ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags "Press for Truth" , Cofer Black , documentaries , george tenet , John Duffy , Khalid al-Mihdhar , Nawaf al-Hazmi , Ray Nowosielski , Richard Blee , richard clarke , sibel edmonds

Reply
Old 23rd September 2011, 09:59 AM   #121
newton3376
The Truth Movement.....still not at 1%
 
newton3376's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,320
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
The OP of that thread is a good summary.
Wrong Childlike Empress.....

Wrong wrong wrong. You do not know what you are talking about.

Unlike Sabrina, who does know what she is taking about and tried to explain things in the real world to you:

She tried to explain things here, here, here, here, here , and here. That is just a sample of her trying to talk some *********** sense into you.

Then I also tried to talk some *********** sense into you here , here , here , and here .

At least try to listen to people who know what the **** they are talking about.
__________________
AE911 Truth....still failing to get 1%
newton3376 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 10:24 AM   #122
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by newton3376 View Post
Wrong Childlike Empress.....

Wrong wrong wrong. You do not know what you are talking about.

Unlike Sabrina, who does know what she is taking about and tried to explain things in the real world to you:

She tried to explain things here, here, here, here, here , and here. That is just a sample of her trying to talk some *********** sense into you.

Then I also tried to talk some *********** sense into you here , here , here , and here .

At least try to listen to people who know what the **** they are talking about.
You can lead a horse to water............
sheeplesnshills is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 11:28 AM   #123
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 16,024
Originally Posted by newton3376 View Post
Wrong Childlike Empress.....

Wrong wrong wrong. You do not know what you are talking about.

Unlike Sabrina, who does know what she is taking about and tried to explain things in the real world to you:

She tried to explain things here, here, here, here, here , and here. That is just a sample of her trying to talk some *********** sense into you.

Then I also tried to talk some *********** sense into you here , here , here , and here .

At least try to listen to people who know what the **** they are talking about.

There's a reason why you link to single posts out of context. You and Sabrina went on numerous general rants based on you being some small lights in some agency, and avoided the very specific information about very specific events sourced with official documents like the plague. You were set straight every time, and not by me. I don't remember having made more that a handful of posts adding context in that thread. But I remember that the thread is a very sad and embarrassing display of the degree of denial that's common here.

Last edited by Childlike Empress; 23rd September 2011 at 11:30 AM.
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 11:31 AM   #124
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,802
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
This game ends here, carlitos.
Guess not.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 11:45 AM   #125
MarkCorrigan
Winter is Coming
 
MarkCorrigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,519
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
You are attacking the messenger. Nobody cares.
Let me get this straight.

You disagree with the official theory.

At some point you champion theory X, which disagrees with the official one.

Later, you find someone implying theory Y which also disagrees with the official theory, and includes statements A,B and C, and champion that idea too,pushing the complete theory Y as being proof that the official theory is wrong and therefore supporting implicitly if not explicitly theory Y.

Someone points out that theories X and Y are mutually exclusive to the extent that statements A, B and C that you are suggesting as good sources of facts over 9/11, if true outright invalidate theory X. Your response?

It isn't important.



Wow. That's some real special cognitive dissonance there. Even if the official theory is complete hogswash and 9/11 was an inside job, you must realise that you cant hold two totally conflicting ideas to be equally correct.
__________________
Naturalism adjusts it's principles to fit with the observed data.
It's a god of the facts world view. -joobz

Now I lay me down to sleep, a bag of peanuts at my feet.
If I die before I wake, give them to my brother Jake.
MarkCorrigan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 11:51 AM   #126
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 16,024
They aren't mutually exclusive, as I explained to these folks several times and they are fully aware of. The last time I responded was only a few days ago. The intent is to bring me into a position where I can either answer again and again, waste my time and derail every thread and topic I want to participate in (they follow me around), or I don't respond and the uninformed reader, like you, thinks I don't have an answer to it. Usually I do the latter.

Last edited by Childlike Empress; 23rd September 2011 at 11:54 AM.
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 11:54 AM   #127
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
the thread is a very sad and embarrassing display of the degree of denial that's common here.
First cast the plank out of your own eye.................
sheeplesnshills is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 11:55 AM   #128
newton3376
The Truth Movement.....still not at 1%
 
newton3376's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,320
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
There's a reason why you link to single posts out of context.
Yeah.....like I tried to "hide" the context....you can just look up the post number there Sherlock Holmes......

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
You and Sabrina went on numerous general rants based on you being some small lights in some agency, and avoided the very specific information about very specific events sourced with official documents like the plague.
1. You do not know what we do day to day or what agencies we interact with. So to say "small lights" tells me you are hoping that is true in an attempt to belittle what we do. But the truth is you are clueless.

2. Sabrina and others dealt more with the specific points....I was dealing with the conclusion of why certain decisions were made and was trying to educate the truthers on some details of the Intel world. A world that, unless you are in it, you will know very little about.

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
You were set straight every time, and not by me. I don't remember having made more that a handful of posts adding context in that thread. But I remember that the thread is a very sad and embarrassing display of the degree of denial that's common here.
The posts were made so that people like yourself...conspiracy theorists who pretty much know nothing...could perhaps learn something about why you should not assume you understand what people's motivations are or go around accusing people of stuff that you know nothing about.

That thread is a very sad display of typical conversations with truthers....it usually goes something like this...


1. Truther makes some unwarranted conclusions based off of lies, distortions, and errors of factual data.

2. Various experts step in and try to explain to the truther why they are misrepresenting, misunderstanding, and misinterpretating the facts.

3. Truther ignores every rational, logical, and factual explanation and keeps repeating debunked arguments over and over.

4. Experts attempt to get through to truthers thick skulls why their retarded ideas are incorrect.

5. Truthers ignorantly continue repeating nonsense and try to ignore the facts and arguments refuting them.

6. Experts give up trying to convince truthers who are either too stupid or deluded to understand the arguments.

7. Truthers just keep babbling even though no one is listening anymore.
__________________
AE911 Truth....still failing to get 1%

Last edited by newton3376; 23rd September 2011 at 11:59 AM.
newton3376 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 12:12 PM   #129
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 16,024
Did you watch the Richard Clarke Interview, newton? Or listen to the other interviews in the documentary? Those informed discussions are based on the very information paloalto presented over there. Known facts from several investigations and other sources, mounting up to the 2011 level of detail knowledge we have.

Information that you and Sabrina blatantly deny exists and tried to handwave away with personal anecdotes without the slightest connection to the case.

Last edited by Childlike Empress; 23rd September 2011 at 12:13 PM.
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 12:19 PM   #130
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
or I don't respond and the uninformed reader, like you, thinks I don't have an answer to it. Usually I do the latter.
No, we know you don't have an answer and if you were honest, so do you.
When it takes more work to not answer a simple question than it would take to answer it then its clear to most folks that you are simply either in denial or have an ulterior motive for not doing so.
sheeplesnshills is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 12:25 PM   #131
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,802
Originally Posted by sheeplesnshills View Post
When it takes more work to not answer a simple question than it would take to answer it then its clear to most folks that you are simply either in denial or have an ulterior motive for not doing so.
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
The yes / no question was Did Frances and Michael intentionally allow 9/11 to happen. It's really a simple yes or no. The question was not "intentionally prevent the system from working."

I realize that you don't want to answer a "yes or no" question for the reasons I stated above, but please stop pretending that you have answered it.

It's only a simple yes or no question for simpletons. Their intentional actions allowed 9/11 to happen. This is a fact. Why they did what they did, and if and to which extent they were aware of the consequences, is a different question we can not know. Shouldn't we ask them, Carlitos? Hm?
Weasel wording highlighted. No answer given.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 12:27 PM   #132
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Did you watch the Richard Clarke Interview, newton? Or listen to the other interviews in the documentary? Those informed discussions are based on the very information paloalto presented over there. Known facts from several investigations and other sources, mounting up to the 2011 level of detail knowledge we have.

Information that you and Sabrina blatantly deny exists and tried to handwave away with personal anecdotes without the slightest connection to the case.

Why would any of us take your advice and listen to anything you suggest? You have chosen to maintain untenable positions on other subjects so we know your opinion on anything is suspect. You take exactly the same tone in the above discussion as you did when insisting a guy can see an airliner when its behind a building. This is your choice, even most twoofers can see through CITs scam, that you cannot, or will not, reflects very badly on your credibility. Grown ups admit when they have made a mistake. Its time to grow up CE.
sheeplesnshills is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 01:51 PM   #133
bill smith
Philosopher
 
bill smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,408
A little background that I came across..

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=259 hyperlink
__________________
*Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together
*A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough
* To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'

Last edited by bill smith; 23rd September 2011 at 01:52 PM.
bill smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 03:09 PM   #134
newton3376
The Truth Movement.....still not at 1%
 
newton3376's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,320
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Did you watch the Richard Clarke Interview, newton? Or listen to the other interviews in the documentary? Those informed discussions are based on the very information paloalto presented over there. Known facts from several investigations and other sources, mounting up to the 2011 level of detail knowledge we have.

Information that you and Sabrina blatantly deny exists and tried to handwave away with personal anecdotes without the slightest connection to the case.

I've heard some of the interviews yes......why?

What "information" do you think I am "blatantly" denying exists? Can you be a little bit less vague CE?
__________________
AE911 Truth....still failing to get 1%
newton3376 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 03:27 PM   #135
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 16,024
The information that a small group of people in the CIA going up to Tenet withhold from the FBI and other agencies the crucial information that two terrorists who were well known and closely surveilled at the meeting in Malaysia had entered the US, for a period starting in early 2000, in a way that can not technically be anything other than intentional. And more (which most likely will be the topic of part two of the documentary).

Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
To enlighten you on what was actually brought out at the Moussaoui trial, information that very few Americans are even aware of today, the documents presented at the Moussaoui trial prove that the CIA knew, when Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi were found inside of the US, that they were here to take part in a massive al Qaeda attack that would kill thousands of Americans. Not only did they not alert FBI agents that could have stopped Mihdhar and Hazmi, but they conspired with FBI HQ agents to shut down the one criminal FBI investigation that could have prevented the attacks on 9/11, the investigation by the FBI Cole bombing investigators in the New York FBI filed office, that wanted to search and find these terrorists before they carried out the attacks on 9/11. The documents at the Moussaoui trial also show that the FBI HQ agents who shut down this FBI criminal investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi knew full well that they were acting illegally to criminally obstruct this investigation, and knew that their criminal actions would allow the al Qaeda terrorists to murder thousands of Americans.

That's what the OP of that thread says and what you were denying without any serious challenge over a series of posts. Do you now agree that this is what the facts say?

Last edited by Childlike Empress; 23rd September 2011 at 03:38 PM.
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 05:13 PM   #136
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 27,812
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
The information that a small group of people in the CIA going up to Tenet withhold from the FBI and other agencies the crucial information that two terrorists who were well known and closely surveilled at the meeting in Malaysia had entered the US, for a period starting in early 2000, in a way that can not technically be anything other than intentional. And more (which most likely will be the topic of part two of the documentary).

That's what the OP of that thread says and what you were denying without any serious challenge over a series of posts. Do you now agree that this is what the facts say?
I am posting this tonight on Pilots for Truth's forum.

Seems like the end of the day for the No Plane at the Pentagon and North of Citgo garbage.

Well done CE, gives us Debunkers one hell of a lot of evidence to at least shut down that nonsense.
__________________
Very legal and very cool!
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 05:54 PM   #137
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
The information that a small group of people in the CIA going up to Tenet withhold from the FBI and other agencies the crucial information that two terrorists who were well known and closely surveilled at the meeting in Malaysia had entered the US, for a period starting in early 2000, in a way that can not technically be anything other than intentional. And more (which most likely will be the topic of part two of the documentary).

That's what the OP of that thread says and what you were denying without any serious challenge over a series of posts. Do you now agree that this is what the facts say?
So did anyone on JREF say the CIA hadn't screwed up before 911? I don't recall that. Inter service rivalry let chances to stop 911 slip away , are you saying you just found that out?
sheeplesnshills is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 05:56 PM   #138
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by 16.5 View Post
I am posting this tonight on Pilots for Truth's forum.

Seems like the end of the day for the No Plane at the Pentagon and North of Citgo garbage.

Well done CE, gives us Debunkers one hell of a lot of evidence to at least shut down that nonsense.
Well I still want to know how people can see through buildings! maybe CE is denying us that information because of Twoofer/debunker rivalry?
sheeplesnshills is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 08:40 PM   #139
thatsmystory
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 254
Quote:
If this story feels a bit one-sided, that is the fault of these CIA officials, all of whom were explained what we were learning here and chose not to speak to us.

After they issued us the Joint Statement, we replied to Tenet's PR man Bill Harlow with a detailed point by point explanation of this story and asked -- no begged -- that they help us tell an accurate story. We wrote: “If there are simple – even benign or admirable – explanations for those issues, I sincerely wish Mr. Tenet, et al, would break their media silence and simply provide those answers. I want them to realize that their failure to do so only appears to give credence to speculation like that in the Clarke interview.”

From the secrecykills podcast transcript
As I understand the argument against transparency--people who believe the CIA owes the public some answers are out of line for not accepting the (absurd) premise that the CIA's repeated obstructions of al Qaeda investigations were done in good faith.

If this is all much to do about nothing then why won't CIA officials and agents explain their conduct? Why does the CIA continually resort to stupid talking points which do nothing but insult the public and further erode public confidence in government?

Last edited by thatsmystory; 23rd September 2011 at 08:41 PM.
thatsmystory is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2011, 10:45 PM   #140
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: A pocket paradise between the sewage treatment plant and the railroad
Posts: 14,234
Originally Posted by thatsmystory View Post
As I understand the argument against transparency--people who believe the CIA owes the public some answers are out of line for not accepting the (absurd) premise that the CIA's repeated obstructions of al Qaeda investigations were done in good faith.

If this is all much to do about nothing then why won't CIA officials and agents explain their conduct? Why does the CIA continually resort to stupid talking points which do nothing but insult the public and further erode public confidence in government?

It appears that they don't care whether a certain portion of the public (to wit: you) feel insulted or have your (obviously vast) confidence in government eroded.

Now, how could that be? It just doesn't make sense! Aren't your confidence and your feelings the most important things in the whole wide world to the CIA? Of course they are! So, I'm totally baffled here.

Respectfully,
Myriad
__________________
A zřmbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 02:22 AM   #141
newton3376
The Truth Movement.....still not at 1%
 
newton3376's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,320
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
The information that a small group of people in the CIA going up to Tenet withhold from the FBI and other agencies the crucial information that two terrorists who were well known and closely surveilled at the meeting in Malaysia had entered the US, for a period starting in early 2000, in a way that can not technically be anything other than intentional. And more (which most likely will be the topic of part two of the documentary).
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
That's what the OP of that thread says and what you were denying without any serious challenge over a series of posts. Do you now agree that this is what the facts say?
Wait? You mean to tell me that the CIA intentionally withheld information from the FBI?

Why that is unheard of! The Intel agencies would never withhold information from each other! They all work together oh so nicely Always giving each other information and talking about how competent and professional the other agencies are

There is never, ever any infighting or competition among them either.

I mean...I have never seen this happen in real life No one from those agencies has ever attempted to keep information from me. No one from any of those agencies has ever asked me not to share Intel with the "other" guys just because he didn't like them

Whew! You really discovered something new there Magellan...we should alert the President at once!

Who knew that the Intel agencies did not play nice together? Shocking!

Do you have any other "points" you would like to make CE? I'm waiting with anticipation...
__________________
AE911 Truth....still failing to get 1%
newton3376 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2012, 01:09 PM   #142
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 593
Lawrencve Wright

Originally Posted by TexasJack View Post
I'm sure he is a good interviewee, it's his interview skills I'm interested in, which he has none that I know of. There is no evidence US sponsoring Al Qaeda, until I see a credible source, I call it fiction.

And why should I take a recommendation of a news article collector? Scott is listed as a poet, does he do the kind of research of Coll, McDermott, or Wright? Does he interview hundreds of pertinent people and scour the public and private archives in places such as Saudi Arabia or other middle eastern countries? Why would Scott or Thompson trump their meticulous research? That's like asking me to replace Adrian Gonzalez with Crash Davis on my fantasy-baseball team.
Lawrence Wright accused the CIA of criminally obstructing the Cole bombing investigation in his account of FBI Agent Ali Soufan. This criminal obstruction was carryed out by FBI HQ agents who were working under a CIA manager ,Tom Wilshire, that Tenet, Black and Blee had moved over to the FBI ITOS unit in mid-May 2001, to spy on the Cole bombing investigators. The CIA thought in April 2001 that the Cole bombing investigators, including FBI Agent Ali Soufan and FBI Agent Steve Bongardt had found out about the al Qaeda planning meeting in Kuala Lumpur and had uncovered the fact that Mihdhar and Hazmi had been at this al Qaeda meeting with Walid Bin Attash, mastermind of the Cole bombing, actually planning the Cole bombing. This was the information that Tenet, Black and Blee had been trying to keep secret ever since Walid Bin Attash had been identified with Midhar and Hazmi at this al Qaeda planning meeting on January 4, 2001.

It was this fact alone that meant that the CIA had been criminally culpable in allowing the attack on the USS Cole to take place killing 17 US sailors, the CIA knew it and wanted to keep this horrific information completely secret, even going so far as to criminally obstruct the Cole bombing investigation many times. While this former CIA manager, Tom Wilshire, was working at FBI HQ and directing the criminal actions of FBI HQ agent Dina Corsi and her boss Head of the FBI HQ Bin Laden unit, Rod Middleton, he was actually secretly reporting to his former CIA managers Blee, Black and Tenet. When these FBI Agents at FBI HQ shut down the FBI criminal investigation by Bongardt of Mihdhar and Hazmi on August 28, 2001, these CIA managers who were secretly directing Wilshire’s actions knew a huge al Qaeda attack was just about to take place inside of the US, knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US in order to take part in this horrific al Qaeda attack and even knew by allowing Wilshire, working with Corsi and Middleton, to shut down this investigation, it would allow these al Qaeda terrorists to murder thousands of innocent Americans.

All of this information has been presented here in this very forum before along with that actual US government documents that prove all of this. If you can imagine that, the US government documents are proof of this account of 9/11. This is no wild conspiracy theory but the documented account that actually comes right directly from the US government investigations of 9/11. Even FBI Agent Ali Soufan and White House Counter terrorism director in the Bush White House, Richard Clarke, now have finally admitted 10 years after the attacks on 9/11 that Tenet, Black and Blee, had deliberately and intentionally withheld the information on Mihdhar and Hazmi from them and the other FBI criminal investigators on the Cole bombing, the very information that could have prevented the attacks on 9/11.

Last edited by paloalto; 17th May 2012 at 01:11 PM.
paloalto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2012, 04:27 PM   #143
JihadJane
not a camel
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 66,915
Originally Posted by newton3376 View Post
Wait? You mean to tell me that the CIA intentionally withheld information from the FBI?

Why that is unheard of! The Intel agencies would never withhold information from each other! They all work together oh so nicely Always giving each other information and talking about how competent and professional the other agencies are

There is never, ever any infighting or competition among them either.

I mean...I have never seen this happen in real life No one from those agencies has ever attempted to keep information from me. No one from any of those agencies has ever asked me not to share Intel with the "other" guys just because he didn't like them

Whew! You really discovered something new there Magellan...we should alert the President at once!

Who knew that the Intel agencies did not play nice together? Shocking!

Do you have any other "points" you would like to make CE? I'm waiting with anticipation...
That's a nasty rash you've got there, newton!
__________________
JihadJane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2012, 04:56 PM   #144
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,087
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
That's a nasty rash you've got there, newton!
Almost eight months now. He is no longer contagious; you might be safe from catching a case of reality.

Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
... that actual US government documents that prove all of this. If you can imagine that, the US government documents are proof of this account of 9/11. This is no wild conspiracy theory but the documented account that actually comes right directly from the US government investigations of 9/11. ... , the very information that could have prevented the attacks on 9/11.
What newspaper has this Pulitzer Prize winning stuff? Are you saying people can predict the future? How? How do you know someone is about to car-jack you, or kill you? Sounds like fiction to me. Why are you not in the CIA and FBI saving us from the next attack if you are able to, after the fact, connect the dots? Oops, you figured this out after you knew 19 terrorists did 911. How would you prevent it?
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2012, 04:58 PM   #145
newton3376
The Truth Movement.....still not at 1%
 
newton3376's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,320
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
That's a nasty rash you've got there, newton!
Almost 8 months later and you still have nothing.
__________________
AE911 Truth....still failing to get 1%
newton3376 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2012, 03:46 PM   #146
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 593
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
Almost eight months now. He is no longer contagious; you might be safe from catching a case of reality.


What newspaper has this Pulitzer Prize winning stuff? Are you saying people can predict the future? How? How do you know someone is about to car-jack you, or kill you? Sounds like fiction to me. Why are you not in the CIA and FBI saving us from the next attack if you are able to, after the fact, connect the dots? Oops, you figured this out after you knew 19 terrorists did 911. How would you prevent it?

I didn't predict the future, Tenet, Black and Blee did when on July 10, 2001 they called Rice at the White House as they were racing over in their car to the White House to set up an urgent meeting with Hadley, Clarke and Rice. At this meeting Tenet, Black and Blee said that the al Qaeda terrorists were just about to attack the US in an attack that would kill thousands of Americans.

The CIA had been told in 1995 by Philippine intelligence that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi Yousef had been making bombs in their Manila apartment when one caught file, and said that Abdal-Harkim Murad told them that KSM had been planning to hijack aircraft in the US for a terrorist attack that would use these hijacked commercial aircraft to target the World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon and the US Capital building among others.

In 1995 Yousef was captured at an al Qaeda safe house in Pakistan, clearly linking both Yousef and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to the al Qaeda terrorists and linking the 1993 attack on the WTC Towers to the al Qaeda terrorists. On June 12, 2001 the CIA and Richard Blee, was told that it was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed that was directing this up an coming attack inside of the US, and that he was sending in the summer of 2001 al Qaeda terrorists into the US to link up with other al Qaeda terrorists who were already in the US in order to carry out this attack. So at this July While House meeting the CIA already knew the targets were the World Trade Center Towers the Pentagon and the US Capital building and that the terrorists were going to use large commercial hijacked aircraft. Since we know Blee was close to Black it is clear that Blee would have immediately notified Black of this horrific information, which then would quickly have gone right to Tenet.

When Tom Wilshire asked his CIA managers, Blee, Black and Tenet his immediate bosses for permission in July 2001 to pass the information on the Kuala Lumpur meeting to the FBI Cole bombing investigators, the information that Walid Bin Attash had been at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting with Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi actually planning the Cole bombing, he was denied permission twice to do this. The first request Wilshire made was only three days after the July 10, 2001 meeting at the While House. In his July 23, 2001 request Wilshire stated that Mihdhar will be found at the location of then next big al Qaeda terrorist attack.

On August 22, 2001 the CIA and FBI HQ found out that both Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US in order to take part in this massive al Qaeda attack. This information went to Blee, who had to approve the cable on Mihdhar and Hazmi sent to the State Department, an unknown FBI unit and the rest of the CIA and to Black, Blee’s boss, and Tenet Black’s boss. Not only did the CIA and FBI Headquarters keep this information secret from FBI Agent Steve Bongardt and his team but when Bongardt accidentally found out that both of these terrorists were inside of the US on August 28, 2001 and even knew they were inside of the US in order to take part in a terrorists attack, Blee, Black and Tenet allowed Wilshire, using FBI HQ Agents Corsi and Middleton to illegally shut down Bongardt’s investigation of these terrorists even when they knew that Bongardt’s investigation was the only investigation that could have stopped this huge attack and saved the lives of thousands of Americans.

Corsi told Bongardt when he first called her on August 28, 2001, that he could not take part in any investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi because she did not have permission to give him her EC that contained a NSA cable restricted from being given to FBI criminal agents without NSA approval. But Corsi had already been approved to give this information to Bongardt and his team of Cole bombing investigators, according to the DOJ IG report on August 27, 2001. When Bongardt protested and stated that since the information in the NSA cable was not connected to any FISA search warrant, they only reason for the NSA restriction on their information, FBI Agent Corsi came back on August 29, 2001 and said the NSLU attorney she had contacted had ruled that Bongardt could not take part or start any investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi. But according to the 9/11 Commission report, page 538 footnote 81, Sherry Sabol the attorney Corsi contacted, tells DOJ IG investigators on November 7, 2002, that because the NSA information had no connection to any FISA warrant Bongardt could take part in any investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi, and she had given this information to Corsi on August 28, 2001.

On August 29, 2001 Corsi sends Bongardt an email that states, “if at such time as information is developed of a substantial Federal crime (by Mihdhar and Hazmi) this information will be passed over the wall". But according to pages 301 and 302 of the DOJ IG report, Corsi tells DOJ IG investigators that she was aware by August 22, 2001 that the CIA had the photo of Walid Bin Attash taken at Kuala Lumpur, and knew that this connected both Mihdhar and Hazmi to the planning of the Cole bombing that took place at this meeting. She also knew that the CIA had been hiding this photo so Bongardt and his team would not have the evidence they needed to start any investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi. Since planning the Cole bombing was “a substantial Federal crime” Corsi herself knew she had no legal right to shut down or block Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi. It was these lies and criminal actions that had allowed the CIA working with FBI HQ agents to block and shut down any investigations that could have prevented the attacks on 9/11 that had cost almost 3000 innocent Americans their lives.

Last edited by paloalto; 18th May 2012 at 03:47 PM.
paloalto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 06:34 AM   #147
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by newton3376 View Post
Well CE?

What is your actual claim? Do you have a claim?
This lurker would like to know what CE's claim actually is.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 06:53 AM   #148
JihadJane
not a camel
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 66,915
Originally Posted by newton3376 View Post
Almost 8 months later and you still have nothing.
Thanks.
__________________
JihadJane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 03:13 PM   #149
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Here's what's frustrating to me as the guy who spent over 1000 hours looking into the controlled demolition theory of Richard Gage: I am way too burned out to even research this issue. Childlike Empress's evidence here looks better (at first glance) than the CD theories, which are all based on what I consider incredibly shoddy research. What if Gage et al had not come up with this embarrassing theory? For me personally, what if I had spent 1000 hours researching CE's claims instead of Gage's?

As one who has done almost no research, I see two possibilities: someone in the government wanted 9/11 to happen and they let it happen. Or, two agencies were involved in petty intraoffice squabbles that allowed thousands of Americans to die. In my mind, either possibility is horrible and merits a serious look. If I were commander in chief I would not want FBI/CIA turf fights to get in the way of national security/. I feel like a fool for haviung wasted so much time on theories that have so little to offer. At least CE's investigations merit a look, if only to be sure our security apparatus is tighter next time.
for having looked s
__________________
20 videos rebutting Blueprint for Truth YouTube keyword chrismohr911 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC3JgWkNNIQ
Playlists http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
and http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
WTC Dust study http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/911...12webHiRes.pdf Hundreds more links and info both sides: http:www.chrismohr911.com
chrismohr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 08:45 PM   #150
SpringHallConvert
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,272
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Here's what's frustrating to me as the guy who spent over 1000 hours looking into the controlled demolition theory of Richard Gage: I am way too burned out to even research this issue. Childlike Empress's evidence here looks better (at first glance) than the CD theories, which are all based on what I consider incredibly shoddy research. What if Gage et al had not come up with this embarrassing theory? For me personally, what if I had spent 1000 hours researching CE's claims instead of Gage's?

As one who has done almost no research, I see two possibilities: someone in the government wanted 9/11 to happen and they let it happen. Or, two agencies were involved in petty intraoffice squabbles that allowed thousands of Americans to die. In my mind, either possibility is horrible and merits a serious look. If I were commander in chief I would not want FBI/CIA turf fights to get in the way of national security/. I feel like a fool for haviung wasted so much time on theories that have so little to offer. At least CE's investigations merit a look, if only to be sure our security apparatus is tighter next time.
for having looked s
You're one of the few official 9/11 conspiracy theory believers here who I wouldn't necessarily label a "government truther". You should be proud and embrace it, as there's no dignity whatsoever in being a government truther.

Kudos to you.
SpringHallConvert is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 08:54 PM   #151
Macgyver1968
Philosopher
 
Macgyver1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,164
Dang Chris...you should be honored...SHC doesn't consider you a shill for the government. How does that make you feel?
__________________
"Fixin' crap that ain't broke."
Macgyver1968 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 08:56 PM   #152
Mudcat
Man of a Thousand Memes
 
Mudcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,474
Originally Posted by SpringHallConvert View Post
You're one of the few official 9/11 conspiracy theory believers here who I wouldn't necessarily label a "government truther". You should be proud and embrace it, as there's no dignity whatsoever in being a government truther.

Kudos to you.
SHC, I have said this, many people have said this; but just because we aren't members of 9/11 truth and buy into stupid theories involving massive coverups and absurd technologies doesn't mean we trust or 'worship' our governments.

Calling people 'government truthers' is just insulting.
__________________
"There is no special treatment for guns." ~WildCat, confirmed gun owner.
Mudcat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 09:17 PM   #153
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 39,342
Originally Posted by Macgyver1968 View Post
Dang Chris...you should be honored...SHC doesn't consider you a shill for the government. How does that make you feel?
Hmm? Or, donning my ATS and Alex Jones cape and hat,... SHC is disinfo and he's helping muddy the waters so we won't realize that Chris is actually The Man.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 09:31 PM   #154
SpringHallConvert
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,272
Originally Posted by Mudcat View Post
SHC, I have said this, many people have said this; but just because we aren't members of 9/11 truth and buy into stupid theories involving massive coverups and absurd technologies doesn't mean we trust or 'worship' our governments.

Calling people 'government truthers' is just insulting.
Do you or do you not believe that the U.S. government told the truth about their role in the 9/11 attacks?

If not, what do you think they were hiding or not honest about?

If yes, then you are a government truther, as you believe the government told the truth.
SpringHallConvert is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 10:06 PM   #155
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,385
I notice FBI agent John O'Neil's problems with US Ambassador to Yemen, Barbara Bodine, which lead to O'Neil's reassignment from the Cole bombing, and ultimately his retirement from the FBI are conspicuously absent from this thread.

Had Bodine allowed the FBI to investigate freely the chance are O'Neil could have put the pieces together himself - without the CIA's help.

I also notice nobody brings up the fact that none of the men attending the meeting in Malaysia were known to have been involved in any crimes against the United States. So technically there was no reason to alert the FBI.

The question is why nothing was said after the Cole bombing? It is entirely possible the CIA agents involved were incompetent, terrorism was not taken seriously at Langley beyond its use as a tool to squeeze extra funding from Congress. This was still true even after CIA employees were gunned down in front of CIA headquarters by a Pakistani national.

Tech note: The CIA did tell the FBI about Almidar and Alhazmi on July, 13, 2001. This was two years after the meeting, and a year after the Cole.

The FBI did nothing.

The CIA sent a memo on August 23, 2001 asking the FBI to track the two men down. When agents requested full criminal investigative resources be used to find them their request was denied by FBI headquarters.

At the end of the day both the CIA and FBI are just government agencies.
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 10:34 PM   #156
Mudcat
Man of a Thousand Memes
 
Mudcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,474
Originally Posted by SpringHallConvert View Post
Do you or do you not believe that the U.S. government told the truth about their role in the 9/11 attacks?

If not, what do you think they were hiding or not honest about?

If yes, then you are a government truther, as you believe the government told the truth.
That would be a series of loaded questions, SHC. But yeah, I do believe they were being as honest as they could be at the time. Does this mean I trust my government? Only when that trust is justified.
__________________
"There is no special treatment for guns." ~WildCat, confirmed gun owner.
Mudcat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 10:49 PM   #157
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 39,342
Originally Posted by SpringHallConvert View Post
Do you or do you not believe that the U.S. government told the truth about their role in all of the events and background, surrounding the 9/11 attacks?
Feeding off of Mudcat's comment, if you remove the bias in your question and word it the way I've edited it, I think you'd find a number of members here would possibly concur - to varying degrees. As mentioned above, just because we don't believe in particle beam weapons, hush-a-boom explosives, thermite/thermate/thermute, missiles masquerading as pigeons or angels masquerading as pterodactyls does not mean that we automatically believe every utterance of every government official.

I'm sure this is very inconvenient for you because in Truther World if you find one inconsistency you are required to believe the whole fable, but that's just not the way it works.

Personally, I have no difficulty believing that the events leading up to 9/11 represent a massive failing of US intelligence gathering (and/or "intelligence responding to"). Nor do I have any difficulty believing that various folk - from the Executive level on down, have obfuscated to make sure that that particular cluster-fornication is not completely and openly discussed.

Does that mean Dick Cheney personally handed money to a guy at the Abu Nidhal bakery in Sheboygan? Or that Dubya plotted with the Saudi royal family to let their citizens attack our country and kill our people so his buddies could get more oil exploration deals. No, not unless proved.

Quote:
If not, what do you think they were hiding or not honest about?
Well, as Edmund Gwenn commented in Miracle on 34th Street (when he was asked in court for his residence), "That's what we're here to determine." I'm all for investigative journalism and dot connecting. Much of the material is very tenuous but there are little nuggets of truth that come out and other and more competent researchers may be able to put them altogether to finally get the whole story. History is like that. We were still putting together the accurate details of Operation Overlord fifty years after it happened, and it was incredibly well documented and amongst the allies, fairly "open".

Quote:
If yes, then you are a government truther, as you believe the government told the truth.
Your need to pigeonhole people into Us versus Them is noted. It is misguided and inappropriate, but many people think like that - the world's a Marvel cartoon and the bad guys are on one side with the good guys on another. Unfortunately, the real world doesn't work like that.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 10:55 PM   #158
SpringHallConvert
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,272
Originally Posted by Mudcat View Post
But yeah, I do believe they were being as honest as they could be at the time.
So you believe the U.S. government told you the truth about 9/11, yet you wonder why I call you a "government truther"?

Do I have this right so far?
SpringHallConvert is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 11:05 PM   #159
Mudcat
Man of a Thousand Memes
 
Mudcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,474
Originally Posted by SpringHallConvert View Post

Do I have this right so far?
No.
__________________
"There is no special treatment for guns." ~WildCat, confirmed gun owner.
Mudcat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 12:31 AM   #160
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 39,342
Originally Posted by SpringHallConvert View Post
So you believe the U.S. government told you the truth about 9/11, yet you wonder why I call you a "government truther"?

Do I have this right so far?
Originally Posted by Mudcat View Post
No.
SpringHallConvert, I note that you responded to Mudcat, but not to me. Why? Are you unable to have a nuanced discussion? This is all too common in Truther-Folk. They just want to be able to label and pigeonhole. If someone tries to bring any shades of gray into the discussion or burst their little bias bubble, they ignore it and go looking for someone else they can squeeze into a preconceived mold.

As I said, it doesn't work like that in the real world. We had an era here (up to the 2008 election) when every truther who came along wasted post after post attacking Bush and Cheney, totally unaware that the majority of the "debunking community" had no love for those two gentlemen and did not support them or their policies. (I can recall one regular who absolutely stunned them when it turned out he had more street cred and protester notches on his gunbelt than the whole bunch of them. Gee, whatever happened to that guy. Lived somewhere in Asia, I believe. Real attractive, too.)

It is possible to be against war, racism, poverty and injustice yet still not see ghosts under the bed. If someone brings me proof of the ghosts under the bed? Well, I'm your boy... but don't let the beams cross! But absent that proof or any actual evidence that someone in the government sat in and planned the events of that day I'm still in the LIHTI (Let It Happen Through Incompetence) camp.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.

Last edited by Foolmewunz; 20th May 2012 at 12:32 AM.
Foolmewunz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:58 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.