Stupid Conspiracy Theorists...Gov't involved in 9/11...Get Real !!!

[kayway8]

They were not U.S trained, I already adressed that pages ago. Secondly, Bush got a very general memo that al-Qaeda wants to attack the U.S..... duh. How was he supposed to stop this attack using just that general information ? Bush =/= superman.
I feel really uncomfortable if people like you are running our intelligence system. And stop saying your questions haven't been answered. Theybeen answered over and over again so again, you're bringing NOTHING new to the table.

My man right here wants a written statement by Bush stating what happened in order to believe the government was involved. Think about that for a minute. Thatdoesn't say much about you.

For every "conspiracy theorist" in this world, there are hundreds and thousands of people like YOU who accept things they way they are. But Ican't hate on people like you because y'all keep the world spinning and are the reason that events like this can continue getting swept under the rug.

Linking bush to hitler does nothing to help your argument.
It's called CORRUPTION and has EVERYTHING to do with the argument.

MidEastBeast. Ask yourself this: How realistic is it to believe that the Bush Administration had a report of a very realistic threat from known American-trained fighters, and did not do anything to respond to it in any way?

How realistic was it that on that day they weren't taken seriously?

 

[nnarum]

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

^ I already know all about what you are posting, probably a lot more than you. Just because hitler did something 60 years ago does not mean that 9/11 was carried out by the U.S government.

Linking bush to hitler does nothing to help your argument.

History doesn't repeat? And how many average Americans can tell you about that stuff? They don't know because they don't care. They are too worriedabout what Lil Wayne is doing or what Britney Spears is up to... They also believe what they see on the TV. Which is why I'm not ruling out the involvementof the government... And this was the first year of the Bush Administration, when no one really knew how much of a crook and fraud this man was going to be...

And also, how did this man get elected again? Because he knew he wasn't going to lose. His buddy John Kerry was running against him, another Skull andBones member... Why wouldn't you challenge the ruling of Bush winning if you didn't want to win in the first place? Why run? He was running to lose...

 

[mo matik]

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

Okay.

The report was in 1998, way before the Bush presidency. Secondly, there are thousands of reports released covering all kinds of scenarios.

Does nothing to show me that the U.S either let 9/11 happen or planned it themselves.

You didn't read the whole thing.

There were plenty of other warnings

Another alert came just a month before the attacks, the report said, when the CIA sent a message to the FAA warning of a possible hijacking "or an act of sabotage against a commercial airliner." The information was linked to a group of Pakistanis based in South America.

 

[mideastbeast]

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

Okay.

The report was in 1998, way before the Bush presidency. Secondly, there are thousands of reports released covering all kinds of scenarios.

Does nothing to show me that the U.S either let 9/11 happen or planned it themselves.

You didn't read the whole thing.

There were plenty of other warnings

Another alert came just a month before the attacks, the report said, when the CIA sent a message to the FAA warning of a possible hijacking "or an act of sabotage against a commercial airliner." The information was linked to a group of Pakistanis based in South America.

Cool. That information does nothing to show me that the U.S planned 9/11 or let it happen.

Originally Posted by nnarum

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

^ I already know all about what you are posting, probably a lot more than you. Just because hitler did something 60 years ago does not mean that 9/11 was carried out by the U.S government.

Linking bush to hitler does nothing to help your argument.

History doesn't repeat? And how many average Americans can tell you about that stuff? They don't know because they don't care. They are too worried about what Lil Wayne is doing or what Britney Spears is up to... They also believe what they see on the TV. Which is why I'm not ruling out the involvement of the government... And this was the first year of the Bush Administration, when no one really knew how much of a crook and fraud this man was going to be...

Thanks for the lecture about the average american, but I could care less. We are discussing whether or not the U.S was involved in 9/11 and so far not a shredof evidence says they are. It's not even plausible demonstrated by how no one can even answer a few elementary questions...

VVV Nice, more youtube videos

, would you like to try to answer my first post ?

 

[i r andre]

@ dude who used the hitler example as "proof" of that the U.S did 9/11... these are the kind of people I am dealing with
The false flag strategy is very old, you sound stupid. N post that 911myth link all you want cuz I read all of them and none of things in thesevideos are addressed on that site. N besides that site is just theories too.

 

[mo matik]

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

Okay.

The report was in 1998, way before the Bush presidency. Secondly, there are thousands of reports released covering all kinds of scenarios.

Does nothing to show me that the U.S either let 9/11 happen or planned it themselves.

You didn't read the whole thing.

There were plenty of other warnings

Another alert came just a month before the attacks, the report said, when the CIA sent a message to the FAA warning of a possible hijacking "or an act of sabotage against a commercial airliner." The information was linked to a group of Pakistanis based in South America.

Cool. That information does nothing to show me that the U.S planned 9/11 or let it happen.
I'm not trying to convince you of anything man.

Like I said, I don't know where I stand.

But I think it's important to keep an open mind.

When we side with one group whole-heartedly, we tend to be ignorant of other evidence and pass it on as just theories. This is the case in everybody.

For example, you didn't even read the article I posted.

Take it with a grain of salt, but just try to read into things without any bias. All I'm saying.

 

[concordefliteschool]

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

^ Still haven't answered anything. I suggest you read first ?

Keep trying though, it's funny.

No one cares to answer your questions. Believe what you want. Whats funny is that your not even open minded

 

[mideastbeast]

Dudes act like I'm a sheep who listens to fox news and accepts it all as fact.

I already did all my research. I know all these lame theories inside-out. I know more about al-Qaeda, the war on terror and the middle east than 99% of peopleon NT.

Dudes can't even answer one of my paragraphs but have no problem believing the U.S killed 3000+ U.S citizens in cold blood without a SHRED of evidence.

 

[kayway8]

^You're just going in circles at this point. Beat it.

 

[nnarum]

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

Dudes act like I'm a sheep who listens to fox news and accepts it all as fact.

I already did all my research. I know all these lame theories inside-out. I know more about al-Qaeda, the war on terror and the middle east than 99% of people on NT.

Dudes can't even answer one of my paragraphs but have no problem believing the U.S killed 3000+ U.S citizens in cold blood without a SHRED of evidence.

Uh, you do realize there's a multi-BILLION dollar "war" that's going on as a result in those attacks on the trade centers...Someone is not benefiting from that cash flow? And do you mind reposting your question? Since your dying to get an answer

 

[i r andre]

I already did all my research. I know all these lame theories inside-out. I know more about al-Qaeda, the war on terror and the middle east than 99% of people on NT.
There' is nothing to know because there is no such thing as a terrorist group called Al-Qaeda, Al Qaeda is the name of a CIA computer programthat they used to keep track of the mujahideen that the CIA trained to fight the russians. Al-Qaeda, is just an enemy the government cooked up to have thesupport of the citizens. You gotta have an enemy for all the sheeple to hate to have them support your war.�

 

[mideastbeast]

I will stop posting on NT forever if you answer this post I made a while back on a different website:

This doesn't make any sense. Let's say the US government was indeed extremely corrupt to the point of attacking its own people. Now, let's say theyeither did 9/11 or helped it in being carried out.

** 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Refution **

What was gained ? (It gave Bush increased power, and allowed for the invasion of Afghanistan) - Why would Bush want to invade Afghanistan so badly ? - What hashe gained in passing the patriot act ? Has he really gained money from Afghanistan for himself or abused the patriot act to the point of using it as a tool togain money from ? Nope. By the way, why would al-Qaeda work with the U.S in claiming they in fact attacked the U.S only to have itself be bombed out by the U.Sin return ?

Now, before you bring up Iraq.. it was not caused by 9/11. 9/11 was a part of it, but too small to be considered. The root cause was WMD's. Beyond this,why would al-Qaeda work to allow the U.S to invade Iraq and turn around and kill U.S soldiers there ? Why would al-Qaeda continue to accept 9/11 responsibilityif the U.S is killing them with the reason that they caused 9/11 ? Does this make any sense to you at all ?

There's only 1 possible way to answer my questions: al-Qaeda is a U.S tool.

If you believe this, I pity you. Why would a U.S tool target Americans/American allies so indiscriminately ? Why is al-Qaeda so loose an organization that I,if I wanted to, could simply go to Afghanistan, learn how to make bombs, and go back to the U.S and kill Americans ? (Before 2001, although still possibletoday). Would the U.S want its own "tool" training thousands of radicals and sending them out with both a thrist for western blood and moreimportantly, the means in which to spill it ? Do you realize how big of a problem this would be for the whole western world ? The only answer to that is thatevery single al-Qaeda member is instructed by the U.S on what to attack. If you believe THIS, well... let's just hope you don't.

Until someone comes up with a valid response to this post, I will consider all 9/11 conspiracy theories disproven and simply copy paste this back when theissue is brought up again.










Most important is the last part, which not a single person can answer.

 

[kayway8]

Why even bother. You can answer every question of his homework assignment and he'll still find a way to come back with the same statements he's madethroughout the entire post.

 

[nnarum]

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

I will stop posting on NT forever if you answer this post I made a while back on a different website:

This doesn't make any sense. Let's say the US government was indeed extremely corrupt to the point of attacking its own people. Now, let's say they either did 9/11 or helped it in being carried out.

** 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Refution **

What was gained ? (It gave Bush increased power, and allowed for the invasion of Afghanistan) - Why would Bush want to invade Afghanistan so badly ? - What has he gained in passing the patriot act ? Has he really gained money from Afghanistan for himself or abused the patriot act to the point of using it as a tool to gain money from ? Nope. By the way, why would al-Qaeda work with the U.S in claiming they in fact attacked the U.S only to have itself be bombed out by the U.S in return ?

Now, before you bring up Iraq.. it was not caused by 9/11. 9/11 was a part of it, but too small to be considered. The root cause was WMD's. Beyond this, why would al-Qaeda work to allow the U.S to invade Iraq and turn around and kill U.S soldiers there ? Why would al-Qaeda continue to accept 9/11 responsibility if the U.S is killing them with the reason that they caused 9/11 ? Does this make any sense to you at all ?

There's only 1 possible way to answer my questions: al-Qaeda is a U.S tool.

If you believe this, I pity you. Why would a U.S tool target Americans/American allies so indiscriminately ? Why is al-Qaeda so loose an organization that I, if I wanted to, could simply go to Afghanistan, learn how to make bombs, and go back to the U.S and kill Americans ? (Before 2001, although still possible today). Would the U.S want its own "tool" training thousands of radicals and sending them out with both a thrist for western blood and more importantly, the means in which to spill it ? Do you realize how big of a problem this would be for the whole western world ? The only answer to that is that every single al-Qaeda member is instructed by the U.S on what to attack. If you believe THIS, well... let's just hope you don't.

Until someone comes up with a valid response to this post, I will consider all 9/11 conspiracy theories disproven and simply copy paste this back when the issue is brought up again.










Most important is the last part, which not a single person can answer.

Um, that's not really a question. That's a personal opinion formed as a rhetorical question.

 

[phillypg1]

zoinks

 

[mideastbeast]

Nice "answers", keep it coming

This joke of a theory holds no weight at all, got destroyed in one paragraph.

/thread.

 

[hazeleyed honey]

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

Fouda is a journalist. He got special access after months of trying, they transported him alone to KSM's apartment blindfolded and with two bodyguards before the interview was conducted. You can't just assume "oh well, he was probably tortured" - No evidence at all, and the claim isn't even plausible. KSM admitted, simple as that.

The interview was dropped before his capture by U.S forces, just for the record.

There are great inconsistencies with his story. The KSM "confessions" were broadcast in the form of a distorted audio tape in September'02. Fouda proclaims that the interview was videotaped, but KSM and Ramzi refused to let him take the tape with him and later they sent him a distortedaudio by mail. Then, as I previously mentioned, he tarnished his credibility when he admitted to lying and said that the interview was not held in June '02as originally stated, but September 02' just before it was broadcast. He straight out said he lied. Not a credible journalist to me and I decide not totake him and his reporting seriously. It clearly seems he has an agenda. KSM even says he was misquoted by Al-Jazeera. But whatever, you buy it and I choosenot to.

About the oil, well obviously. That is the definition of a contract. Iraq lacks the ability to do it on their own right now. Would you rather have them just keep the oil in the ground ? The companies were awarded the contracts because they provided the best service for the cheapest price, they just so happened to be western countries. Again, chosen by ELECTED Iraqi officials, who will use the profits to rebuild Iraq.

So those big oil conglomerates are there just to help out Iraq and they provided the cheapest price? Not for self-interest at all? How about the fact it isbecause that is why Iraq was invaded in the first place and so they can get a griphold on the untapped oil reserves there so they can get a big chunk of theprofits? Like they do in all oil rich countries? Where do you think these oil conglomerates get their billions or how do they get it?

You again ignored my point that if the tape was fake as you claim, why isn't anyone saying this except the conspiracy theorists ? Why hasn't Osama or any other al-Qaeda official said it was fake ? No, they keep taking responsibility. al-Qaeda says they did it. The U.S says al-Qaeda did it. Only people who disagree are the conspiracy nuts.

A lot of experts have doubted and even questioned the authenticity of those tapes and audiotapes. Unless, some of these "officials" admit openly totheir responsibilities through a fair court whilst not being tortured, then maybe that would make much more sense.

Bin Laden has not been formally charged due to the fact there is no hard evidence linking him to the attacks. If thesetapes as you claim are authentic, then I am sure they would have been used by now to formally indict him of his alleged role in the 9/11 attacks. It has been 8years, and he has not been formally charged.

Atta's father is delusional. Atta is dead. There is video footage of him boarding the plane, recordings of his voice, detailed accounts of his time in America and Germany etc etc. All the hijackers are dead. There was a myth that a few were alive but that was later proven wrong and BBC apologized for publishing that article. It was a case of mistaken identity.

If it was a case of mistaken identity, then who are the real hijackers? Does the tape show Atta boarding and stepping on the plane? He could very well haveboarded the plane though, and died, and how do we know he was not used by CIA officials and he was set up, along with some of the others?

And obviously not all militants are al-Qaeda. The VAST majority in Iraq are, and the same was true in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda carried out the biggest most spectacular attacks in Iraq, terrorized Iraqi cities, spread the most propoganda videos, intimidated and dominated other groups etc etc. To the point of the Iraqi's themselves fighting against them (Sons of Iraq).

Most are NOT former baathists or shiites.. that's ducktales. The heart of the Sunni insurgency is al-Qaeda in Iraq, which has now branched into the Mujahideen al-Shura Council (military wing of the Islamic State of Iraq) - you can look this up. The Shiite squads are mostly controlled by Iran and have done little if any attacks on U.S forces, instead they are busy killing other Sunni Iraqi's. As you already know, Saddam was hated by the Islamic extremists, so no way in hell are al-Qaeda in Iraq fighting for him. Go listen to interviews of members and leaders, or read their releases....

Still waiting on answers to why if al-Qaeda is a U.S "tool" that it then teaches anyone how to go out and kill Americans. Any ideas ?

Really? Ducktales?

Who is the US Fighting in Iraq?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/25/world/middleeast/25detain.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/20.../middleeast/25detain.html

As Juan Cole, President of the Global Americana Institute, explains:

...
Self-identified al-Qaeda are only 1800 of the 24000 in captivity, about 7 percent. (Of course, most of these fighters are not really al-Qaeda in the sense of pledging fealty to Usama Bin Laden or being part of his organization; they are using "al-Qaeda" to mean "bogeyman": i.e., 'be afraid of me'.)
...
The odd tendency of the US military and press to refer to all guerrillas in Iraq as "al-Qaeda" is obviously not justified by their own subsequent interrogations of captured suspects. Readers should write and complain when they see al-Qaeda used indiscriminately to describe Sunni Arab fighters.

http://www.juancole.com/2007/08/who-is-us-fighting-in-iraq.htmlhttp://www.juancole.com/2...-us-fighting-in-iraq.html

As to answer your last question...Which "Al-Qaeda" are you speaking of? The ones who claim allegiance to them, and that they are offshoots of them,but are not even really linked to the original "Al-Qaeda" cell? The ones propped up to become "Al-Qaeda"?

 

[kix4kix]

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

I will stop posting on NT forever if you answer this post I made a while back on a different website:

This doesn't make any sense. Let's say the US government was indeed extremely corrupt to the point of attacking its own people. Now, let's say they either did 9/11 or helped it in being carried out.

** 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Refution **

What was gained ? (It gave Bush increased power, and allowed for the invasion of Afghanistan) - Why would Bush want to invade Afghanistan so badly ? - What has he gained in passing the patriot act ? Has he really gained money from Afghanistan for himself or abused the patriot act to the point of using it as a tool to gain money from ? Nope. By the way, why would al-Qaeda work with the U.S in claiming they in fact attacked the U.S only to have itself be bombed out by the U.S in return ?

Now, before you bring up Iraq.. it was not caused by 9/11. 9/11 was a part of it, but too small to be considered. The root cause was WMD's. Beyond this, why would al-Qaeda work to allow the U.S to invade Iraq and turn around and kill U.S soldiers there ? Why would al-Qaeda continue to accept 9/11 responsibility if the U.S is killing them with the reason that they caused 9/11 ? Does this make any sense to you at all ?

There's only 1 possible way to answer my questions: al-Qaeda is a U.S tool.

If you believe this, I pity you. Why would a U.S tool target Americans/American allies so indiscriminately ? Why is al-Qaeda so loose an organization that I, if I wanted to, could simply go to Afghanistan, learn how to make bombs, and go back to the U.S and kill Americans ? (Before 2001, although still possible today). Would the U.S want its own "tool" training thousands of radicals and sending them out with both a thrist for western blood and more importantly, the means in which to spill it ? Do you realize how big of a problem this would be for the whole western world ? The only answer to that is that every single al-Qaeda member is instructed by the U.S on what to attack. If you believe THIS, well... let's just hope you don't.

Until someone comes up with a valid response to this post, I will consider all 9/11 conspiracy theories disproven and simply copy paste this back when the issue is brought up again.










Most important is the last part, which not a single person can answer.

I really do not get what you are asking, but for 1. The patriot act was the most beneficial legislation to a president since Lincoln. You say why would U.S.use them as pawns. Look throughout history political leaders in the Middle East have been figure heads dating back to the fall of the Ottoman empire. Youquestion the benefits, I question the motive.

 

[nnarum]

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

Nice "answers", keep it coming

This joke of a theory holds no weight at all, got destroyed in one paragraph.

/thread.

No, your question asks why would this stuff happen? Then you state reasons that it couldn't. And then you say this is the only possibleanswer, but you can't believe it. How do you ask questions if you already include YOUR answer saying you know that it's all wrong? That's why noone answered your "question", because you already answered it saying that you cannot include the given answer because you know it as fact....

 

[i r andre]

** 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Refution **

What was gained ? (It gave Bush increased power, and allowed for the invasion of Afghanistan) - Why would Bush want to invade Afghanistan so badly ? -
He didn't want to invade Afghanistan, he wanted to invade Iraq. There are more police officers in New York city than there were soldiers sentto Afghanistan to fight. Afghanistan was never the real objective- Iraq's oil fields were.

What has he gained in passing the patriot act ?
Slowly but surely taking away our rights under the constitution little by little. The patriot act allows them to spy on you in many forms if thereis evidence you're a terrorist or not.

Has he really gained money from Afghanistan for himself or abused the patriot act to the point of using it as a tool to gain money from ? Nope.
All the money that was made, was made from Iraq at least the majority of it.

That's a question no one but government employees who do counter terrorism surveilance could answer- you're not qualified to tell people "nope.

By the way, why would al-Qaeda work with the U.S in claiming they in fact attacked the U.S only to have itself be bombed out by the U.S in return ?
As I said before, there is no such thing as a terrorist group called al- Qaeda.

Now, before you bring up Iraq.. it was not caused by 9/11. 9/11 was a part of it, but too small to be considered. The root cause was WMD's.
The hell are you talking about? One of the main reasons Bush gave was that Saddam was harboring "Al-Qaeda" operatives as well as theWMD's. Colin powell as well as bush in march of 2001 said Saddam didn't have WMD's and a few months after 9/11 all of a sudden he had them come on.

Beyond this, why would al-Qaeda work to allow the U.S to invade Iraq and turn around and kill U.S soldiers there ? Why would al-Qaeda continue to accept 9/11 responsibility if the U.S is killing them with the reason that they caused 9/11 ? Does this make any sense to you at all ?
No "Al-Qaeda" leader has come out and taken responsibility for 9/11. Osama Bin Laden is dead, and no other of the higher ups have takenresponsibility. That is why nearly 10 years later no one has been convicted of the crimes of 9/11

There's only 1 possible way to answer my questions: al-Qaeda is a U.S tool.

If you believe this, I pity you. Why would a U.S tool target Americans/American allies so indiscriminately ?
You really think the government wouldn't kill a few thousand citizens to make a few hundred billion dollars in profit and at the same timemake the leash tighter on his citizens? I do.

Why is al-Qaeda so loose an organization that I, if I wanted to, could simply go to Afghanistan, learn how to make bombs, and go back to the U.S and kill Americans ? (Before 2001, although still possible today). Would the U.S want its own "tool" training thousands of radicals and sending them out with both a thrist for western blood and more importantly, the means in which to spill it ? Do you realize how big of a problem this would be for the whole western world ? The only answer to that is that every single al-Qaeda member is instructed by the U.S on what to attack. If you believe THIS, well... let's just hope you don't.

Until someone comes up with a valid response to this post, I will consider all 9/11 conspiracy theories disproven and simply copy paste this back when the issue is brought up again.
*see videos*

 

[nnarum]

BTW, how the hell do we know that you don't work for the government?

Since you're so sure of things...

 

[mideastbeast]

Originally Posted by Hazeleyed Honey

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

Fouda is a journalist. He got special access after months of trying, they transported him alone to KSM's apartment blindfolded and with two bodyguards before the interview was conducted. You can't just assume "oh well, he was probably tortured" - No evidence at all, and the claim isn't even plausible. KSM admitted, simple as that.

The interview was dropped before his capture by U.S forces, just for the record.

There are great inconsistencies with his story. The KSM "confessions" were broadcast in the form of a distorted audio tape in September '02. Fouda proclaims that the interview was videotaped, but KSM and Ramzi refused to let him take the tape with him and later they sent him a distorted audio by mail. Then, as I previously mentioned, he tarnished his credibility when he admitted to lying and said that the interview was not held in June '02 as originally stated, but September 02' just before it was broadcast. He straight out said he lied. Not a credible journalist to me and I decide not to take him and his reporting seriously. It clearly seems he has an agenda. KSM even says he was misquoted by Al-Jazeera. But whatever, you buy it and I choose not to.

About the oil, well obviously. That is the definition of a contract. Iraq lacks the ability to do it on their own right now. Would you rather have them just keep the oil in the ground ? The companies were awarded the contracts because they provided the best service for the cheapest price, they just so happened to be western countries. Again, chosen by ELECTED Iraqi officials, who will use the profits to rebuild Iraq.

So those big oil conglomerates are there just to help out Iraq and they provided the cheapest price? Not for self-interest at all? How about the fact it is because that is why Iraq was invaded in the first place and so they can get a griphold on the untapped oil reserves there so they can get a big chunk of the profits? Like they do in all oil rich countries? Where do you think these oil conglomerates get their billions or how do they get it?

You again ignored my point that if the tape was fake as you claim, why isn't anyone saying this except the conspiracy theorists ? Why hasn't Osama or any other al-Qaeda official said it was fake ? No, they keep taking responsibility. al-Qaeda says they did it. The U.S says al-Qaeda did it. Only people who disagree are the conspiracy nuts.

A lot of experts have doubted and even questioned the authenticity of those tapes and audiotapes. Unless, some of these "officials" admit openly to their responsibilities through a fair court whilst not being tortured, then maybe that would make much more sense.

Bin Laden has not been formally charged due to the fact there is no hard evidence linking him to the attacks. If these tapes as you claim are authentic, then I am sure they would have been used by now to formally indict him of his alleged role in the 9/11 attacks. It has been 8 years, and he has not been formally charged.

Atta's father is delusional. Atta is dead. There is video footage of him boarding the plane, recordings of his voice, detailed accounts of his time in America and Germany etc etc. All the hijackers are dead. There was a myth that a few were alive but that was later proven wrong and BBC apologized for publishing that article. It was a case of mistaken identity.

If it was a case of mistaken identity, then who are the real hijackers? Does the tape show Atta boarding and stepping on the plane? He could very well have boarded the plane though, and died, and how do we know he was not used by CIA officials and he was set up, along with some of the others?

And obviously not all militants are al-Qaeda. The VAST majority in Iraq are, and the same was true in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda carried out the biggest most spectacular attacks in Iraq, terrorized Iraqi cities, spread the most propoganda videos, intimidated and dominated other groups etc etc. To the point of the Iraqi's themselves fighting against them (Sons of Iraq).

Most are NOT former baathists or shiites.. that's ducktales. The heart of the Sunni insurgency is al-Qaeda in Iraq, which has now branched into the Mujahideen al-Shura Council (military wing of the Islamic State of Iraq) - you can look this up. The Shiite squads are mostly controlled by Iran and have done little if any attacks on U.S forces, instead they are busy killing other Sunni Iraqi's. As you already know, Saddam was hated by the Islamic extremists, so no way in hell are al-Qaeda in Iraq fighting for him. Go listen to interviews of members and leaders, or read their releases....

Still waiting on answers to why if al-Qaeda is a U.S "tool" that it then teaches anyone how to go out and kill Americans. Any ideas ?

Really? Ducktales?

Who is the US Fighting in Iraq?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/25/world/middleeast/25detain.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/25/world/middleeast/25detain.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/20.../middleeast/25detain.html

As Juan Cole, President of the Global Americana Institute, explains:

...
Self-identified al-Qaeda are only 1800 of the 24000 in captivity, about 7 percent. (Of course, most of these fighters are not really al-Qaeda in the sense of pledging fealty to Usama Bin Laden or being part of his organization; they are using "al-Qaeda" to mean "bogeyman": i.e., 'be afraid of me'.)
...
The odd tendency of the US military and press to refer to all guerrillas in Iraq as "al-Qaeda" is obviously not justified by their own subsequent interrogations of captured suspects. Readers should write and complain when they see al-Qaeda used indiscriminately to describe Sunni Arab fighters.

http://www.juancole.com/2007/08/who-is-us-fighting-in-iraq.htmlhttp://www.juancole.com/2007/08/who-is-us-fighting-in-iraq.htmlhttp://www.juancole.com/2...-us-fighting-in-iraq.html

As to answer your last question...Which "Al-Qaeda" are you speaking of? The ones who claim allegiance to them, and that they are offshoots of them, but are not even really linked to the original "Al-Qaeda" cell? The ones propped up to become "Al-Qaeda"?



So we have an audio tape of KSM himself admitting to the 9/11 attacks without any torture. He gets captured, and then writes anotherconfession letter. First confession was to a journalist without any torture. Secondly, Fouda lied about the dates to escape the myths that it was him who gaveKSM away to the U.S. There are doubts about that and the real date of the tape, but it was dropped BEFORE he was captured, and no one is doubting what was init. KSM says he was misquoted afterwards when trying to deny involvement, but he had already spilled the beans and sounded damn proud of the attacks. Thisinterview is not the only evidence. We have the videos of the hijackers THEMSELVES, osama HIMSELF, and other al-Qaeda leaders.

Obviously they are ther for self interest. That means nothng. Like I said before, it is a contract, and they were chosen by the electedIraqi officials. Why are you even arguing this at this point ? The Iraqi's keep their money and can easily kick them out and mine their own oil once theyhave the technology.


Once again, you ignore my question. If the tape is fake why isn't Osama or al-Qaeda saying so ? Secondly, the FBI hasn't listedit because there is not enough direct evidence linking the man himself to the attack. KSM was the one who was chief of the operation, not Osama. The tape onlyshows Osama and al-Qaeda claiming responsibility. All we know for sure is that al-Qaeda was the group that carried out the attacks. If this really was aninside the job then the opposite would be true, the FBI would have immedietely put up Osama as wanted for 9/11... no ? Either way, not charging him does notmean he is innocent and you have not a shred of evidence that points to U.S involvement, but there is plenty pointing to al-Qaeda, including Osama and theHijackers OWN WORDS.


? We already know who all the hiackers are. They made tapes before the attacks, they are documented as dead. None are "alive"that was proven false. I wont even talk about your bizzare teory of faked security footage and audio recordings ? Just read the last part of what you wroteagain and think about how stupid it sounds. That, and once again, you have ZERO proof.


I question those numbers. First of all, the fact that ANYONE said al-Qaeda already means you are wrong. Al-Qaeda exists, unlike you triedto claim (there are letters between Osama and Zarqawi.... videos of osama calling Zarqawi the prince of Iraq). It says that 7% of "captured" - thatdoesn't mean the %age of those fighting, especially because most of al-Qaeda's attacks are suicide bombings. Either way, there is no denying al-Qaedahad the largest impact (kicked out U.N, released most propoganda, controlled entire cities, sparked the entire sunni/shia conflict) and did the most damage.


The al-qaeda i am talking about are the ones who are linked the original al-Qaeda and continue to fight against U.S forces and killcivilians.

 

[mideastbeast]

Originally Posted by I R Andre

** 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Refution **

What was gained ? (It gave Bush increased power, and allowed for the invasion of Afghanistan) - Why would Bush want to invade Afghanistan so badly ? -

He didn't want to invade Afghanistan, he wanted to invade Iraq. There are more police officers in New York city than there were soldiers sent to Afghanistan to fight. Afghanistan was never the real objective- Iraq's oil fields were.

What has he gained in passing the patriot act ?
Slowly but surely taking away our rights under the constitution little by little. The patriot act allows them to spy on you in many forms if there is evidence you're a terrorist or not.

Has he really gained money from Afghanistan for himself or abused the patriot act to the point of using it as a tool to gain money from ? Nope.
All the money that was made, was made from Iraq at least the majority of it.

That's a question no one but government employees who do counter terrorism surveilance could answer- you're not qualified to tell people "nope.

By the way, why would al-Qaeda work with the U.S in claiming they in fact attacked the U.S only to have itself be bombed out by the U.S in return ?
As I said before, there is no such thing as a terrorist group called al- Qaeda.

Now, before you bring up Iraq.. it was not caused by 9/11. 9/11 was a part of it, but too small to be considered. The root cause was WMD's.
The hell are you talking about? One of the main reasons Bush gave was that Saddam was harboring "Al-Qaeda" operatives as well as the WMD's. Colin powell as well as bush in march of 2001 said Saddam didn't have WMD's and a few months after 9/11 all of a sudden he had them come on.

Beyond this, why would al-Qaeda work to allow the U.S to invade Iraq and turn around and kill U.S soldiers there ? Why would al-Qaeda continue to accept 9/11 responsibility if the U.S is killing them with the reason that they caused 9/11 ? Does this make any sense to you at all ?
No "Al-Qaeda" leader has come out and taken responsibility for 9/11. Osama Bin Laden is dead, and no other of the higher ups have taken responsibility. That is why nearly 10 years later no one has been convicted of the crimes of 9/11

There's only 1 possible way to answer my questions: al-Qaeda is a U.S tool.

If you believe this, I pity you. Why would a U.S tool target Americans/American allies so indiscriminately ?
You really think the government wouldn't kill a few thousand citizens to make a few hundred billion dollars in profit and at the same time make the leash tighter on his citizens? I do.

Why is al-Qaeda so loose an organization that I, if I wanted to, could simply go to Afghanistan, learn how to make bombs, and go back to the U.S and kill Americans ? (Before 2001, although still possible today). Would the U.S want its own "tool" training thousands of radicals and sending them out with both a thrist for western blood and more importantly, the means in which to spill it ? Do you realize how big of a problem this would be for the whole western world ? The only answer to that is that every single al-Qaeda member is instructed by the U.S on what to attack. If you believe THIS, well... let's just hope you don't.

Until someone comes up with a valid response to this post, I will consider all 9/11 conspiracy theories disproven and simply copy paste this back when the issue is brought up again.
*see videos*



I already answered most of your comments. You said Osama is dead ? Explain the constant release of new tapes, mentioning new events. Proof he is dead ? Justsaying something that stupid makes me not feel like taking anything else you said seriously.

@ "see videos"... I already did, they answerednothing.

Originally Posted by nnarum

BTW, how the hell do we know that you don't work for the government?

Since you're so sure of things...

Yep, I am Chief of the "Keeping 9/11 Conspiracy Secret", assigned to the "Niketalk" department, posting from CIA headquarters.

 

[i r andre]

I already answered most of your comments. You said Osama is dead ? Explain the constant release of new tapes, mentioning new events
Despite those doctored video's there has been no proof of life- that's why.

I already did, they answered nothing.
They bodied every point you made, just not the answer you wanted.

I already answered most of your comments.
No you didn't what you did do tho is write a bunch of stuff thinking no one was gonna actually read it. I did, and then explained and refutedall your points and "facts".

 

[hazeleyed honey]

Originally Posted by MidEastBeast

So we have an audio tape of KSM himself admitting to the 9/11 attacks without any torture. He gets captured, and then writes another confession letter. First confession was to a journalist without any torture. Secondly, Fouda lied about the dates to escape the myths that it was him who gave KSM away to the U.S. There are doubts about that and the real date of the tape, but it was dropped BEFORE he was captured, and no one is doubting what was in it. KSM says he was misquoted afterwards when trying to deny involvement, but he had already spilled the beans and sounded damn proud of the attacks. This interview is not the only evidence. We have the videos of the hijackers THEMSELVES, osama HIMSELF, and other al-Qaeda leaders.

Who really knows why Fouda lied, but he did. Again, it was a distorted audio tape. KSM says they misquoted him and fabricated portions ofit and exaggerated it. So then again now, all you have is Fouda's word and KSM's word.

Obviously they are ther for self interest. That means nothng. Like I said before, it is a contract, and they were chosen by the elected Iraqi officials. Why are you even arguing this at this point ? The Iraqi's keep their money and can easily kick them out and mine their own oil once they have the technology.

But you are trying to claim is not for oil profits on behalf of the occupiers. I showed you how it is. I doubt Iraqis will kick them outand I guarantee you it will be the oil conglomerates who will get the most profits out of this. The instance Iraqi regime would even think of threatening theoil grip by these companies, you can damn well bet that regime would be overthrown. The U.S. went to war with Saddam because he was threatening the Western oildistribution and supply by annexing Kuwait. That is why this regime propped up in place is ensured by the Allies to be more favourable to Western interests.

Once again, you ignore my question. If the tape is fake why isn't Osama or al-Qaeda saying so ? Secondly, the FBI hasn't listed it because there is not enough direct evidence linking the man himself to the attack. KSM was the one who was chief of the operation, not Osama. The tape only shows Osama and al-Qaeda claiming responsibility. All we know for sure is that al-Qaeda was the group that carried out the attacks. If this really was an inside the job then the opposite would be true, the FBI would have immedietely put up Osama as wanted for 9/11... no ? Either way, not charging him does not mean he is innocent and you have not a shred of evidence that points to U.S involvement, but there is plenty pointing to al-Qaeda, including Osama and the Hijackers OWN WORDS.

Is Osama even alive?Who knows where the hell he is. As for Al-Qaeda, as I said, they are not real and are just propped up. None of themin these copy cat Al-Qaeda groups know enough about the authenticity of these tapes.

But you claim there is no evidence point to Bin Laden's involvement. Isn't Bin Laden supposedly the mastermind and the one who ordered the attacks?That is what the government and the CIA have been feeding people all these years. All I am saying is that the videotapes, audiotapes, etc., there is noguaranteed verification they are authentic or even real. No proof that Al-Qaeda was behind the attacks nor that Osama was.

? We already know who all the hiackers are. They made tapes before the attacks, they are documented as dead. None are "alive" that was proven false. I wont even talk about your bizzare teory of faked security footage and audio recordings ? Just read the last part of what you wrote again and think about how stupid it sounds. That, and once again, you have ZERO proof.

Again, if their authenticity can be proved and in a federal jury court that it is indeed them with full on clear evident proof, then maybe there is reason tobelieve it. Supposedly, some of those hijackers were mistaken for others being alive, then where are the real ones? Oh yeah, and they found passports of thehijackers that feel from the debri that hit the towers.Riiiigghhhttttt. That planted evidence is such bullcrap to me.

I question those numbers. First of all, the fact that ANYONE said al-Qaeda already means you are wrong. Al-Qaeda exists, unlike you tried to claim (there are letters between Osama and Zarqawi.... videos of osama calling Zarqawi the prince of Iraq). It says that 7% of "captured" - that doesn't mean the %age of those fighting, especially because most of al-Qaeda's attacks are suicide bombings. Either way, there is no denying al-Qaeda had the largest impact (kicked out U.N, released most propoganda, controlled entire cities, sparked the entire sunni/shia conflict) and did the most damage.


The al-qaeda i am talking about are the ones who are linked the original al-Qaeda and continue to fight against U.S forces and kill civilians.

Again, if the authenticity of this can be proved, then maybe there is a reason to believeit.

I showed you the statistics and that is how it is. There are not that many suicide bombings compared to actual ground battles with these groups. So then thatstumps your theory how they are mostly fighting "Al-Qaeda" operatives. The U.S. is mostly fighting locals who joined the resistance movement. Also,as Juan Cole stated, those claiming they are with Al-Qaeda use that term meaning as boogeymen and not the real ones.

As Bush has stated:

A clear strategy begins with a clear understanding of the enemy we face. The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists, Saddamists and terrorists. The rejectionists are by far the largest group. These are ordinary Iraqis, mostly Sunni Arabs, who miss the privileged status they had under the regime of Saddam Hussein -- and they reject an Iraq in which they are no longer the dominant group. . . .
The second group that makes up the enemy in Iraq is smaller, but more determined. It contains former regime loyalists who held positions of power under Saddam Hussein -- people who still harbor dreams of returning to power. These hard-core Saddamists are trying to foment anti-democratic sentiment amongst the larger Sunni community. . . .

The third group is the smallest, but the most lethal: the terrorists affiliated with or inspired by al Qaeda.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/06/23/al_qaeda/http://www.salon.com/opin...wald/2007/06/23/al_qaeda/
Also note how he says that the "smallest" group among those that the U.S. are battling in Iraq, Bush described them not as"Al Qaeda," but as those "affiliated with or inspired by al Qaeda."

MidEast, we are just going around in circles with you. Obviously, you have your own mindset, as we have our own. I believe I answered all yourquestions logically, but since you believe in your truth, then you will never see it my way as I will never see yours. You say we did not answer you, but wedid. As someone states, it is just not the answers you are looking for.

This can go on all damn day and we will still be back at square one.