9/11 Was NOT an Inside Job

[Papoon]

I'm big on anger & vengeance too.
But not in the direction this country takes....&
with too little regard for the rights of others.
My own vengeance is more considered & ethical.

I once met an ex army sniper in a small Tasmanian city. We busked in the mall, periodically taking turns to convert our earnings into bourbon.

He said "You don't need rights if you've got a good left"

 

[LittlePinky82]

Yes, I did.

Now look at the trouble you've done tsk. Naughty. No cookies for you.

I once met an ex army sniper in a small Tasmanian city. We busked in the mall, periodically taking turns to convert our earnings into bourbon.

He said "You don't need rights if you've got a good left"

That's pretty clever.

CIA Whistleblower: The USA government knew about 9/11 before it happened

And? They knew about it because they gave Bush the memo's in August and he ignored them and went back to his vacation. See everything from Richard Clarke.

All it shows is the CIA tried to warn the Bush administration who ignored them. Remember that? Condi Rice saying "oh we had no idea they would do this." But then the memo to them about it in August. They warned them multiple times.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It contains footage of the event which you will not see anywhere else. Including lots of live interviews with survivors coming out of the building before the collapse all confirming multiple explosions heard from the basement, footage of sequenced detonations at lower levels preceding the collapse, and lots of other significant video and information.

Even if these bombs were there and were detonated, it is in no way evidence to suggest an insider job or cover up because those "unmarked white vans" I've heard "truthers" go on about are popular with terrorists. And there is no evidence to even suggests these explosives happened. And eyewitness accounts are not golden or necessarily accurate. Under normal circumstances, different people will see different things. Add in a ton of chaos, total mental overload, and eyewitness accounts become even less reliable. Case in point with 9/11 is those eyewitness accounts that claimed to have seen a small propeller-flown aircraft.

Who would believe the US government would do such a thing ?

It's not hard to imagine when you look at all the really bad stuff the American government has done.

I actually pity anyone that believes this trash. It would be horrible to have your own brain turn on you.

I don't. I believe every responsible citizen should occasionally burn their countries flag to remind them the power is in their hands, but "truthers" offend me - on very many levels. Looking at Al Qaeda records prove it was not an insider/cover up job. They dismiss the final calls many people made to their loved ones before their deaths. They use horrible pictures to "prove" their points, even though with many pictures and videos you wouldn't know what you're looking at if you weren't told. And it's denying that we in the West do have an enemy who wants to kill us, and suicide plane attacks is not at all outside of the extreme measures that such extremists will take. And in the end, even though we have hard evidence of a ton of really bad things the government has done, there is no hard evidence that 9/11 was an insider job. We weren't even supposed to know that Reagan violated congressional law and continued to arm Iran, but it didn't take long before we learned.

Saddam was very provocative, clearly grasping for more land, and he was clearly nutty about the USA. The invasion was his own doing and that of his B-ath party. They brought it on themselves by threatening everybody around, invading and acting crazy. Even without the towers he had it coming.

Saddam had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11.

I know. You brought up the invasion of Iraq, so I wanted to point out that Iraq had it coming with or without the towers. They let Saddam be their king-like lord, and he was just going crazy.

Saddam may have been a cruel dictator and a lingering remnant of Nazi Germany's presence in the area, but he was also the cork that kept the pressure from erupting, which is exactly what happened when Saddam was overthrown. If America hadn't overthrown him, ISIS likely would have been crushed from the start, if they even got started at all.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

All it shows is the CIA tried to warn the Bush administration who ignored them. Remember that? Condi Rice saying "oh we had no idea they would do this." But then the memo to them about it in August. They warned them multiple times.

For even that we have sufficient concrete evidence to know that did happen. But yet we have nothing indicating or suggesting the American government carried out the attacks.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Saddam had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11.

The other guy I was responding to brought it up. I never said he caused it, nor did I imply it. I pointed out that Saddam was due a visit regardless.

Saddam may have been a cruel dictator and a lingering remnant of Nazi Germany's presence in the area, but he was also the cork that kept the pressure from erupting, which is exactly what happened when Saddam was overthrown. If America hadn't overthrown him, ISIS likely would have been crushed from the start, if they even got started at all.

Yup. It was dumb. We should have let the ME take care of itself. We left with no reward, no improved relations, no new territories, no new friends and not even any new enemies. All we got was a t-shirt.

 

[Valjean]

Iraq, at the time, was a stabilizing force in the region. The no-fly zone had effectively neutralized their air force. The Kurds were safe. The Mossad felt no threat. The weapons inspectors reported there were no WMD. But an Iraq invasion was part of the PnAC/RAD plan, and 9/11 provided a Klein moment.
The neocons saw an opportunity and took it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Iraq, at the time, was a stabilizing force in the region. The no-fly zone had effectively neutralized their air force. The Kurds were safe.

Is this really true?
A friend who emigrated (escaped) from Iraq paints a different picture of mass murder within Iraq.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Is this really true?
A friend who emigrated (escaped) from Iraq paints a different picture of mass murder within Iraq.

Mmm. I am wondering the same thing. Iraq invaded Kuwait and constantly threatened the states around it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Mmm. I am wondering the same thing. Iraq invaded Kuwait and constantly threatened the states around it.

I recall a Nat Geo article about his regime, & I calculated that the number
of people he killed in peacetime was about 18,000 per month.

My friend was a student (active in politics) at the time he left. It was because
he saw a friend in a government car, & could only recognize him by his clothing.
His face was no longer intact.

 

[Valjean]

Mmm. I am wondering the same thing. Iraq invaded Kuwait and constantly threatened the states around it.

But by the early '90s Iraq was pretty much locked down. no-fly zones in the north and South protected the Kurds and the Shias. Saddam and his sons were still terrorizing the population in central Iraq, but their depredations were confined to the ground. Iraq was no longer a regional threat.

 

[Brickjectivity]

But by the early '90s Iraq was pretty much locked down. no-fly zones in the north and South protected the Kurds and the Shias. Saddam and his sons were still terrorizing the population in central Iraq, but their depredations were confined to the ground. Iraq was no longer a regional threat.

We on the other hand were still chilled from the Cold War and the threats of spreading fascism. WWII was still affecting us and making us believe in pure evil, something we thought could be rooted out by removing an evil leader. Such was the illusion cast by that war!

What do you think would have happened if we hadn't invaded? It would still have been Iraq. I agree it was a waste of time and resources and lives for us to invade, because it made no difference. There was no evil leader to root out. Nobody wanted any responsibility, and the only reason Saddam was in charge was that he was insane and didn't believe he was responsible. They were pretty much all screwed no matter what. We should have let them be.

 

[Valjean]

The world is full of psychopathic leaders and screwed up societies, Brick. We can't fix them all, and I don't think killing or displacing half the population of a country is a very good way of saving them from their evil oppressor.
Do we have to kill them to save them?

 

[Brickjectivity]

The world is full of psychopathic leaders and screwed up societies, Brick. We can't fix them all, and I don't think killing or displacing half the population of a country is a very good way of saving them from their evil oppressor.
Do we have to kill them to save them?

I think that you are exacerbating things by saying 'Half'. We have not even attempted to do that, and we have withdrawn voluntarily from the country.

 

[Valjean]

We killed a million civilians, rendered millions more refugees, fomented a civil war, destroyed infrastructure and created the regional disruptions that plague us to this day. We trashed that country, and for what -- to unseat Saddam Hussein and save the people? We could have had Saddam back in 2001, when the Taliban offered to turn him in to a neutral party. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/17/afghanistan.terrorism11
But we wanted none of it. We wanted war. That was part of the plan from the beginning (PnAC).

"...We have withdrawn voluntarily..." -- We had no intentions of withdrawing, initially, that's not the American way, and we still have troops in country to this day.

 

[Revoltingest]

We killed a million civilians, rendered millions more refugees, fomented a civil war, destroyed infrastructure and created the regional disruptions that plague us to this day. We trashed that country, and for what -- to unseat Saddam Hussein and save the people? We could have had Saddam back in 2001, when the Taliban offered to turn him in to a neutral party. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/17/afghanistan.terrorism11
But we wanted none of it. We wanted war. That was part of the plan from the beginning (PnAC).

"...We have withdrawn voluntarily..." -- We had no intentions of withdrawing, initially, that's not the American way, and we still have troops in country to this day.

Every Americastanian voter should remember.....
Hillary voted for this plan.
Bernie didn't.

 

[Valjean]

And they both had access to the same information.
Some do what they feel is right, some what they feel is expedient...

 

[Brickjectivity]

Don't keep doubling and tripling numbers. Our soldiers killed about 110,000. After that most of the killing was sectarian violence and was simply a result of being where we were not wanted, and the maximum affected total, outside maximum liberal account, including every thing that could possibly be imagined, much of which we had no control of, would be 500,000. We did not kill a million people, so please don't tell me we killed a million. We just didn't.

 

[Valjean]

I think you've been watching too much Fox news:
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/...vasion-occupation-of-iraq-left-1-million-dead
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/...vasion-occupation-of-iraq-left-1-million-dead
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-deaths-survey-idUSL3048857920080130
http://www.telesurtv.net/english/ne...on-Dead-in-Three-Countries-20150330-0011.html
http://www.alternet.org/story/15170...true_human_toll_of_war_--_and_why_we_let_them

 

[Revoltingest]

Don't keep doubling and tripling numbers. Our soldiers killed about 110,000. After that most of the killing was sectarian violence and was simply a result of being where we were not wanted, and the maximum affected total, outside maximum liberal account, including every thing that could possibly be imagined, much of which we had no control of, would be 500,000. We did not kill a million people, so please don't tell me we killed a million. We just didn't.

Some years ago, I did a calculation about wrongful deaths in Iraq before, during, & after the war.
As I recall, the toll was higher before the war.
This was likely because his military was much more effective against his own people than our military.
And our military had become much more capable of reducing civilian deaths than in previous wars.

I should've saved that issue of Nat Geo & my calcs....dang it!

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

I do not believe 9/11 was an inside job and there is NO evidence to support such an extraordinary claim. There, debate it here.

There are many people who do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job but to claim there is no evidence is absurd to the extreme.