9-11 Conspiracy

Hi GM,I'm not sure, but I think this is my first response to you, so this should be interesting. As you wisely should. I do find your next statement interesting though: Viewed unanimously by whom? This statement is quite vague, unless you are actually trying to make the claim that nearly every human being on this planet views OBL this way. If this is what you are claiming, then you are sadly mistaken. OBL is a Muslim who dares to stand against the west.This view is held by many Muslims as admirable. The vast majority of Muslims here in Afghanistan simply want us to leave them alone. They want us out of their country, and OBL and the Taliban facilitate that desire. As I was told by a Pashtun Commander; "The Afghan people are a proud people." Firstly, to put it bluntly, your opinion is worthless in this matter as:
A) You don't really know anything about OBL.
B) You don't really know anything about how OBL is viewed by his subordinates.
C) You don't really know anything about how the local populations in the middle east and Southwest Asia view OBL.So, how does the average Al-Qaeda member view OBL is the question.OBL is known to view himself as a soldier that has not provided himself any more comfortable accommodations, or food than any of his soldiers. He is actively involved in training camps and their operation. He is viewed as a patriarch within the network, that is tantamount to it's survival.The average local national views OBL as a respectable Muslim that is executing that which they themselves desire. They are willing to facilitate Al-Qaeda and Taliban members in the provision of housing and food. This is correct. I would be more confident in the Saudi Gov't facilitating AL-Qaeda, seeing as OBL is a Saudi Royal Family Member.I pretty much can see your argument for the rest of your post, I just felt the need to clarify some misconceptions on OBL and Al-Qaeda. Like I said to Onifre, I am hardly an expert on the rest of the 9/11 facts.I kind of view the whole thing as being a huge display of the idiocy of the Bush Administration. I would definitely say that terrorists actually hijacked planes, that smashed into the WTC towers and the Pentagon. I would also say their collision is the direct cause of the tower collapse, and that neither of the towers came EVEN CLOSE to free fall speed upon collapse.I would also say that Osama Bin Laden was directly involved in the planning and execution of this plan, and that his taking credit for the attack (as well as other sources which I won't divulge) is evidence of this.The inconsistencies and obvious "We need to cover our butts" behavior is another demonstration of the Bush Administration trying to do just that.I would say that our invasion of Afghanistan was a terrible mistake in that we did not completely destroy the country and wipe our hands of it, but hey, I am at the last 2 weeks of my deployment, and a tad bitter at this point.Take care.Edited by Michamus, : typo

The NORAD tapes, on which the 9/11 Commission's report was based, support the 9/11 Commission.Here's some more tapes, again released by NORAD. Let us know if you, or any conspiracy theorist, can find anything in there which supports the timeline for United 175 that that NORAD released on 18th September.Here's Shelly Miller of the FAA, the person responsible for assembling timelines, explaining (amongst other things) how they got it wrong about United 175.Curiously enough, you started off by accusing NORAD of actual perjury. Yet presented with hard evidence that they did get at least one detail wrong, you defend them to the death --- because this is a detail you'd have liked them to be right about.In addition, as has been pointed out to you, the NORAD timeline can't be right --- it amounts to a claim that the FAA informed them of the hijack of United 175 the moment it happened. Where?

There as many different opinions on OBL as there are people in this world. It matters not what people think of OBL, whether Muslim or not. It only matters what history reflects him to be: the mastermind and enabler of the mass murder of thousands of people. Case closed. However, the same could be said of some well-known Americans (and even Presidents) as well i.e. Andrew Jackson (the virtual eradication of whole tribes of American Indians) Many but not all. Muslims, Arab or otherwise, have as many different opinions on this matter as many Americans. Some support OBL and some don't. It is not a 100% concensus. How do I know? I have been over there myself as well i.e Iraq, Bahrain, UAE and the like and have talked to the people overthere as well.Unfortunately "the West" has as invested so much, both bad and good, in the Middle East, that it is almost impossible for us to extract ourselves out of the cluster-fck over there. Agreed. As do most of the Muslims in Iraq and other Arab countries as well. They are as tired of this feud as us non-Arabs. However, the difference is that they have nowhere else to go. So many will fight to the death to protect there way of life and real or perceived injustices.However, we cannot just walk away and let the Middle East dissolve into the chaos that Bush and Cheney started.Just my thoughts from a fellow serviceman.BTW, I wish the best for you and other serviceman and women serving with you over there and hope you have a safe end to your deployment and joyous return home.Sincerely,Pale Blue Dot
aka Devil's AdvocateEdited by Pale Blue Dot, : No reason given.Edited by Pale Blue Dot, : No reason given.Edited by Pale Blue Dot, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

And that would make us better than OBL and other terrorists and meglomaniac murderers how?I do understand your bitterness. It is hard not to be bitter when many of the people we are "trying to help" are turning around and trying to kill us. This is a lesson we should have learned from Vietnam.Unfortunately, we keep electing the same idiots to the white house who haven't a clue of how to run an effective war, who will not listen to the Generals and Admirals who do have the right experience and who spend more time on vacation than doing there damn job. If people were not dying it would almost be laughable how inane this predictament is.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

I don't know why you even felt the need to state this. If I had intended to state all, I would have stated 'all'.OOC, When were you in Iraq, and what did you do?Take care.

This was more of a clarification for lurkers and other readers than for yourself. Navy IA 2006-07, C-RAM.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

I did not, I started off by saying that they don't fuck up like that.For 2 years NORAD held to those timelines.Now "tapes" brought out by the FAA claim differently - convinently.Senator Mark Dayton:

quote:

---

Senator Mark Dayton (D) charges that NORAD and the FAA have covered up catastrophic failures that left the nation vulnerable during the 9/11 hijackings. He says, For almost three years now, NORAD officials and FAA officials have been able to hide their critical failures that left this country defenseless during two of the worst hours in our history. He notes major discrepancies between various accounts and chronologies given by officials. He says NORAD officials lied to the American people, they lied to Congress and they lied to your 9/11 Commission to create a false impression of competence, communication and protection of the American people. He calls the FAA’s and NORAD’s failures the most gross incompetence and dereliction of responsibility and negligence that I’ve ever, under those extreme circumstances, witnessed in the public sector. He says that he grew upset about these failures after staying up late and reading the 9/11 Commission’s final report.

---

So someone is lying here. If we accept that NORAD lied for 2 years and the FAA timelines are the correct ones, then NORAD still has to account for their lies to Congress and the 911 Commission.But, if they didn't lie, if their timelines were the correct ones, then the FAA has been used as the scapegoat, tapes have been edited to sound a certain way (which is not hard to do) and the public has no way of finding out.From the book written by John Farmer, who served as Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission. The book: The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11.

quote:

---

the public had been seriously misled about what occurred during the morning of the attacks, and Farmer himself states that at some level of the government, at some point in timethere was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened.

---

From Thomas H. Kean:

quote:

---

We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us, said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. It was just so far from the truth. . . . It’s one of those loose ends that never got tied.

​

Farmer himself is quoted in the Post article, stating, I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described . The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. This is not spin. This is not true.

---

If we accept the FAA's account then NORAD was lying - If NORAD wasn't lying then we must question the FAA's accounts.Either way, like Farmer states: at some level of the government, at some point in timethere was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened.- Oni

Hi, Pale Blue Dot? ...or, a great defender of Muslim land and a rebel against the capitalist system?Mass murder? ...or, casualties of the holy war against capitalist tyranny? The "west" had no business there, this includes Israel and their current occupation of land that wasn't theirs for the taking - Supported by the US, and armed by the US.Is there really any question as to why Muslim "extremist" feel the need to attack the west, when the west does nothing but invade, occupy and exploit them?The "cluster fuck" dates back before 911, before Kuwait, and before OBL.I'm just playing "devils advocate" as to how Muslims might view the west. That's the beauty of the whole invasion, once you're there you can make an argument as to why leaving would be catastrophic.Dissolve into what kind of chaos exactly?We don't want to leave because others will swoop in and take control of the only thing we want out of that place...oil. I liked Devils Advocate better. - Oni

You don't mean "trying to help" as in actually trying to help them, do you?I notice you put it in quotations, I'm wondering what you mean. I think the issue stems from our naive illusion that people elected to the White House actually have the power to do anything, let alone effectively run a war.Defense is an industry. Being at war drives the market. War is needed, and sustaining it is financially benefitial to those "elected" officials who get lobbied by the Defense Industry. Noboby in that industry wants the war to end, the more wars, the greater the gain.What we need to do, in my anachical opinion, as citizens who "elect" these officials, is question our elected officials ties with this industry.- Oni

Hi Onifre,Good talking again, even if we may not agree on everything. Not all muslims accept this opinion of OBL. Some are more sympathetic than others just as some Americans are more sympathetic of Bush and Cheney than others. Some just view OBL and Al-Qaeda as a extremists punks who are feeding the fire of discontent and making the situation over there worse. The vast majority Muslims just want the fighting to stop so they can live there lives in peace. Many countries in the Middle East are run by capitalist-centered regimes i.e. OPEC, the multi-trillion dollar banking systems of Bahrain, UAE and Saudi Arabia. I would venture this is more of a religious and cultural war than a war against capitalism or a specifical financial system. I am not an advocate of the forced statehood of Israel back in 1946 either. However, I am sure the original natives of America could say the same for the British colonialists in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries as well. Israel is now a recognized and soverign country. We need to move forward on these issues not backwards. We need to fix the problems of today as well as recognising the mistakes of the past. BTW, the state of Israel was not only supported by the US. Great Britian and several other powers of the West were involved as well.The problem is we are entrenched in the Middle East and we need to fix the "fuck ups" we created over there. In no way do I advocate why or how we overthrew the Iraqi regime right after 9-11. IMHO, we should never have picked the fight with Iraq as our hands were full already with chasing Al-Queda in Afghanistan and the outer reaches of Pakistan.However, that is the past, we have to address the situation on the ground in the middle east as it exists TODAY. If we pull out completely out of Afghanistan now, that entire area WILL destabilize and the Taliban and Al-Qaeda WILL rebound even stronger than what existed before 9-11 in Afghanistan, Pakistan and more than likely spread to other regions as well. The only solution is to empower the Afghan military and the Karzai regime and work alongside them until they are ready to take over force protection and security while conducting a phased withdrawel of US forces like we are conducting in Iraq. We also must empower the indigenous people of these countries to stand up to the extremism of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban on there own. We must lead through diplomacy and our example. You cannot spread democracy at the point of the sword. This is Obama's and our current military leadership's approach to this situation and mine as well. No question in my mind. That is how many everyday citizens as well as the hardened Muslim "extremists" view America's as well as many of the other Western powers aka GB's, France's and Israel's occupation of there countries. How would you like it if Russia or China invaded America and enacted martial law for decades at a time. The middle east is the most contested piece of real estate on the globe in the entire history of the human species. Totally agree. Nothing new here. And you are totally correct in your assessment here. Now you just need to educate the rest of the American population of this. Good luck Edited by Pale Blue Dot, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Not all of us military people go over to the Middle East wanting to kill innocent men, women and children. Look up the term 'blowback' (here is a good articles which explains this phenomena well, as well as our current predictament in the ME: Blowback) and you will understand what I mean. Our very presence over there fans the flames of Islamic extermism. Unfortunately, like I said in my preceding post if we pull 100% of our forces completely out of the Middle East, irrevocable damage would occur and this entire region could destabilize. We are in a catch-22. Presidents do have the power to send our troops into the battlefield as shown during our actions during WWII. The read question is: Who do you want sending your sons and daughters into harms way? So was WWII an industry? Should we have not fought this battle? How about the Gulf War of the 1990's? There is a need for our military. The question is, are we employing it for the right reasons. Bullshit. Are you saying Collin Powell, Tommy Franks, Normon Schwarzkopf and other leading Generals and Admirals want a never-ending war? You got to be out of your mind. I have personally served under several Commodores and Admirals. They have families. Many have sons and daughters serving in the military are themselves in harm's way. You really think all they care about is the perpetuating the "military industrial complex"? However, I do agree that some of the people in the past who have "led" this country have done irrevokable harm to are security, reputation of our country and military as well as families and friends of serviceman themselves killed in action. Agreed. Question and analyze the background and intentions of these people before they even get elected.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Good talking to you again too. Hope all is well with you and your family.And like I told, Straggler, if we were hanging out drinking a few beers we'd agree on a lot more than you think, but it's fun to antagonize a debate every now and then so, you know, it's all in good fun. I can agree with that, but I'd also add that the Muslims who are sympathetic to the west, like Americans with Bush/Cheney, are those who stand to gain from siding with the west. In the case of the Muslims it may be those of a more moderate opinion who don't hold so strict to Islamic rule, see the financial benefits to siding with the west (I hope it's not 'cause their envious of our culture) and would support western ideologies. Yes, but these opinions don't necessarily mean that they support the west. They're just tired of the fighting, so I think OBL himself could still be held in high regards, even by those who want the fighting to stop. Not all of course, maybe not even most, but some I would imagine fall under this catagory.Basically, they hate the west, can appreciate the cause that OBL is fighting for, but simply wish for the fighting to end. Fair enough, I'll agree with that. In fact, if I recall correctly, it's been most the religous figures in the Muslim faith that usually have the problem with capitalism. Well, at least they're not currently treated as second class citizens, like the Palestinian are. Israel is a representative of the US and of modern culture, their current treatment of the Palestinians doesn't set, or elevate them to, this standard.Israel is an oppressive nation, currently, under it's current government. If the US was really a nation that helps the weak, we would not allow this.However, instead of that, we continue to fund their illegal wars, their occupation and military control.From Amnesty International: Source

quote:

---

"Legally and morally, this U.S. arms shipment should have been halted by the Obama administration given the evidence of war crimes resulting from military equipment and munitions of this kind used by the Israeli forces," said Brian Wood, arms control campaign manager for Amnesty International. "Arms supplies in these circumstances are contrary to provisions in U.S. law."

---

The bias move then, if the Palestinians fight back, or elect a hardcore, BIG balls political party like Hamas, is to consider them terrorist. In my opinion, the US needs to stop funding these wars. Take control of Israel and try to find peace with the Palestinians, and equally share the country. BOTH sides need to be charged with the war crimes they commited, bringing fair, and balanced justice to the region. Agreed.However... I think we may be shocked to find out that the "extremist", in their eyes, are us, the US military. Their fellow Muslims who are fighting us, even though they may not agree with them fighting and just want things to stop, are not "extremist", they're simply strong willed Muslim who are willing to fight for their land. Something some of the ones who aren't fighting wish they had the courage to do. We can't so long as we are the biggest supporters of oppression and inequality in the eyes of the Muslim world. I direct you again to Amnesty Internationals article:

quote:

---

this U.S. arms shipment should have been halted by the Obama administration given the evidence of war crimes resulting from military equipment and munitions of this kind used by the Israeli forces

---

I agree!And the guy who came from an oil family, who was elected as chief executive officer of the US, did everything in his power to get himself, and "his friends", onto that piece of property - even knowingly allow information about an attack to go unregarded, and set up distractions to throw off NORAD/FAA/Air traffic controlers. Now hows that for a fuck'n conspiracy theory? ...or, get my head blown off from a moving convertible trying. - OniEdited by onifre, : added "currently" to second class citizens

Not what I meant at all.I meant the overall US agenda. Individual soldiers have my full respect. I'll read it when I get a chance, thanks. That goes further than I meant. Presidents can declare war, but who knows why they're doing it. Bush, in my opinion, did it because of his ties to oil and the desire to control it - more or less.Who cares who is leading them into battle when the motives are greed? Curiously, what got the US into WWII? Wasn't it also a single act of "terrorism"? Kuwaiti oil is a good cause to send troops into harms way? There is only a need for a military when you are a nation like ours that proliferates tyranny, oppression and global hegemony. How badass is Canada's military? Swedens? etc.The need for a military, especially one as big as ours, is another one of the illusions drilled into our heads, promoted through fear tactics, and is insulting to free thinkers, IMO. Again, I'm not refering to individual servicemen.When I say the Defense Industry I mean the manufacturers of the weapons, fighterjets, munisions, tanks, guns, bullets, missiles, etc. In other words, the Nike of the military defense program. Those guys need war, I don't think that's a big mystery. They would be out of a job with out war, wouldn't they?- Oni

I refer you to your first post on this thread, post #41, where you wrote: Here you are taking the 9/11 Commission to be in the right and accusing NORAD, not just of accidental error, but of actual perjury. But when you want NORAD to be right about something and the Commission to be wrong, then suddenly the Commission are part of a big conspiratorial cover-up, and what NORAD says is gospel. Evidence?All we've looked at so far is a timeline that NORAD rushed out a week after the event. How is it "convenient" for the FAA to release tapes proving that they and NORAD got it wrong? How is it "convenient" for NORAD to turn over to the Commission, and the public, tapes showing that they got it wrong? Or wrong. I refer you again to "Nebraska Man" --- is that a proof that the Evil Evil-utionists are enmeshed in a conspiracy of lies, as creationists claim? Or was it an honest mistake? Yes, you can imagine that any piece of evidence that doesn't fit your hypothesis has been faked. So can creationists. But if we enter into that sort of epistemological nightmare, then what is there left for us to discuss?Perhaps 9/11 was perpetrated by Freemasons using flying saucers. If we discount all the evidence to the contrary as a product of the Masonic conspiracy ... then we have made this hypothesis completely unfalsifiable. Hooray!However, as a rebuttal, I would point out that the tapes you are disputing came from NORAD. And if they had been tampered with in any way, then NORAD could have said so.And finally, why would anyone bother to lie? We're talking about a discrepancy of 19 minutes. Again, this is creationist thinking: the one little anomaly or discrepancy that proves the huge conspiracy.

So again, was this war (WWII) not justified on our (USA and the Allies) part? Or should we have just let Germany, Japan and Italy wreck devastation while we stuck our head in the sand to appease the Monroe doctrine.BTW, I am dead set against trying to compare the current situation in the ME and our "war against terrorism" with the conflicts of WWII. They are totally different creatures with different causes and plot lines.I believe the first Gulf War was justified to protect the sovereign rights of the recognized country of Kuwait and to thwart the power grab by Saddam Hussein in 1990. This is further substantiated by the fact that a massive allied coalition of over 35 countries participated in this operation including nearly all the Muslim countries of the Middle East such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, UAE, Morroco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Afghanistan and Turkey and our most strongest allies such as the UK, France, Canada, Italy, Spain and Australia.The current war against Iraq I do not believe was adequately justified and this is reflected by the fact that only a hand full of allied countries have provided troops to this conflict in its 6 year history. Only 4 contries provided troops to initially invade Iraq and overthrow Sadam Hussein in 2003: (US [248,0000 troops], UK [45,000 troops], Australia [2000 troops], and Poland [194 troops]) compared with the 35 country coalition (of non-us 210,000+ troops) of the 7 month Gulf War (Aug 1990-Feb 1991). No Arab countries provided troops for the war in Iraq as opposed to the 10+ Arab countries which provided troops during the Gulf War.Most of the countries of the Iraqi coalition of 20 some countries were not involved in the initial invasion but rather only with the clean up, security and reconstruction afterwords. Of which almost 100% of these troops are from small European NATO countries (such as Albania, Azerbizon, Denmark, etc which are compelled by treaty to provide a minimal amount of troops or risk being expelled from NATO (for example Iceland provided 2 troops and Moldova provided 24) Multi-National Force - Iraq) and small pacific countries such as Tongo, South Korea and Singapore which are dependent on the USA for trade and military reasons for a total of 24,000 coalition troops (excluding the US & UK troops) during the last 6 years of the war in Iraq (Mar 2003 to present day) compared to the 210,000 coalition troops of the 7 month Gulf War (excluding the US & UK troops). There is a vast difference between these two conflicts and the current Iraq War "coalition" is a joke IMHO.BTW, I will take you up on the beer if we ever get a chance to meet Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan