9/11 Redux - Page 15 - Ajarn Forum

Farangrakthai · 21st May 2008, 20:37

Xtrafresh, I'm sorry to say, but you must haven't read the first 13 pages of this thread. Because you didn't address any of the points thus far made. If you believe that it was a conspiracy to have the 15 guys with box cutter do it, then please provide some facts to support that.

Xtrafresh · 21st May 2008, 20:40

i need to put on my glasses

.

I do not believe in conspiracy theories. give me solid facts with people coming out of the woodwork. I was not on the planes with the hijacters came on so I dont know how they did it. No one probably will since they are all dead.

Farangrakthai · 21st May 2008, 20:47

o.k. so do you think it was an inside job or not? inside job, including the possiblitity that it was allowed to happen.

Xtrafresh · 21st May 2008, 20:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xtrafresh

The first conspiracy theories about 9-11 began to emerge while the wreckage was still smoldering at ground zero. As evidence begin to pile up that conclusively linked the hijackings to Al Qaeda, some self-proclaimed skeptics searched for alternative explanations as to what happened on 9/11. Many seemed driven to find a way to blame the United States for somehow abetting, or even orchestrating, the tragedy.

that statement should give you an insight on how I feel.

Farangrakthai · 21st May 2008, 20:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xtrafresh

As evidence begin to pile up that conclusively linked the hijackings to Al Qaeda, some self-proclaimed skeptics searched for alternative explanations as to what happened on 9/11

no that doesn't say anything.

Uncle Harry · 21st May 2008, 21:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farangrakthai

including the possiblitity that it was allowed to happen.

As much as I hate Bush and his evil bunch, I don't think they had anything to do with planning the attack. But I do believe that they knew about it and allowed it to happen.

esoteric1 · 26th May 2008, 16:41

YouTube - 9/11: Total Proof That Bombs Were Planted In The Buildings!

no there were no reports of other explosions at all

Larkinny · 28th May 2008, 23:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xtrafresh

that statement should give you an insight on how I feel.

This?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xtrafresh

As evidence begin to pile up that conclusively linked the hijackings to Al Qaeda

Evidence?

Quote:

The FBI confirmed in a recent statement (July 2006) that "The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on the Usama Bin Laden's Most Wanted page is because "the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11"

Osama bin Laden, among the FBI's "Ten Most Wanted Fugitives": Why was he never indicted for his alleged role in 9/11?

Larkinny · 3rd June 2008, 16:27

Swiss newspaper asks if Bush was behind 9/11

Quote:

Blick, a newspaper with a daily circulation of 275,000, has released an article asking many questions about the official version of the events of 9/11. They are referencing some work done by local professors at the University of Switzerland, Albert A. Stahel (63) and Daniele Ganser (34).

Stahel, an expert in strategy, commented, "something is wrong" and called the official line "incomplete". Gansers stance is much harder - believing that Bush and co. could be responsible "The more we explore, the more we doubt on Bush's version...Bush has lied so much already!"

The issue is still a taboo inside the media, but slowly more and more mainstream sources are asking questions of the official commission. Should the 9/11 truth movement get what they want and have a fresh public investigation into the attacks?

OK, so only a local rag, but newsworthy all the same.

Then we have this major Croatian news site:

Javno - World

Quote:

In 1997, the neo-conservatives William Kristol and Robert Kagan founded PNAC, with the aim of Reuters-.--.-getting the USA to stand on its feet and free itself of evil regimes in the beginning. The most dangerous of those regimes was Saddam Hussein.

They did not want to be in the shadows any longer, and on January 26, 1998 they sent a letter to Bill Clinton in which they sought the urgent invasion of Iraq in order to stop any attempts of attacks against the United States. Clinton ignored them, because of which they contacted all of the Republican members of congress. They did not ignore them.

[...]

However, regardless of how extreme the ideas of PNAC were, what provoked the most controversy was the 90 page document from September 2000, called “Rebuilding America’s Defences – Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century” in which PNAC described in detail, how the United States could progress.

Even though the entire document is very extreme, the most interesting part is where PNAC called for a new Pearl Harbour:

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.

[...]

Political analysts are comparing the document to Mein Kampf, because it was also ignored until war took place. However, everybody knows how the Nazi idea and Hitler ended. The problem is that people have obviously learned nothing, and they allow these people to lead the world.

Xtrafresh · 4th June 2008, 19:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larkinny

Swiss newspaper asks if Bush was behind 9/11

OK, so only a local rag, but newsworthy all the same.

Then we have this major Croatian news site:

Javno - World

Your point is.....? I am not to concerned about these newspapers. If Bush was behind 9/11 then I am sure that someone would be running their mouths by now. Look at McCellon new book. Loose lips sink ships and this is one ship that bush has that hasent sunk.

Xtra

Larkinny · 4th June 2008, 23:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xtrafresh

Your point is.....? I am not to concerned about these newspapers. If Bush was behind 9/11 then I am sure that someone would be running their mouths by now. Look at McCellon new book. Loose lips sink ships and this is one ship that bush has that hasent sunk.

Xtra

I don't think Bush was the mastermind. The point of those articles is to show that even mainstream media is coming around to acknowledging the Americans were lying.

And as I've said many times before, if a foreign intelligence agency is involved, the number of Americans in the know is greatly reduced.

Xtrafresh · 5th June 2008, 06:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larkinny

I don't think Bush was the mastermind. The point of those articles is to show that even mainstream media is coming around to acknowledging the Americans were lying.

And as I've said many times before, if a foreign intelligence agency is involved, the number of Americans in the know is greatly reduced.

That is mere speculations. Even if a foreign intelligence agency was involved there would be many people "in the know" stateside. And GWB has a horrible track record at keeping his close friends from talking. Even his most senior cabinet members have said negative things about him.

Do I think that our government told us the complete truth? Most likely not. I do believe however that Bush did not have any knowledge before the events took place.

Larkinny · 6th June 2008, 23:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xtrafresh

That is mere speculations.

What do criminal investigators do when they're trying to solve a crime? Do they speculate?

Quote:

Even if a foreign intelligence agency was involved there would be many people "in the know" stateside. And GWB has a horrible track record at keeping his close friends from talking. Even his most senior cabinet members have said negative things about him.

The magnitude of this event means that those in the know would realize that if they made any attempt to spill the beans they would be "suicided".

What would the first thing be they'd do? Go to the media? HA HA. The controlled media. A judge? The FBI would quickly find out and it would be curtains for them. Look what happened here:

Quote:

David Schippers, noted conservative Chicago lawyer and the House Judiciary Committee's chief investigator in the Clinton impeachment trial, later claims that FBI agents in Chicago and Minnesota contact him around this time and tell him that a terrorist attack is going to occur in lower Manhattan. According to Schippers, the agents had been developing extensive information on the planned attack for many months. However, the FBI soon pulls them off the terrorist investigation and threatens them with prosecution under the National Security Act if they go public with the information. As a result, they contact Schippers hoping he can persuade the government to take action. Schippers tries to pass the information on to high government officials, but apparently his efforts are ignored. Partly in conjunction with Judicial Watch, the public interest law firm, Schippers is now representing at least ten FBI agents in a suit against the US government in an attempt to have their testimony subpoenaed, which would enable them to legally tell what they know without going to jail.

Quote:

I do believe however that Bush did not have any knowledge before the events took place.

He's a puppet. He may or may not have known.

Xtrafresh · 7th June 2008, 02:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larkinny