Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
9/11 was an inside job. Change my mind.
9/11 was an inside job. Change my mind.
By Vegas
22 Jul 2023 12:05 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
23 Jul 2023 10:17 am
Who the **** cares, those cruise missiles have a range of a 1,000 miles, it could have come from anywhere, probably from a submarine if that makes you happy..
Suppose you tell us what happened to the airplane wreckage?
In memory of Pumpkins
23 Jul 2023 10:22 am
It's NOT the entire FBI, CIA, and ALL of any agency. Just the heads. Maybe 10 people who know full well what being outed would mean.Z09 » 23 Jul 2023, 8:30 am » wrote: ↑ There is simply no way any deep state could keep the murder of 3000 people a secret during the planning or after the deed.
Like JFK...
After 60 years and there's still no evidence...Just speculation..
Does anyone really think the Secret Service, FBI, CIA and Dallas Police all got together and killed JFK and then kept it quietly...?
The meat and potatoes of those organizations are told what to investigate and cut off if they're headed in the "wrong" direction.
23 Jul 2023 10:24 am
Still no picturesbut there was this at your link
In the real footage, after McIntyre mentions the “huge, gaping hole,” he continues: “I can see parts of the airplane that crashed into the building — very small pieces of the plane — on the heliport outside the building. The biggest piece I saw was about three-feet long. It was silver and it had been painted green and red, but I could not see any identifying markings on the plane. I also saw a large piece of shattered glass that appeared to be a cockpit windshield or other window from the plane.”
jumbo jet reduced to a pickup load
23 Jul 2023 10:35 am
No, there wasn't.. and don't come with pictures of those few crappy pieces that were clearly planted there later..where are the engines, the tail, the luggage..
Damn, I just told you, are you acting stoopid on purpose?And you think a cruise missile hit the Pentagon?
From where?
A ship?
lol.. that is the most important thing?And most important...
If these planes crashed into the Towers that day why LIE about one crashing into the Pentagon?
But if you want to know, the Pentagon was more difficult target, ground level and they needed to hit a specific section, they weren't sure they could pull that off with a remote controlled boeing 727 so they used a cruise missile..
In memory of Pumpkins
23 Jul 2023 11:11 am
“And the word back,” says Tenet, “‘was ‘we’re not quite ready to consider this. We don’t want the clock to start ticking.’” (Translation: GW admin did not want a paper trail to show that they’d been warned.)razoo » 22 Jul 2023, 4:11 pm » wrote: ↑ They were receiving flight instructions and paying cash money for their instruction ........... odd thing about this instruction is they were not interested in landing only take off .......
Where was the GW Bush surveillance team? No where to be found. Clinton had these terrorists under surveillance then GW came along and provided no more funding. Inside job? You bet inside the Bush admin,
Big brother knew of these nut jobs yet lost funding and they were living within walking distance of NSA headquarters yet still got away with this terrorist activity................. Inside job = the GOP
“Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” The CIA’s famous Presidential Daily Brief, presented to George W. Bush on August 6, 2001, has always been Exhibit A in the case that his administration shrugged off warnings of an Al Qaeda attack. But months earlier, starting in the spring of 2001, the CIA repeatedly and urgently began to warn the White House that an attack was coming.
By May of 2001, says Cofer Black, then chief of the CIA’s counterterrorism center, “it was very evident that we were going to be struck, we were gonna be struck hard and lots of Americans were going to die.” “There were real plots being manifested,” Cofer’s former boss, George Tenet, told me in his first interview in eight years. “The world felt like it was on the edge of eruption. In this time period of June and July, the threat continues to rise.
The drama of failed warnings began when Tenet and Black pitched a plan, in the spring of 2001, called “the Blue Sky paper” to Bush’s new national security team. It called for a covert CIA and military campaign to end the Al Qaeda threat—“getting into the Afghan sanctuary, launching a paramilitary operation, creating a bridge with Uzbekistan.”
“And the word back,” says Tenet, “‘was ‘we’re not quite ready to consider this. We don’t want the clock to start ticking.’” (Translation: they did not want a paper trail to show that they’d been warned.)
Black, a charismatic ex-operative who had helped the French arrest the terrorist known as Carlos the Jackal, says the Bush team just didn’t get the new threat: “I think they were mentally stuck back eight years [before]. They were used to terrorists being Euro-lefties—they drink champagne by night, blow things up during the day, how bad can this be? And it was a very difficult sell to communicate the urgency to this.”
That morning of July 10, the head of the agency’s Al Qaeda unit, Richard Blee, burst into Black’s office. “And he says, ‘Chief, this is it. Roof’s fallen in,’” recounts Black. “The information that we had compiled was absolutely compelling. It was multiple-sourced. And it was sort of the last straw.” Black and his deputy rushed to the director’s office to brief Tenet.
All agreed an urgent meeting at the White House was needed.
“I said, ‘Condi, I have to come see you,’” Tenet remembers. “It was one of the rare times in my seven years as director where I said, ‘I have to come see you. We’re comin’ right now. We have to get there.’”
Tenet vividly recalls the White House meeting with Rice and her team. (George W. Bush was on a trip to Boston.) “Rich [Blee] started by saying, ‘There will be significant terrorist attacks against the United States in the coming weeks or months.
The attacks will be spectacular. They may be multiple. Al Qaeda’s intention is the destruction of the United States.’” [Condi said:] ‘What do you think we need to do?’ Black responded by slamming his fist on the table, and saying, ‘We need to go on a wartime footing now!’”
https://www.politico.eu/article/attacks ... bin-laden/
23 Jul 2023 11:21 am
The attacks will be spectacular. They may be multiple. Al Qaeda’s intention is the destruction of the United States.’” [Condi said:] ‘What do you think we need to do?’ Black responded by slamming his fist on the table, and saying, ‘We need to go on a wartime footing now!’”Z09 » 23 Jul 2023, 11:16 am » wrote: ↑ If Clinton had these terrorists under surveillence then why didn't he stop them?
“And the word back,” says Tenet, “‘was ‘we’re not quite ready to consider this. We don’t want the clock to start ticking.’” (Translation: GW admin did not want a paper trail to show that they’d been warned.)
https://www.politico.eu/article/attacks ... bin-laden/
23 Jul 2023 11:24 am
Correct....Z09 » 23 Jul 2023, 10:06 am » wrote: ↑ CLAIM: A CNN report from Sept. 11, 2001, is evidence that no airplane debris was found at the site of the Pentagon attack.
AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The CNN report was deceptively recut to make it seem as though a correspondent at the scene, Jamie McIntyre, said debris from an airplane had not been found. In the real footage, McIntyre says that debris had not been found anywhere except the Pentagon, and describes in detail the parts of the plane that he did see. There is also photographic evidence of airplane debris found at the crash site.
And the questions the Inside Job folks cannot answer is what happened to Flight 77 ---- or how did the charred remains and body parts of almost all the passengers & crew, as verified through DNA get to the Pentagon crash impact site... How did the Boeing 757 Commercial Airline parts get to the site ---both inside & outside the building... How did the Flight Recorders (aka Black Boxes) from Flight 77 that were used as an evidence exhibit at the Moussaoui trial find their way there?.... Are all the witnesses, including current and former Pilots (and also a Priest) lying or mistaken when saying they saw a commercial Airliner impact, or rapidly closing in to impact the Pentagon?
You also raise the question, if it were a missile, who fired it and from where?....
23 Jul 2023 11:24 am
That's what you claimed I claimed .........Z09 » 23 Jul 2023, 11:23 am » wrote: ↑ Wait...
Yesterday you claimed the GOP planned 911...
Remember?
23 Jul 2023 11:28 am
Strategic Errors of Monumental Proportionsrazoo » 23 Jul 2023, 11:21 am » wrote: ↑ The attacks will be spectacular. They may be multiple. Al Qaeda’s intention is the destruction of the United States.’” [Condi said:] ‘What do you think we need to do?’ Black responded by slamming his fist on the table, and saying, ‘We need to go on a wartime footing now!’”
“And the word back,” says Tenet, “‘was ‘we’re not quite ready to consider this. We don’t want the clock to start ticking.’” (Translation: GW admin did not want a paper trail to show that they’d been warned.)
https://www.politico.eu/article/attacks ... bin-laden/
Military operations must be judged by whether and how they contribute to accomplishing war aims. No clear view is possible of where we are today and where we are headed without constant focus on war aims and how they affect US interests.
The interaction of interests, war aims, and military operations defines the strategic context in which we find ourselves. We cannot have the slightest understanding of the likely consequences of proposed changes in our war policy without relating them to the strategic context. Here are the four major realities that define that context:
1. Confusion about war aims and US interests. The president stated three war aims clearly and repeatedly:
* the destruction of Iraqi WMD;
* the overthrow of Saddam Hussein; and
* the creation of a liberal democratic Iraq.
The first war aim is moot because Iraq had no WMD. The second was achieved by late Spring 2003. Today, people are waking up to what was obvious before the war -- the third aim has no real prospects of being achieved even in ten or twenty years, much less in the short time anticipated by the war planners.
Implicit in that aim was the belief that a pro-American, post-Saddam regime could be established. This too, it should now be clear, is most unlikely. Finally, is it in the US interest to have launched a war in pursuit of any of these aims? And is it in the US interest to continue pursuing the third? Or is it time to redefine our aims? And, concomitantly, to redefine what constitutes victory?
2. The war has served primarily the interests of Iran and al-Qaeda, not American interests.
We cannot reverse this outcome by more use of military force in Iraq. To try to do so would require siding with Sunni leaders and the Ba'athist insurgents against pro-Iranian Shi'ite groups. The Ba'athist insurgents constitute the forces most strongly opposed to Iraqi cooperation with Iran.
At the same time, our democratization policy has installed Shi'ite majorities and pro-Iranian groups in power in Baghdad, especially in the ministries of interior and defense.
Moreover, our counterinsurgency operations are, as unintended (but easily foreseeable) consequences, first, greater Shi'ite openness to Iranian influence and second, al-Qaeda's entry into Iraq and rooting itself in some elements of Iraqi society.
3. On the international level, the war has effectively paralyzed the United States militarily and strategically, denying it any prospect of revising its strategy toward an attainable goal.
https://apjjf.org/-William-E.-Odom/2335/article.html
23 Jul 2023 11:33 am
Your interpretations do not represent the truth ...........
Why did GW attack Iraq when in fact the 9/11/01 terrorists were Saudi Arabian?
23 Jul 2023 11:41 am
Who told Bush?Z09 » 23 Jul 2023, 11:34 am » wrote: ↑ Because Saddam refused weapon inspections and we were told he had WMDs
Actually...Bush was told there were wmds
Just for purposes of analysis, let us suppose we had unlimited numbers of US troops to deploy in Iraq. Would that change my assessment? In principle, if two or three million troops were deployed there with the latitude to annihilate all resistance without much attention to collateral civilian casualties and human rights, order might well be temporarily reestablished under a reign of US terror.
The problem we would then face is that we would be opposed not only by 26 million Iraqis but also by millions of Arabs and Iranians surrounding Iraq, peoples angered by our treatment of Muslims and Arabs. These outsiders are already involved to some degree in the internal war in Iraq, and any increase of US forces is likely to be exceeded by additional outside support for insurgents.
I never cease to be amazed at our military commanders' apparent belief that the "order of battle" of the opposition forces they face are limited to Iraq. I say "apparent" because those commanders may be constrained by the administration's policies from correcting this mistaken view.
Once the invasion began, Muslims in general and Arabs in particular could be expected to take sides against the United States. In other words, we went to war not just against the Iraqi forces and insurgent groups but also against a large part of the Arab world, scores and scores of millions. Most Arab governments, of course, are neutral or somewhat supportive, but their publics in growing numbers are against us.
It is a strategic error of monumental proportions to view the war as confined to Iraq.
Yet this is the implicit assumption on which the president's new strategy is based.
We have turned it into two wars that vastly exceed the borders of Iraq. First, there is the war against the US occupation that draws both sympathy and material support from other Arab countries.
Second, there is the Shi'ite-Sunni war, a sectarian conflict heretofore sublimated within the Arab world but that now has opened the door to Iranian influence in Iraq. In turn, it foreordains an expanding Iranian-Arab regional conflict.
https://apjjf.org/-William-E.-Odom/2335/article.html
23 Jul 2023 11:50 am
And every credible witness who in fact did see that American Airlines 757 strike the Pentagon are either mistaken, hallucinating, or liars....Z09 » 23 Jul 2023, 11:33 am » wrote: ↑ I asked those questions and they responded with "who cares"?
They complain they can't see clear footage of the plane hitting the Pentagon....
But at the same time there's no footage of a cruise missile headed to DC ?
They have also have yet to explain how the team of over 100 personnel at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware where the remains of those on Flight 77 were brought for identification are also part of this cover-up, conspiracy and inside job..... Some of the Flight 77 Victims families were given enough of their loved one's corpses to have funerals & burials ... One such Victim whose remains were identified & given to her family for burial was the well known Conservative Author & political pundit Barbara Olsen...
23 Jul 2023 11:58 am
You'll need to ask Bill......... perhaps the crime was not yet in the commencement stage...........Z09 » 23 Jul 2023, 11:16 am » wrote: ↑ If Clinton had these terrorists under surveillence then why didn't he stop them?
23 Jul 2023 12:06 pm
Bill Clinton, God love him, is a cockhound piece of **** that could party harty with The Donald.razoo » 23 Jul 2023, 11:58 am » wrote: ↑ You'll need to ask Bill......... perhaps the crime was not yet in the commencement stage...........
But Clinton said his greatest regret was not putting a cruise missile on Osama. Too much chance of civilian casualties, too low of confidence.
23 Jul 2023 12:06 pm
There is no footage of a wrecked plane ... that's the point misterZ09 » 23 Jul 2023, 11:09 am » wrote: ↑ They see parts of the airplane...
To believe you then there's footage of someone towing a wrecked airplane to the Pentagon 10 minutes after the crash...
even the FBI link you provided didn't show more than a truckload of bits after a jumbo jet hit the pentagon
23 Jul 2023 12:08 pm
where?
the FBI site you posted didn't have any
23 Jul 2023 12:09 pm
The tail number was missing.Mrkelly » 23 Jul 2023, 12:06 pm » wrote: ↑ There is no footage of a wrecked plane ... that's the point mister
even the FBI link you provided didn't show more than a truckload of bits after a jumbo jet hit the pentagon
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_registration
Where did it go?
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-9 ... 8153051732
You can trace that plane from the day it left the factory until the morning of 9-11 when it vanished.
There were a bunch of fare paying passengers on board too, that left kinfolks.
23 Jul 2023 12:15 pm
WTC7 was an INFERNO...a raging all-consuming fire....not hit by a plane.
No building could have withstood this RAGING INFERNO
No building could have withstood this RAGING INFERNO
23 Jul 2023 12:15 pm
paid site with the same couple of pictures that the FBI has on your linkZ09 » 23 Jul 2023, 12:12 pm » wrote: ↑ Here you go...
There's numerous photos of the plane
https://www.businessinsider.com/the-fbi ... light-77-1
keep showing the same lame **** ... it's what you do best dude
23 Jul 2023 12:16 pm
so .. a jumbo jet was reduced to a 3 ft pile of rubbish
were done
Who is online
In total there are 8887 users online :: 8 registered, 17 bots, and 8862 guests
Registered users: Johnny You, Blackvegetable, RebelGator, Beekeeper, jerra b, Deezer Shoove, nefarious101, sole
Bots: Not, Pinterest, proximic, NING, LCC, Baiduspider, curl/7, Yeti, DuckDuckBot, Bolt, CriteoBot, Applebot, ADmantX, facebookexternalhit, bingbot, Mediapartners-Google, Googlebot