Japan Questions 9/11 and the Global War on Terror

[John_Mace]

@The_Tooth

I’ve read they were willing to turn him over to a neutral party for trial on the condition the US showed he had planned the deed. It makes a sort of sense, because there’s nothing wrong with sheltering someone who didn’t plan to blow up four major US buildings.

I refer to this.

Even absent the events of 9/11/01, al Qaeda had conducted attacks against the US As the leader of that organization, bin Laden bears responsibility. His training camps in Afghanistan were factories for turning out fighters that were intent on attacking not only the US, but targets all over the world.

[Cisco]

@EasyPhil

Perhaps to facilitate the subsequent invasion of Iraq based on phoney evidence of WMDs?

But EasyPhil, the invasion of Iraq was authorized in 1998 by Bill Clinton; 9/11 was not necessary. This is perhaps the worst yet most common motive that troothers profer.

(In the spirit of fairness, your other two motives are extraordinarily bad as well. What was the goal of invading Afghanistan? What nefarious ends have the civil liberty restrictions since 9/11 accomplished?)

[Desert_Nomad]

@ExTank

That’s the great part: they never existed.

And so what do you say to the people that know people that were on that flight? Where exactly did these people go to hide for the last 7 years?

[The_Tooth]

Then Bush’s refusal to make his case was completely unnecessary. Oh well. I don’t know why people look for conspiracy here when it’s easily explained by Bush’s diplomatic ham-handedness.

[EasyPhil]

@Cisco

But EasyPhil, the invasion of Iraq was authorized in 1998 by Bill Clinton; 9/11 was not necessary. This is perhaps the worst yet most common motive that troothers profer.

(In the spirit of fairness, your other two motives are extraordinarily bad as well. What was the goal of invading Afghanistan? What nefarious ends have the civil liberty restrictions since 9/11 accomplished?)

If they, the Govt, didn’t need a pretext to invade Iraq they wouldn’t have went to all of the trouble of coming up with phoney evidence and just outright lying about stuff. Once 9/11 happened they, the Govt began the propaganda campaign of link Iraq to the events of 9/11, heck people still believe Iraq had something do with it. If you get a chance, take a look at the video “War Made Easy”, it gives you a pretty comprehensive look at what went down.

[EasyPhil]

@The_Tooth

Then Bush’s refusal to make his case was completely unnecessary. Oh well. I don’t know why people look for conspiracy here when it’s easily explained by Bush’s diplomatic ham-handedness.

So why lie about it?

[EasyPhil]

@MEBuckner

You know, I’ve always wanted to see some solid proof that Japan was actually responsible for the attack on Pearl Harbor. Do we really know for sure that the U.S. government didn’t stage an attack on its own Pacific Fleet in order to justify war with Japan? There are lots of “anomalies”: Why were the warnings from the radar posts that detected the (allegedly Japanese) aircraft approaching ignored? Why were the aircraft carriers all conveniently out to sea, leaving only the battleships (which were less important by World War II)? Why were crucial oil storage facilities carefully spared? Why was it that a number of B-17s just happened to be flying in from the mainland right as the attack took place? Several of the B-17s were shot down by so-called “friendly fire”–how do we know the Navy didn’t shoot down the Army bombers because the Army bombers were the ones dropping bombs on them and sinking their battleships?

I mean, I’m just asking questions is all.
[/tinfoil-hat-wearing Internet conspiracy theorist]

Three words…Gulf of Tonkin

[ExTank]

@Desert_Nomad

And so what do you say to the people that know people that were on that flight? Where exactly did these people go to hide for the last 7 years?

Thinking Like A Conspiracy Theorist:

There were no flights, hence there were no people on those flights.

Anyone who claims to have known someone on one of those flights is working for the CIA (NSA, UN, pick your evil agency of choice).

Seriously, I was speaking tongue-in-cheek in my previous post.

[Cisco]

@EasyPhil

If they, the Govt, didn’t need a pretext to invade Iraq they wouldn’t have went to all of the trouble of coming up with phoney evidence and just outright lying about stuff. Once 9/11 happened they, the Govt began the propaganda campaign of link Iraq to the events of 9/11, heck people still believe Iraq had something do with it. If you get a chance, take a look at the video “War Made Easy”, it gives you a pretty comprehensive look at what went down.

Is “inside job” the only possible conclusion you can think of? Are you assigning malice when incompetence could explain this? Did you think maybe they wanted a stronger case to persuade other countries to help?

[The_Tooth]

@EasyPhil

So why lie about it?

Don’t ask me, I’m not accusing Bush of lying.