternoon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #115
117. Well since you are always with yourself
you have the smell morning noon and night, happy smells to you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #114
116. I've asked you many questions that were not in any way personal attacks
My motivation on this particular board is to demonstrate the intellectual bankruptcy of the "truth movement," so your refusal to answer my questions serves my purpose just as well as a ridiculous answer.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #116
118. Now where were those questions? In all the deleted posts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #118
119. Nope
The one here was, "If these 'facts speak for themselves' please do tell us what they say."

Another recent one I remember was, after you posted something about the CIA tracking the hijackers, whether you now believe that there were Arab hijackers. I'm sure I could find others, but there's no point when I can't expect anything intelligible from you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #119
120. please do tell us what they say
I have already done that, it's in the OP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #119
121. Could you please link to when I EVER posted I did not believe there were Arab hijackers?
Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Seger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #121
123. I doubt that I could link to where you EVER posted ANYTHING that YOU believe
No place to copy-n-paste it from, I guess.

And it looks like you don't intend to break your record, even though the "facts speak for themselves."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Realityhack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #121
127. So you are saying there were?
or just evading the question EXACTLY as predicted?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #114
122. Oh, bullshit, SLAD....
post something with an actual factual basis and not the warmed-over conspiracy hype you typically serve up and you might just trigger actual debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #122
124. Oh, bullshit SD when did YOU ever post anything of ANY value
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Realityhack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #114
126. Funny... I admitted I was wrong in another forum on DU yesterday.
Guess my mind isn't as made up as you might think.
Seriously... show me a convincing argument based on evidence and sound logic. Your OP certainly doesn't make one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #126
128. Everyman His Own Historian.
Carl Lotus Becker


The significance of man is that he is insignificant and is aware of it


All historians, even the most scientific, have bias, if in no other sense than the determination not to have any.


Generally speaking, men are influenced by books which clarify their own thought, which express their own notions well, or which suggest to them ideas which their minds are already predisposed to accept.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Realityhack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-08 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #128
129. Yes yes...
Edited on Mon Nov-17-08 07:58 AM by Realityhack
I know. Nice quote... but not exactly proof of anything. You realize it is a double edged sword right?

You ever going to tell us what you think of the list? Going to explain what you think the text I bolded means?

You keep asking for substantive annalists of the stuff you post... then skip out on any discussion of the merits whatsoever, instead focusing on anything that isn't about the substance.

How about you answer a few questions:
Do *you* see any errors with in the list you posted? After all if it isn't your work you might not agree with it 100%.
What do you think that list of facts 'says'?
What do you think the text I bolded means (or is it just a mistake)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-08 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #129
130. SLAD's got a nice game going
She's crying about no substantive discussion or rebuttal of her cut and paste jobs, but anyone likely to offer her one is somebody she doesn't have to listen to!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-08 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #130
131. She's crying about no substantive discussion or rebuttal
Edited on Mon Nov-17-08 11:07 AM by seemslikeadream
Just WHERE was I doing any crying?


Just more of YOUR imagination
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Realityhack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-08 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #131
132. And it continues.
Once again responding to a post not directly related to the OP while not answering one that is.

You DO complain about not having substantive responses. Call it complaining or crying or whatever... you make the complaint frequently enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Realityhack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #110
125. Why?
Why on earth would I go through a point by point refutation when you have already demonstrated you will ignore any questions by ignoring my question below?
Nobody owes you a point by point refutation, not even the government.

If you want to discuss the substantive issues around a particular point... lets discuss that point. But the tactic you are using is to fling a huge pile of junk and hope something sticks. You won't even comment on what you think of the list YOU posted.

So no.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Realityhack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #95
106. You going to comment on the bolded text or not? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-16-08 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
109. Michael Parenti -- Creating Mass Audiences
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #109
151. +1
Excellent post, too, SLAD
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Twist_U_Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-09 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
136. How did I miss this?? Thanks SLAD
Edited on Sun Jan-04-09 12:31 PM by Twist_U_Up
Its too bad this section of DU remains a tragedy of disinformation because of a few tools who are stuck in the rut of repeating fantasy because they turned their backs on actual truthseeking in order to have a fun hobby.

Keep up the good work. You are one of the few left, thats truely, DUs finest.

edit: just noticed I didnt miss this its just been awhile.
Oh well this deserves a kick.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BunnyBluetimes Donating Member (78 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-15-09 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #136
137. I second this motion
may all slad roads lead to victory. :kick: No matter what happens keep the info flowing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
go west young man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #137
138. I'll third it.
Excellent post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-11-09 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #138
147. Fourth.
Kick for Truth on September 11, 2009.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anigbrowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-11-09 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #136
148. This would be a lot more interesting of a forum if it were focused around the sort of stuff in the O
even if it copypasta. Instead much of the bandwidth is filled up by loons going on about no planes, mini-nukes, DEWs, and repeatedly insisting the lunar lander was a poorly-made movie prop (quite what this has to do with 9/11 I have no idea but the poster likes to keep repeating it).

There are little flaws in the OP but overall it does a good job of summarizing outstanding troubling questions about 9/11, without jumping to conclusions about what 'must have' been the cause. I wish I could think of a way to drive the woo-mongers out of this forum and let have their idiotic mini-nuke-hologram-space-alien conversations somewhere else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #148
150. one side note, in fairness
repeatedly insisting the lunar lander was a poorly-made movie prop (quite what this has to do with 9/11 I have no idea...).

By rule, this forum is "the only forum on Democratic Underground where we permit members to debate highly speculative conspiracy theories." The mods exercise discretion in enforcing that rule (e.g., election fraud crap is likely to be moved to the Election Reform forum, not here), but "moon landing faked" stuff ends up here if it doesn't start here.

At least in principle, I agree that the forum would be much more interesting if more people had things to say about political arguments -- beyond "PNAC PNAC PNAC neener neener," that is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
152. Zombie-slad rises again...nt
Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC