Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
W Tell

Talking Turkey

901 posts in this topic

Additional information for anyone reading (I don’t actually hope to get any coherent discussion out of skyeagle)...

The CIA are certainly not revealing the full extent of their involvement with the hijackers and prevention of the FBI to do their duty in that report. The report mentions only that the CIA failed to pass information to the FBI. This is somewhat different to the omitted fact that the FBI had enough information on the terrorists to act upon, and desperately wanted to do so, but the CIA consistently and aggressively forbid it at every step. Did you really expect the CIA to come clean on such issues? More fool you.

That has nothing to do with a government conspiracy. Apparently, you did not comprehend what has been presented to you in the past. You should have received the hint when intelligence missteps and blunders were not only admitted by the CIA and the FBI, but before a congressional hearing as well.

Even more than 18 months before 9/11, an FBI agent, Mark Rossini, based overseas, aware of Al Mihdhar and Al Hazmi’s terrorist background and attendance at the January 2000 Al Qaeda summit, said to the CIA, “What's going on? You know, we've got to tell the Bureau about this. These guys clearly are bad. One of them, at least, has a multiple-entry visa to the U.S. We've got to tell the FBI.” The CIA forbid his request and Rossini feared for his job if he ignored the order.

This situation continued over the next 18 months, at times the FBI and CIA agents having stand up rows about it, until shortly before 9/11 FBI agent Steve Bongardt became aware of Al Mihdhar inside the United States. He requested to open an investigation that would have had the terrorists detained and either charged or deported. When denied by the CIA again, he took the case up to the NSLU but was overruled – it seems the CIA had greater sway than the FBI in the judgement. This prompted Bongardt’s strong but justified outburst: “Whatever has happened to this – someday someone will die – and wall or not – the public will not understand why we were not more effective and throwing every resource we had at certain ‘problems’. Let’s hope the National Security Law Unit will stand behind their decision then, especially since the biggest threat to us now, UBL, is getting the most ‘protection’.”

A brief mention on the information 'wall' that Bongardt refers to above, and which the CIA used to block the FBI... upon investigation, it was concluded in the 9/11 Commission report (yes, they did at least scrape the surface in their investigation) that ‘the wall’ was improperly used as a barrier in this case as the FBI already had existing justification to go after the hijackers - the ‘wall’ was never intended to be used as it was; to outright block the FBI from carrying out their duty.

Anyhow, that specifically discussed above could be put down to an intelligence agency territorial war. What gets me in that case, is what were the CIA waiting for? The FBI were clearly aware of the severe threat, made numerous complaints and were irate at the situation, as we have seen, going so far to state pre-9/11 that people would die as a result. FBI agent Rossini later said, “People who are going to watch this, they're going to say, "Oh, it's hindsight 20–20." But, no, I'm not talking hindsight 20–20. I'm talking basic, logical investigation.” Yet another FBI agent, Kenneth Maxwell, would later say when learning of the situation, “Two al-Qaeda guys living in California—are you kidding me? We would have been on them like white on snow: physical surveillance, electronic surveillance, a special unit devoted entirely to them.” So I repeat, what were the CIA waiting for all those months whilst the terrorists, Al Mihdhar and Al Hazmi, were known to be living in the United States? What were they doing surrounding the terrorists during that time? Is it conceivable they went such length to block the FBI whilst not themselves having an operation attached to those terrorists? No, of course the CIA had some use or purpose and ongoing operation for those terrorists and must have had them under surveillance, otherwise they would not be so vigorously holding off the FBI. And we know this due to the actions and intelligence reports...

Soon upon arriving in the United States the terrorists had what the 9/11 Commission report describes as a ‘chance meeting’ with a Saudi intelligence agent, Omar Bayoumi (who would later be arrested but then quickly released by U.S. authorities, to the shock of British police who had detained him and said, “giving financial aid to terrorists is a very serious offense and there is no way [the FBI] would have let him go scot-free”). Along with putting the hijackers in contact with flight schools, Bayoumi sends them on to rented accommodation, two miles from NSA HQ, where the landlord happens to be a U.S. intelligence informant (just chance again, I’m sure). Rubbish... this is not chance... the CIA are clearly interested in these terrorists, and this is their operation using a Saudi intelligence asset and the U.S. informant to get close to the hijackers.

They had them, they were watching them... fair enough, perhaps... but what are they waiting for and why in the hell are they assisting them to open bank accounts and contact flight schools. That intelligence landed right on Bush's desk in the President’s daily brief, August 2001, when it said, “information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings”. For god’s sake what were the CIA waiting for? And how long were they going to wait? They are deliberately providing terrorists free rein in the United States. The same CIA unit whose head held daily meetings with top tier of the Neocon Bush administration (where Bush had bizarrely informed his intelligence heads he, “did not want to respond to al-Qaida one attack at a time”, whatever that means) were paving the way for terrorists in the United States.

I can’t say where precisely the decision was made and the order given – whether it was Bush, Cheney, Cofer Black (head of the CIA bin Laden unit) or another CIA agent in the chain – but what is clear is that no action was ever going to be taken against these terrorists, only guidance, assistance and surveillance. Why? What intelligence could have outweighed that they already had of an imminent attack, and was worth risking American lives for? With this approach, the eventual attack was inevitable. What were they waiting for?

The logical answer, is that they were waiting for 9/11.

It’s a horrible and sad situation, for the FBI in particular...

FBI agent Mark Rossini would later reflect: “I can't come up with a rational reason why I didn't break the rules, pick up the phone, and tell that the hijackers, or really bad guys, are in the U.S. And I don't know if I'll ever be able to come to terms with that. I don't know. I really don't know.”

FBI agent Steve Bongardt, upon learning of the hijacker identities: “This is the same Almihdhar we’ve been talking about for three months!” In an attempt to console him, his boss replies, “We did everything by the book.” Now that Bongardt is allowed to conduct a basic Internet search for Almihdhar that he had been denied permission to conduct before 9/11, he finds the hijacker’s address “within hours.”

Another FBI agent, Ali Soufan, aware of the case and danger posed before 9/11, when told of the attackers identities, “ran to the bathroom, fell to the floor next to a toilet and threw up, unable to comprehend why the CIA had withheld such key intelligence for more than a year.” Though it was more than simply ‘withholding’ intelligence, we know.

You should all be furious, American patriots in particular, demanding answers of the Bush administration and CIA agents who put the FBI, who attempted to protect the American people, in that position and allowed this to happen to the United States, dragging us all into a long war where thousands more have died. There’s something twisted with the world when otherwise good people would instead make any excuse to defend this. But then it's all probably just a big accident, assistance to the hijackers and all... that got them exactly the pretext the new administration wanted... right? Are you sure?

There were the intelligence failures, which is nothing new, and nothing to do with a government conspiracy. Those intelligence failures were also revealed before a congressional hearing and in other reports. The CIA inspector general revealed the intelligence failure of the CIA and the FBI inspector general revealed problems with FBI field offices, which failed their inspections, and the 9/11 commission report revealed intelligence failures prior to the 9/11 attacks as well.

To show that warnings have been ignored in the past and nothing to do with government conspiracies, warnings were ignored by President Jimmy Carter who was warned that allowing the Shah of Iran into the United States would have serious consequences, and it did when the Shah was allowed into the United States for medical reasons. Iranian militants became angry and took over our embassy in Iran and the rest is now history. Warnings were ignored concerning the USS Cole incident and the rest became history after militants set off explosives next to the vessel. A warning was ignored when a Predator had Mullah Omar in its sights and military lawyers overruled the use of force to take him out and now, the rest is history as the hunt for Mullah Omar continues.

What you have posted was typical, and has been going on for many years between the CIA and the FBI, so you presented nothing new. In fact, intelligence blunders and failures continued even after the 9/11 attacks.

CIA boss admits intelligence failures over 9/11 attacks

THE HEAD of the CIA yesterday admitted that his agents had flatly failed to penetrate the September 11 plot and said it would be at least five years before America developed the sort of intelligence capabilities to take on terrorists such as al-Qa'ida.

George Tenet, whose agency was roundly criticised by the commission investigating the attacks, said that he and his colleagues had failed those people who died in the strikes in New York and Washington.

"We all understood bin Laden's attempt to strike the homeland. We never translated this knowledge into an effective defence of the country," Mr Tenet testified before the commission.

"No matter how hard we worked, or how desperately we tried, it was not enough. The victims and the families of 9/11 deserved better."

The failures, outlined in a statement issued by the commission and admitted to by Mr Tenet, were not failures of effort or of intention. Rather a picture emerged of an intelligence community still grounded in the challenges of the Cold War and ill-prepared and ill-equipped to deal with the threat presented by stateless terrorists using unconventional means of attack.

http://www.independe...cks-176015.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FBI admits 9/11 could have been prevented many times over

The FBI has admitted it had many chances to prevent 9/11 but did not do so. Meanwhile, the so-called "war on terror" that followed 9/11 has has made the world a more dangerous place. In Iraq and Afghanistan the US regime has killed hundreds of times more people than 9/11, and millions more innocent people in South America and Indochina, but in the Western propaganda model it is only a great disaster when wealthy white people are affected. ***

Pre-9/11 Missteps By FBI Detailed

Report Tells of Missed Chances To Find Hijackers

The inability to detect the Sept. 11, 2001, hijacking plot amounts to a "significant failure" by the FBI and was caused in large part by "widespread and longstanding deficiencies" in the way the agency handled terrorism and intelligence cases, according to a report released yesterday.

In one particularly notable finding, the report by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine concluded that the FBI missed at least five chances to detect the presence of two of the suicide hijackers -- Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar -- after they first entered the United States in early 2000.

"While we do not know what would have happened had the FBI learned sooner or pursued its investigation more aggressively, the FBI lost several important opportunities to find Hazmi and Mihdhar before the September 11 attacks," the report said.

Although many of the missteps surrounding Alhazmi and Almihdhar have become well known, Fine's report adds significant new details about the FBI's role in fumbling the case. Previous reports, including the best-selling tome by the independent Sept. 11 commission, focused more heavily on the CIA's failure to track the men after a pivotal terrorist summit meeting in Malaysia.

The FBI said in a statement that it agreed with many of Fine's conclusions but "has taken substantial steps to address the issues presented in the report."

http://www.theinside...cle.asp?id=1264

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9/11 commission faults U.S. intelligence

U.S. intelligence gathering was fragmented and poorly coordinated before the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the 9/11 commission reported Wednesday, adding that it remains unclear how such crucial information is managed.

"A question remains: Who is in charge of intelligence?" reads the final line of a critical report by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, as the bipartisan 9/11 panel is formally known.

The report, examining the performance of the intelligence community, described a "loose collection" of intelligence agencies that often operated independently of one another with little communication or cooperation. And it faulted CIA Director George Tenet for not having a management strategy to battle terrorism before the 9/11 attacks.

http://articles.cnn....=PM:ALLPOLITICS

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Intelligence Community and 9/11: Congressional Hearings and the Status of the Investigation

Ms. Hill traced the history of the Intelligence Community’s concern with the international terrorist threat back into the 1980s and its focus on Al Qaeda from the early 1990s. A Counterterrorist Center (CTC) had been established at the CIA in 1986 consisting of personnel from various intelligence agencies and the FBI.

By mid-2001 it consisted of some 400 personnel; a special unit within the CTC to monitor Osama bin Laden had been created in 1996. Ms. Hill traced the response of agencies to the series of terrorist attacks, including the one on the New York World Trade Center in February 1993, an unsuccessful plot to bomb New York City tunnels, the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing, a plot to kill the Pope in Manila and blow up 12 U.S.-owned airliners over the Pacific Ocean, a plan to attack the Los Angeles Airport in December 1999, the August 1998 bombings of two U.S. Embassies in Africa, and the attack on the USS Cole in October 2000. Despite extensive casualties and property damage that have been inflicted by Al Qaeda, she noted that effective intelligence and law enforcement work by U.S. agencies, in cooperation with foreign countries, disrupted other planned attacks that would have been very costly.

http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL31650.pdf

Please point out where the above reports and hearings pointed toward a 9/11 government conspiracy as opposed to 9/11 intelligence failures of the CIA and the FBI. Read, and understand what is being said in the following link. You will notice that intelligence failure prior to the 9/11 attacks is clearly evident and nothing to do with a government conspiracy.

http://www.pbs.org/w...11-attacks.html

Basically, you are spreading misinformation because you are unaware of the series of blunders, missteps, and conflicts within the intelligence community that has been going on for years prior to the 9/11 attack, and instead, you hatched that misinformation into a government conspiracy that never was because you were unaware of the rest of the story.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The holes are not evidence the piece was ever in a molten state after its initial fabrication. Look at the thickness of the material. The material reminds me when we annealed 4130 steel sheets in the oven to soften the material in order to form the sheets into complex shapes for use in high temperature sections of our aircraft and engines.

They never took a pic of the whole piece. It's setting on top of a bunch of heavy duty steel. It has holes in it, and the end of it shows something diferant than a clean break.

It's an excellant piece of evidence for for fires hot enough to melt steel. Thanks Sky! Appreciate it Amigo!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They never took a pic of the whole piece. It's setting on top of a bunch of heavy duty steel. It has holes in it, and the end of it shows something diferant than a clean break.

It's an excellant piece of evidence for for fires hot enough to melt steel. Thanks Sky! Appreciate it Amigo!

You're welcome!

However, check out the characteristics of those holes in that photo and then, read from the following link.

WTC Molten Steel

http://911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That has nothing to do with a government conspiracy. Apparently, you did not comprehend what has been presented to you in the past. You should have received the hint when intelligence missteps and blunders were not only admitted by the CIA and the FBI, but before a congressional hearing as well.

There were the intelligence failures, which is nothing new, and nothing to do with a government conspiracy. Those intelligence failures were also revealed before a congressional hearing and in other reports. The CIA inspector general revealed the intelligence failure of the CIA and the FBI inspector general revealed problems with FBI field offices, which failed their inspections, and the 9/11 commission report revealed intelligence failures prior to the 9/11 attacks as well.

I’m not discussing the FBI in general, but the agents I have mentioned. It is disgusting that you would lump the FBI agents I have mentioned in as part of a failure. Read the quotes of FBI agents Rossini and Bongardt again. Would you stand in front of them and tell them to their face that they made “missteps and blunders”? Either 1) you would – in which case, given their sustained efforts to take action against the terrorists for months before 9/11, you are a disgrace, or 2) you wouldn’t – in which case you are disingenuous in your argument. So which is it? Perhaps there is a third option; 3) you are ignorant of the implication of your argument.

I however would be quite satisfied to call the actions of the top tier Bush administration, Cofer Black, other CIA agents and Omar Bayoumi – all those who blocked the FBI and assisted the terrorists - into question. I’d be quite content to point a finger and ask questions to their face. Because that is where, at a minimum, the horrible ‘failure’ occurred. Who knows, if we asked questions to pinpoint cause of the actions and held those responsible accountable, perhaps we’d even uncover direct evidence of wrongdoing.

Really, all the reports that you link attempt, is to claim that some inherent high level failure occurred in the intelligence system, whilst ignoring the detailed, on record actions of individual units and agents that took place – as though it’s not the type of detail the official reports ever cared to look at, or were not permitted to. Well, we know that is the case; as 9/11 Commissioner, Bob Kerrey, later said, “Evidence relating to the plausible involvement of possible Saudi government agents in the September 11th attacks has never been fully pursued.” Which highlights that the 9/11 Commission conclusion, that the meeting between the Saudi government agent and the hijackers and the assistance they received took place by chance, even more ridiculous. The Saudi government agent that Kerrey is primarily referring to is Omar Bayoumi who appears to be a part of the ongoing CIA operation surrounding the hijackers Al Mihdhar and Al Hazmi – think about it – how else did that agent, Bayoumi, who aided and abetted the terrorists, happen to meet those longterm CIA terrorist targets, forward them to live with a U.S. intelligence informant and avoid charge or further investigation from U.S. authorities – he was a part of the CIA operation. Another Senator, Bob Graham, would add, “There’s no question in my mind that the Saudi government was involved in 9/11 ... But there’s still so much we don’t know. Unfortunately, many Americans seem to have lost interest ... The three primary questions that remain for me are: what was the extent of involvement by Saudi officials in 9/11, what was their motivation, and why has the U.S. government gone to such lengths to cover it up?”

In all skyeagle, the reports you have linked are a whitewash – acceptable only to people who care for faith and speculation over knowledge and facts, i.e. the wilfully ignorant. The fact is that you would rather remain in your safety bubble, than face the truth of 9/11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not discussing the FBI in general, but the agents I have mentioned.

The problems have been highlighted in the links as to why the agents were having problems.

It is disgusting that you would lump the FBI agents I have mentioned in as part of a failure.

It is surprising that despite the highlighted problems of the CIA and the FBI, you are still trying to paint a 9/11 government conspiracy on a non-existent canvas.

Read the quotes of FBI agents Rossini and Bongardt again. Would you stand in front of them and tell them to their face that they made “missteps and blunders”?

Either 1) you would – in which case, given their sustained efforts to take action against the terrorists for months before 9/11, you are a disgrace, or 2) you wouldn’t – in which case you are disingenuous in your argument. So which is it? Perhaps there is a third option; 3) you are ignorant of the implication of your argument.

I would simply tell them their problems were the result of missteps and blunders of the CIA and the FBI, which were clearly evident in the links I've posted.

I however would be quite satisfied to call the actions of the top tier Bush administration, Cofer Black, other CIA agents and Omar Bayoumi – all those who blocked the FBI and assisted the terrorists - into question. I’d be quite content to point a finger and ask questions to their face. Because that is where, at a minimum, the horrible ‘failure’ occurred. Who knows, if we asked questions to pinpoint cause of the actions and held those responsible accountable, perhaps we’d even uncover direct evidence of wrongdoing.

Really, all the reports that you link attempt, is to claim that some inherent high level failure occurred in the intelligence system, whilst ignoring the detailed, on record actions of individual units and agents that took place – as though it’s not the type of detail the official reports ever cared to look at, or were not permitted to.

On the contrary, the two agents can only do so much considering the intelligence blunders and missteps of the CIA and the FBI leading up to the 9/11 attacks.

Well, we know that is the case; as 9/11 Commissioner, Bob Kerrey, later said, “Evidence relating to the plausible involvement of possible Saudi government agents in the September 11th attacks has never been fully pursued.”

Are you trying to implicate the Saudi government directly in the 9/11 attacks? Remember, you were also the person who tried to implicate Israelis in the 9/11 attacks who were later found innocent, and remember, Israel also sent out warnings of an impending attack against the United States by Muslim terrorist just prior to the 9/11 attacks, so implicating Israel didn't make any sense by that very fact.

Which highlights that the 9/11 Commission conclusion, that the meeting between the Saudi government agent and the hijackers and the assistance they received took place by chance, even more ridiculous. The Saudi government agent that Kerrey is primarily referring to is Omar Bayoumi who appears to be a part of the ongoing CIA operation surrounding the hijackers Al Mihdhar and Al Hazmi – think about it – how else did that agent, Bayoumi, who aided and abetted the terrorists, happen to meet those longterm CIA terrorist targets, forward them to live with a U.S. intelligence informant and avoid charge or further investigation from U.S. authorities – he was a part of the CIA operation.

First of all, he was not a Saudi agent.

Bayoumi Not a Government Agent: Bandar

WASHINGTON, 25 July 2003 — A Saudi citizen named in a US congressional report, who is said to have been in contact with two of the Saudi terrorists involved in the Sept. 11 bombings, was not a Saudi government agent, according to Prince Bandar ibn Sultan, the Saudi ambassador to the United States.

“Reports that Omar Al-Bayoumi is an agent of the Saudi government are baseless and not true. It is unfortunate that reports keep circulating in the media describing him as an agent of the Saudi government with attribution only to anonymous officials. This is blatantly false,” said Prince Bandar in a statement released yesterday.

http://www.m.arabnews.com/node/234797

Another Senator, Bob Graham, would add, “There’s no question in my mind that the Saudi government was involved in 9/11 ... But there’s still so much we don’t know. Unfortunately, many Americans seem to have lost interest ... The three primary questions that remain for me are: what was the extent of involvement by Saudi officials in 9/11, what was their motivation, and why has the U.S. government gone to such lengths to cover it up?”

Nothing there implicating the United States in the 9/11 attacks. It is no secret that when our intelligence agencies make mistakes, they try to coverup those mistakes, some of which have been revealed.

In all skyeagle, the reports you have linked are a whitewash – acceptable only to people who care for faith and speculation over knowledge and facts, i.e. the wilfully ignorant. The fact is that you would rather remain in your safety bubble, than face the truth of 9/11.

On the contrary, I am right on the money and the links show there were serious intelligence failures leading up to the 9/11 attacks and nothing there implicating the United States of America in the 9/11 attacks. In other words, you have presented no evidence implicating the United States in the 9/11 attacks. After all, the news media has taken a look and found no evidence implicating the United States the 9/11 attacks either.

Assigning responsibility

For several months after the 9/11 attacks, no one, nor any group, claimed responsibility for the attacks, so the primary responsibility fell solely upon the hijackers, all of whom were killed and all of whom left no message or any claim of responsibility behind at explaining why they had carried the attacks out. As the media covered the 9/11 attacks unfolding, many quickly speculated that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks.

On the day of the attacks, the National Security Agency intercepted communications that pointed to Osama bin Laden, as did German intelligence agencies.[22] This helped rule out other immediate suspects, such as Croatian nationalists, who had bombed Grand Central Terminal on September 11, 1976.

Authorities in the United States and Britain also obtained electronic intercepts, including telephone conversations and electronic bank transfers, which indicate that Mohammed Atef, a bin Laden deputy, was a key figure in the planning of the 9/11 attacks. Intercepts were also obtained that revealed conversations that took place days before September 11 between bin Laden and an associate in Pakistan. In those conversations, the two referred to "an incident that would take place in America on, or around, September 11" and they discussed potential repercussions. In another conversation with an associate in Afghanistan, bin Laden discussed the "scale and effects of a forthcoming operation." These conversations did not specifically mention the World Trade Center or Pentagon, or other specifics.

The investigators were quickly able to link the 19 men to the terrorist organization al-Qaeda, also by accessing material in their intelligence agency files. The New York Times reported on September 12 that: "Authorities said they had also identified accomplices in several cities who had helped plan and execute Tuesday’s attacks. Officials said they knew who these people were and important biographical details about many of them. They prepared biographies of each identified member of the hijack teams, and began tracing the recent movements of the men." FBI agents in Florida investigating the hijackers quickly "descended on flight schools, neighborhoods and restaurants in pursuit of leads." At one flight school, "students said investigators were there within hours of Tuesday’s attacks."

The Washington Post later reported that "In the hours after Tuesday’s bombings, investigators searched their files on [satam] al-Suqami and [Ahmed] al-Ghamdi, noted the pair’s ties to [Nabil] al-Marabh and launched a hunt for him."

Based on the evidence, authorities in the United States quickly asserted that Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organization were solely responsible for the attacks, and other suspects were ruled out. The Government of the United Kingdom reached the same conclusion.

http://en.wikipedia....mber_11_attacks

2004 Osama bin Laden video

On October 29, 2004, at 21:00 UTC, al Jazeera broadcast excerpts from a videotape of Osama bin Laden addressing the people of the United States (in which he accepts responsibility for the September 11 attacks) condemns the Bush government's response to those attacks and presents those attacks as part of a campaign of revenge and deterrence motivated by his witnessing of the destruction in the Lebanese Civil War in 1982

He also admits for the first time a direct link to the attacks, saying that they were carried out because "we are a free people who do not accept injustice, and we want to regain the freedom of our nation". Bin Laden threatens further retaliation against the U.S., noting that the conditions which provoked the 2001 attacks still exist and compares America to "corrupt" Arab governments.

He speaks of his desire to bankrupt the U.S., saying:

"[it is] easy for us to provoke and bait this administration. All that we have to do is to send two mujahidin to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al-Qaeda, in order to make the generals race there and cause America to suffer human, economic, and political losses ... This is in addition to our having experience in using
and the war of attrition to fight tyrannical superpowers, as we, alongside the mujahidin, bled
for 10 years, until it went bankrupt and was forced to withdraw in defeat."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Osama_bin_Laden_video

As you can see, there is nothing there implicating the United States government in the 9/11 attacks and you have not presented evidence implicating the United States in the 9/11 attacks, which is why after more than 11 years, not one shred of evidence has surfaced.

What you are doing is turning a blind eye from the real evidence and promoting disinformation and misinformation that 9/11 conspiracy websites are well-known for.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dang I thought the poster was writing about a turkey that could talk..... that would be amazing !! Would completely put a different spin on Thanksgiving ! Might even impress my parrot but I doubt it !

Edited by mfrmboy
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problems have been highlighted in the links as to why the agents were having problems.

The FBI agents on the case had problems because the CIA agents on the case blocked them from taking action against the terrorists, end of story.

Are you trying to implicate the Saudi government directly in the 9/11 attacks? Remember, you were also the person who tried to implicate Israelis in the 9/11 attacks who were later found innocent, and remember, Israel also sent out warnings of an impending attack against the United States by Muslim terrorist just prior to the 9/11 attacks, so implicating Israel didn't make any sense by that very fact.

Well actually I quoted two former U.S. Senators, one a member of the 9/11 Commission, who believe Saudi government agents were implicated with the hijackers. If you want my opinion, it is very blatant that a Saudi government element, as was a U.S. government element, implicit in the attack. The Saudis, U.S. allies, had no love for the Taliban or Saddam Hussein and 9/11 strengthened their own position in the Gulf region. Yes we can include Israeli elements too, and perhaps British for the record. Heck, I’ll even throw Islamic extremists/Al Qaeda elements, whatever you want to call them, and bin Laden into the plot to some extent. The evidence leads where it will and no one should be excused.

Your point about ruling out any Israeli involvement because one element of their intelligence services warned the U.S. of a potential attack is completely nonsensical, knowing that countries and governments consist of different groups/cells which do not always share the same agendas.

First of all, he was not a Saudi agent.

Your own FBI conclude that Omar Bayoumi was a Saudi agent (as do his circumstances suggest)... but you’re going disregard that and take the word of the Saudi ambassador to the U.S. on this?... oh ok. You are absurd – you actually expect everyone from the CIA to the Saudis to come clean on their involvement with the hijackers pre-9/11 and implicate themselves in the attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FBI agents on the case had problems because the CIA agents on the case blocked them from taking action against the terrorists, end of story.

Such problems have been occurring for many years between the FBI and the CIA on other matters as well, so it is nothing new,and the fact of the matter is, problems still persisted after the 9/11 attack on other cases as well. And remember, the CIA and the FBi have acknowledged problems and intelligence failures before the 9/11 attacks, so there was nothing there that implicated the United States in the 9/11 attacks.

Well actually I quoted two former U.S. Senators, one a member of the 9/11 Commission, who believe Saudi government agents were implicated with the hijackers.

Still nothing there that implicates the United States govenment.

If you want my opinion, it is very blatant that a Saudi government element, as was a U.S. government element, implicit in the attack.

Evidence please! No evidence, and you have no case. :no:

The Saudis, U.S. allies, had no love for the Taliban or Saddam Hussein and 9/11 strengthened their own position in the Gulf region.

What position?

Yes we can include Israeli elements too, and perhaps British for the record.

No we can't!!

Israel and the UK also passed on warnings that Muslim terrorist were in the process of carrying out their attack on the United States prior to the 9/11 attacks, so by that very fact, we can dismiss Israel and the UK, as well as the United States in the 9/11 attacks.

Heck, I’ll even throw Islamic extremists/Al Qaeda elements, whatever you want to call them, and bin Laden into the plot to some extent. The evidence leads where it will and no one should be excused.

Since there is no evidence implicating Israel, the UK, and the United States, we can point the finger at al-Qaeda. After all, bin Laden declared war on the United States and Muslim terrorist bombed WTC1 in 1993, the USS Cole, our embassies in Lebanon, Kenya, and in Tanzania, and yet, we did not go to war, not even when Pan Am 103 was downed by a bomb.

Your own FBI conclude that Omar Bayoumi was a Saudi agent (as do his circumstances suggest)... but you’re going disregard that and take the word of the Saudi ambassador to the U.S. on this?... oh ok. You are absurd – you actually expect everyone from the CIA to the Saudis to come clean on their involvement with the hijackers pre-9/11 and implicate themselves in the attack.

You have failed to provide any evidence that implicates the United States in the 9/11 attacks and when you think you have found that evidence, pass that evidence on to the news agencies because they found no evidence implicating the United States in the 9/11 attacks after more than 11 years. :no:

All you are doing is creating something for which there is no basis of reality.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such problems have been occurring for many years between the FBI and the CIA on other matters as well, so it is nothing new,and the fact of the matter is, problems still persisted after the 9/11 attack on other cases as well. And remember, the CIA and the FBi have acknowledged problems and intelligence failures before the 9/11 attacks, so there was nothing there that implicated the United States in the 9/11 attacks.

Still nothing there that implicates the United States govenment.

Evidence please! No evidence, and you have no case. :no:

What position?

No we can't!!

Israel and the UK also passed on warnings that Muslim terrorist were in the process of carrying out their attack on the United States prior to the 9/11 attacks, so by that very fact, we can dismiss Israel and the UK, as well as the United States in the 9/11 attacks.

Since there is no evidence implicating Israel, the UK, and the United States, we can point the finger at al-Qaeda. After all, bin Laden declared war on the United States and Muslim terrorist bombed WTC1 in 1993, the USS Cole, our embassies in Lebanon, Kenya, and in Tanzania, and yet, we did not go to war, not even when Pan Am 103 was downed by a bomb.

You have failed to provide any evidence that implicates the United States in the 9/11 attacks and when you think you have found that evidence, pass that evidence on to the news agencies because they found no evidence implicating the United States in the 9/11 attacks after more than 11 years. :no:

OMG....you think because Israel and Uk and anyone else who warns us of an attack cannot be involved? well, no chance of you ever being an intelligence agent, you don't even understand what a false flag op is! I am not saying they ARE involved, I am saying they could still possibly be, warning of an attack does not mean they aren't plotting against you....gee whiz. It's basic espionage dude! lmao.....I am laughing so hard right now. At least you brightened my mood. I just wish I could be 'innocent' and naive again, and believe everyone is honest and upfront and well intentioned....must be nice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG....you think because Israel and Uk and anyone else who warns us of an attack cannot be involved?

That's right!! No evidence implicating Israel, the UK, nor the United States has been uncovered. After an investigation, no explosives were found in their van and after an investigation, they were found innocent. In other words, no evidence implicating them nor Israel in the 9/11 attacks was found. Just another case where 9/11 conspiracist blew things out of proportion.

well, no chance of you ever being an intelligence agent, you don't even understand what a false flag op is!

I understand what a 'false flag operation' is and I have dealt with intelligence folks as well. In one case, when my C-5 was tasked to support recovery operations regarding Korean Airlines 007, which was shot down by the Soviet Union. My crew was given an intelligence briefing at Clark airbase, Philippines before we flew down to Cubi Point to pick up recovery equipment, which was destined for Japan. In other cases,

I have been called in from time to time by the Air Force OSI to vouch for my compatriots were to be sent to secret bases. Another time, I was debriefed after my little tour on a Soviet warship, so I am no stranger to our intelligence folks.

I am not saying they ARE involved, I am saying they could still possibly be, warning of an attack does not mean they aren't plotting against you....gee whiz. It's basic espionage dude! lmao.....I am laughing so hard right now. At least you brightened my mood. I just wish I could be 'innocent' and naive again, and believe everyone is honest and upfront and well intentioned....must be nice!

There are many ways we can ascertain the rest of the story that can be passed on to those in Washington D.C. and you know the old saying:

"Those who laughs last, laughs best." :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's right!! No evidence implicating Israel, the UK, nor the United States has been uncovered. After an investigation, no explosives were found in their van and after an investigation, they were found innocent. In other words, no evidence implicating them nor Israel in the 9/11 attacks was found. Just another case where 9/11 conspiracist blew things out of proportion.

I understand what a 'false flag operation' is and I have dealt with intelligence folks as well. In one case, when my C-5 was tasked to support recovery operations regarding Korean Airlines 007, which was shot down by the Soviet Union. My crew was given an intelligence briefing at Clark airbase, Philippines before we flew down to Cubi Point to pick up recovery equipment, which was destined for Japan. In other cases,

I have been called in from time to time by the Air Force OSI to vouch for my compatriots were to be sent to secret bases. Another time, I was debriefed after my little tour on a Soviet warship, so I am no stranger to our intelligence folks.

There are many ways we can ascertain the rest of the story that can be passed on to those in Washington D.C. and you know the old saying:

"Those who laughs last, laughs best." :lol:

OH BOY..... am talking about the intelligence agents 'that do not exist'.....I am talking about darker than black ops. they do not exist.....*wink* *wink* The kind of ops that start wars and assassinate leaders of foreign countries......you know the illegal stuff the US would NEVER participate in.....haha.

I do have to say, I wish I could be naive and innocent again....and not know about some of the more dastardlly deeds committed by my fellow human beings......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OH BOY..... am talking about the intelligence agents 'that do not exist'.....I am talking about darker than black ops. they do not exist.....*wink* *wink* The kind of ops that start wars and assassinate leaders of foreign countries......you know the illegal stuff the US would NEVER participate in.....haha.

* Did we go to war when the USS Stark was struck by a missile?

* Did we go to war when the USS Cole was bombed?

* Did we go to war when WTC1 was bombed in 1993?

* Did we go to war when North Korea shot down our EC-121 and hijacked the USS Pueblo in international waters?

* Did we go to war when terrorist bombed our embassies?

No, we did not go to war, but 9/11 conspiracist play up 'false flag ops' and try to portray 9/11 as a 'false flag' operation without the understanding of what would have been involved nor of the consequences. Basically speaking, the government could not have pulled off a 9/11 'false flag' operation and not get caught. Look what happened after the Watergate scandal. The government couldn't do a good job of covering up that scandal.

We actually sought to avoid the first Gulf War and even conducted naval exercises in the Persian Gulf to discourage Saddam Hussein to back off, but he failed to heed our warnings and the rest is history. Many within the military felt that we should have gone all the way to Baghdad and overthrow Saddam before ending the war, but President Bush decided to stop the war after Iraqi troops were ejected out of Kuwait.

It seems to me that 9/11 conspiracist try to portray the United States as land-grabbing warmongers, but that isn't true at all.

I do have to say, I wish I could be naive and innocent again....and not know about some of the more dastardlly deeds committed by my fellow human beings......

How many more people would have been slaughtered in Bosnia and Kosovo had the United States remained passive in light of Serb atrocities in the region?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No sense in winking at Sky, as he seems to be quite naive. Thinks that US government and US corporations are peopled by only honest people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No sense in winking at Sky, as he seems to be quite naive. Thinks that US government and US corporations are peopled by only honest people.

Other than American Airlines and United Airlines, are you now claiming that Protec, Air Line Pilots Association, Allied Pilots Association, American Institute of Architects, and the American Society of Civil Engineers are part of a government conspiracy?

Goes to show that you make up things as you go. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* Did we go to war when the USS Stark was struck by a missile?

* Did we go to war when the USS Cole was bombed?

* Did we go to war when WTC1 was bombed in 1993?

* Did we go to war when North Korea shot down our EC-121 and hijacked the USS Pueblo in international waters?

* Did we go to war when terrorist bombed our embassies?

No, we did not go to war, but 9/11 conspiracist play up 'false flag ops' and try to portray 9/11 as a 'false flag' operation without the understanding of what would have been involved nor of the consequences. Basically speaking, the government could not have pulled off a 9/11 'false flag' operation and not get caught. Look what happened after the Watergate scandal. The government couldn't do a good job of covering up that scandal.

We actually sought to avoid the first Gulf War and even conducted naval exercises in the Persian Gulf to discourage Saddam Hussein to back off, but he failed to heed our warnings and the rest is history. Many within the military felt that we should have gone all the way to Baghdad and overthrow Saddam before ending the war, but President Bush decided to stop the war after Iraqi troops were ejected out of Kuwait.

It seems to me that 9/11 conspiracist try to portray the United States as land-grabbing warmongers, but that isn't true at all.

How many more people would have been slaughtered in Bosnia and Kosovo had the United States remained passive in light of Serb atrocities in the region?

are you serious?

many of our 'wars' never hit the news................if you understand more about black ops......the 'real' ones.....the ones that don't exist and answer only to their master whoever that may be at any particular time then you would understand what I am telling you.

please spare me the SH crap......we were quite friendly with him when it suited our needs.....friendlier than you could ever imagine, same with UBL, Qaddafi, arms traders, int'l terrorist financiers....dictators, the Saudi royal family.......drug cartels, Pakistani ISI, Syria torture centers, Egyptian torture centers.......the Taliban, on and on ad nauseum.

.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than American Airlines and United Airlines, are you now claiming that Protec, Air Line Pilots Association, Allied Pilots Association, American Institute of Architects, and the American Society of Civil Engineers are part of a government conspiracy?

Goes to show that you make up things as you go. :yes:

you would do the proverbial sh***T yourself crazy if you knew what kind of people who would cooperate with an official story/stance/opinion just to save their career and their life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are you serious?

Yes indeed!

...many of our 'wars' never hit the news...............

Right now, much of our war on terror is not carried by news services. After all, our guys want to be the first to announce to the terrorist that they are in the area.

...

.if you understand more about black ops......the 'real' ones.....the ones that don't exist and answer only to their master whoever that may be at any particular time then you would understand what I am telling you.

please spare me the SH crap.....

Believe me, I know much more about 'black ops' than you think!

....we were quite friendly with him when it suited our needs.....friendlier than you could ever imagine, same with UBL

We did not have a love for bin Laden and his group. You are confusing the Afghan Mujahideen with the Afghan Arabs, who fought along side of one another against the Soviet Union.

We do act kindly when the time comes and an example is, we did not send a bill to bin Laden's family as payment for the use of an aircraft carrier to facilitate his burial at sea and I am sure that bin Laden would have been very grateful to the United States for use its aircraft carrier to transport his body to his final resting place and remember, it is not cheap to use an aircraft carrier for burial purposes either..

... , Qaddafi, arms traders, int'l terrorist financiers....dictators,

Did you know that a Tuskegee Airman, Colonel Daniel "Chappie" James, almost blew Qaddafi away during a heated confrontation?

the Saudi royal family.......

Did you know that the United States was instrumental in stopping Saddam Hussein from overrunning Saudi Arabia and advancing onward toward other Gulf States? Were you aware of the warning Saddam issued to the Gulf States prior to invading Kuwait? Were you even aware that Saddam struck the oil platforms of the UAE? There's much of what you don't know and what you are doing is just judging a book by its cover. You heard the old saying: "Still Waters Run Deep."

What you don't know can hurt you.

drug cartels,

I am sure that United States spent a lot of money fighting the drug cartels.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Double Post

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes indeed!

Right now, much of our war on terror is not carried by news services. After all, our services want to be the first to announce to the terrorist that they are in the area.

You have every right to believe that everything the CIA or our presidents do is legit and in our best interests........but it isn't always so.

I envy you your innocence and trust....some of us don't have that luxury anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have every right to believe that everything the CIA or our presidents do is legit and in our best interests........but it isn't always so.

I envy you your innocence and trust....some of us don't have that luxury anymore.

Believe me, I have had my own issues with the government as well, but that is another story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a 22 year old lieutenant US Army, I discovered that the CIA was in the dope business in Southeast Asia.

Now maybe it was simply a gaggle of rogue agents, but opium was being carried on their Air America helicopters, under orders of supervisors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a 22 year old lieutenant US Army, I discovered that the CIA was in the dope business in Southeast Asia.

Now maybe it was simply a gaggle of rogue agents, but opium was being carried on their Air America helicopters, under orders of supervisors.

Evidence please! Besides, what does that have to do with the 9/11 attacks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're talking turkey Sky.

A pilot friend of mine went to work for AA after he got out of the Army. He told the story, and he was not making it up. He and the rest of us ideal young aviators were shocked to discover it. Kinda like losing one's virginity, if you get my drift.

And Sky--I already know that you don't believe me sir. And, Chief, I could not care less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evidence please! Besides, what does that have to do with the 9/11 attacks?

how the hell do you think black ops get funded?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're talking turkey Sky.

A pilot friend of mine went to work for AA after he got out of the Army. He told the story, and he was not making it up. He and the rest of us ideal young aviators were shocked to discover it. Kinda like losing one's virginity, if you get my drift.

And Sky--I already know that you don't believe me sir. And, Chief, I could not care less.

some people literally cannot handle the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.