So was yours.
:rolleyes:
AND George W brings up 9/11 all the time. The guy can’t take a crap without saying it.
“Before I drop a load I want us all to remember back to that faithful day of Sept 11th”
It’s almost like Bush is an Al Qaeda member working to promote membership.
I have to say, the fact that he never actually denied it, or said that it was a horrible act (something that most everyone did, even most of the United States’ enemies agreed on it), Is pretty damming. Given that we will never see the evidence that actually implicates OBL, lets look at the actions of our government after the attacks.
We attacked the Taliban in Afghanistan in retaliation. Before this, GWB had not mentioned them at all, and was very public about wanting to go into Iraq. I have heard (I am sorry, I cannot provide a cite at the moment) that Rumsfeld made a note to himself in the meeting immedeately afterward to blame Iraq, even if they are not involved. At any rate, other than OBL, they were able to get everything else they wanted from the Taliban by simply providing them money in exchange. This leads me to belive that they believed their own statements about OBL being behind it, at least.
If your objection really is that it would be a miscalcualtion on OBL’s part to attack the US directly, then why had he not shied away from it before? If I were not trying to incur the wrath of the US millitary, I wouldn’t have attacked one of their ships, or embassies. He is on the record saying that we just did not have the cojones to engage him in a meaningful manner. I’m not saying that we did it intelligently, not by a long shot, but that is a different matter entirely.
As for the idea that another government, or our own staged the 9/11 attacks, most have the money and expertise to pull off a bombing in a manner that would give them a much smaller chance of it going wrong, or their being caught. The plane that crashed in Pennsylvania is a good example of how this attack could go wrong. If someone knwe how to fly that plane, well, we might know more than we do now about the attacks. A truck bomb of sufficent size would have pulled it off, with limited chance of being caught. Remeber, we caught McVeigh, and the original bombers of the WTC by dumb luck. The attackers in 1993 admit that they were not successful because of inadequate funds.
As far as the misidentificaion of some of the persons claimed to be the hijackers, never ascribe to malice what can be sufficently explaned through ignorance. Shoddy police work is kinda the hallmark of our federal government.
That said, I could go on all day about how they knew Iraq was not a threat, and how their actions in that war back that perception up. So please do not try to label me as some flag-waving, goose stepping, Bush or US war zealot. Because I ain’t.
Plenty of evidence, right from the start, to show that money for the 9/11 operation either went through the Pakistani ISI, or was financed (in part) by same. 'course, that didn’t prevent Bush agreeing new loans, deferring and cancelling old loans, initiating new trade deals, etc. so the US could use Pakistani air space.
Also, we don’t even know for sure the ID of many of the operatives.
Everything else, at least in the public domain, remains speculation, though what happened at the WTC in 1993 seems a reasonable indicator of the kinds of people who ‘fancied’ a shot at the towers.
Well one thing everyone agrees is that Saddam and Iraq had nothing to do with it…
In 1949, a British author, Eric Blair, under the pseudonym, “George Orwell”, penned a futuristic novel, simply titled “1984”, depicting a society under the yolk of a totalitarian super-state endearingly referred to as “Big Brother”. One of the bureaucratic agencies within “Big Brother” was the “Ministry of Truth”, what we refer to as the “news media”.
Subsequent to the 9-11 attack on the World Trade Center, the collective divisions that comprise our establishment news media have revealed a worrisome tendency to emulate Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth”.
The attack on the World Trade Center was an extensively planned and coordinated effort, involving the almost simultaneous hijacking of four passenger airliners by up to nineteen individuals of Arab descent who had been residing in America under temporary visas. Despite several of the terrorists being on an FBI “watch list”, they were allowed unfettered travel within America’s borders. Some of the named suspects had entered America under student visas, but did not attend any classes. Others were allowed to enroll in various degrees of domestic flight training involving the use of sophisticated flight simulators but were reported to have not been interested in any instruction in either take-offs or landings.
Despite billions of dollars spent on domestic surveillance, international espionage and sophisticated eavesdropping satellites, the agencies charged with America’s national security were caught completely off-guard. But yet, those comprising our “intelligence community” had solved the mystery of who and why within a mere twenty-four hours after the attack without the benefit of any forensic evidence.
This almost miraculous example of crime solving came as the result of a tip from a “concerned citizen” who, upon learning of the hijackings and subsequent attack on the WTC, reported having an “altercation” with a carload of “Arab-looking” men in an airport parking-garage.
The “concerned citizen” was able to lead FBI investigators to the parking-garage and point out the vehicle involved in the “altercation”. A forced entry into the vehicle led investigators, not only to the identities of the car’s previous occupants, but also to the discovery of “terrorist literature” implicating Osama Bin-Laden and the Al-Qaeda organization.
Now, here’s the rub. One would think that at least one of the divisions of the establishment media, either ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN or, at least, Fox News would have wanted to interview and present to their viewing audience this mysterious and almost heroic “concerned citizen”, who did the right thing. But for reasons unknown, none did.
As in Orwell’s fictional novel, sometimes initially reported events, that are found to be inconvenient to the establishment party line, for reasons of political expediency, are relegated to the “memory hole”, never to see the light of day again.
During the live reporting of the WTC attack, the establishment media reported that a group of men of Arabic descent had been detained by authorities for videotaping and celebrating the attack with what were described as “cries of joy and mockery”.* Even Dan Rather, the dean of the establishment media, made note of the “America-hating Arabs” while a guest on “Late Night with David Letterman”. However, the establishment media had to resort to utilizing the “memory hole” when it came to light that it was not Arabs, but rather five Israelis, who were in this country illegally, that were caught videotaping and celebrating the attack on the Twin Towers.
Evidently, the reporting of certain events must be suppressed to prevent the asking of some uncomfortable questions, such as, “How did five Israelis, who were in this country illegally, know what they were cheering for?” But, you can bet your last shekel that had it been a group of men caught celebrating the attack on America that the establishment media could link to, what they refer to as, a “right-wing extremist group”, it would still yet be a feature of the “nightly news”.
It is painfully obvious that America’s establishment media regard their viewing audience in much the same manner that Big Brother’s “Ministry of Truth” expected the proletariat to unquestionably accept what they were allowed to know. And if any “proles” should question the official party line, they could be guilty of a “thought crime”.
Even to this day, those who dare to question the official party line, that the September 11 attack was based solely on the hatred that fundamentalist Muslims supposedly have for the abstract concept of America’s “freedom and democracy”, are being denounced as either conspiracy theorists or enemy sympathizers for having politically incorrect thoughts.
Sadly, the majority of today’s populace mimic the “proles” of “1984” in their willingness to unquestionably embrace the establishment media as a “Ministry of Truth”, even in the light of well-documented instances in which the establishment media has deliberately suppressed information, blatantly manipulated evidence and produced documentaries based on fabricated events in an effort to manipulate public opinion.
Yes, it seems that many of the trappings of Orwell’s nightmarish vision of the totalitarian super-state are with us, just a little later than predicted.
*Ha’aretz Tuesday, September 18, 2001 Tishrei 1, 5762 Israel Time: 04:41 (GMT+3)
5 Israelis detained for `puzzling behavior’ after WTC tragedy
By Yossi Melman
Five Israelis who had worked for a moving company based in New Jersey are being held in U.S. prisons for what the Federal Bureau of Investigation has described as “puzzling behavior” following the terror attack on the World Trade Center in New York last Tuesday. The five are expected to be deported sometime soon.
The Foreign Ministry said in response that it had been informed by the consulate in New York that the FBI had arrested the five for “puzzling behavior.” They are said to have had been caught videotaping the disaster and shouting in what was interpreted as cries of joy and mockery.
I’ll see your George Orwell and raise you one William of Occam:
Your little anecdote at the end has two possible explanations:
- The five cheering Israelis were involved in the attacks, and therefore, the Israeli government itself was responsible, because of course all Israelis are spies.
or:
- The five cheering Israelis were assholes.
I’ll let ol’ Bill decide
Bill has an even better one:
5 Isrealis stand on a roof observing the fire and collapse of the WTC. THey took a few pictures. A neighbor hears them talking and, not knowing Hebrew from Arabic, complains to the police that there are Arabs singing and dancing on a nearby roof. Police come by, later the 5 are followed, but there’s nothing to what they are doing except speaking loudly in Hebrew(in shock). Some jump to the conclusion that they are ‘celebrating’ and are briefly arrested, 'casue they look like Arabs dontcha know.
Later, in the conspiracy press, their actions are magnified, and they magically become vetern Mossad agents. Their van is full of maps with strategic points marked. Of course only the kookpress has these important details.
Does anyone have a cite for these five Israelis? Sounds like an urban legend to me.
I think its real… google it up.
I don’t get it. Are we really saying that the lack of plausible alternatives is indicative of OBLs guilt ?
I didn’t realize the evidence was quite this weak. I also think it’s noteworthy that although OBL endorses / approves the WTC attack in his various speeches he never seems to claim responsibility. I believe he would show the same response to any other anti-US terrorist act, regardless of the perpetrator.
Would it be safe to assume that if he’s captured at some point and goes to trial there would be sufficient evidence to convict ?
Well, as noted by xtisme above, there is taking of credit. Plus there were a couple of tapes where he took credit. Plus there’s the fact that this is his M.O. and his favorite target. (Remember 1993?)
In this link (provided by a previous thread) Osama is on video taking credit.
http://www.warroom.com/ladenconfesses.htm
As well as him discussing it with rather intimate detail as to what would happen:
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/12/13/tape.transcript/
ANd a BinLaden Aide who took credit as well:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26418
We already covered a bunch of nutty stuff:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=210453&highlight=Osama
There’s also probably a host of evidence that we may not be aware of since it is not made public, and any that does gets buried behind a boatload of kookpress that dominates any google search.
I don’t get it. Are we really supposed to assume, as Roland Saul and Razorsharp apparently do, that hundreds if not thousands of bureaucrats from different agencies would cheerily band together and conspire to murder three thousand of their fellow citizens on the say-so of one George W. Bush or his advisors, simply because the chain of evidence leading to one or more well-known terrorist organizations with loudly declared grudges against the US doesn’t strike them as perfectly air-tight?
Thanks for the effort, but you pixies are gonna have try considerably harder if you think I’m gonna buy what you’re selling.
A massive conspiracy wouldn’t be required to steer the public in the wrong direction after the attacks. It would just take some high level intelligence folks to say “all the evidence points to [insert terrorist/country].” And the media would gobble it up and report it like it was Holy Truth, and then everyone in the US would gobble it up from the media.
I’m not a conspiracy theorist, and I don’t really have any opinion on the official story of 9/11, but I’m just saying a few people in the government could’ve said pretty much anything they wanted to and we’d have swallowed it hook line and sinker.
I mean even though Iraq wasn’t implicated in 9/11, what was it, 60% of people polled thought Iraq was behind it by 2003 because of vague assertions of evil on the part of the Iraqi government. They didn’t even have to say Iraq was involved in any way - and it’s even contradictory to the official story of OBL (OBL hates Saddam) - and the American people still gobbled it up.
I mean, if some vague, contradictory assertions can get half the people in the country believing something, sure “concrete” truth from our infalliable State would win over just about anyone without any real evidence, just their word.
That’s my point. I have no idea of OBL/Afghanistan were involved in the whole thing, and neither do 99.9% of Americans, but 90%+ of them believe wholeheartedly that OBL was. With no evidence, or critical thinking, just swallowing what the government said.
That’s scary.
He got one part right.
Isn’t it interesting that the all-powerful totalitarian big-brother Ministry of Truth that really runs the United States doesn’t bother to put a bullet in the brains of those who dare to speak the truth?
I know that if I were dictator of the US if any of you all deviated from the official version of the truth, and went so far as to post their subversion on a public message board, I’d send a few Stormtroopers over to your house and drag you away in the middle of the night, and you would never be seen again.
Razorsharp has been posting here since April, but the Ministry of Truth STILL hasn’t seen fit to put an end to his courageous challenge to tyranny. It certainly is puzzling…
Looking at the other threads on this topic, I can see how this subject brings out the best in everybody - and I’m certainly not looking to inflame.
I’d just like to put forward the position that investigative resources may have been excessively skewed towards an assumption of OBLs guilt, while the actual evidence remains somewhat patchy.
Granted, the choice of target would start me sniffing around OBL.
Regarding the MO I’m not aware of substantial similarities with other terrorist attacks (there was a plot to crash a plane into the Eiffel tower, but that wasn’t OBL). Does this assertion refer to sources of false passports or somesuch ?
The fact that the terrorists were Saudis could point at OBL, but I believe that by 2001 Afghanis would have been just as likely for OBL. It would certainly be interesting if the nationality issue could be followed up in regard to other possible Saudi perpetrators / hypotheses.
OBLs taking of credit : Mr Miskatonic while the articles you cite (same material Xtisme is referring to ?) point the finger at OBL, the quotes are only indicative of some degree of advance knowledge and approval. He’s clearly saying “I’m a bad guy and the victims deserved it”, but I don’t see him saying “I did it / was the instigator”. The first article (warroom) makes a vague reference to his use of the personal pronouns “I” and “we” when describing the attacks, but supplies no quotes to this effect - this usage could be analogous with you saying “we liberated Iraq” although you had no part in the action (I assume ! Even so you get my point.). The CNN article is certainly indicative of advance knowledge (although the statements are post facto), but still contains no claim of anything like a leadership role in the attack.
I don’t speak Arabic, and I am not being paid to comb through the hours of videotapes looking for OBLs admission of guilt - but I have yet to see any direct quotes where he appears to be claiming this action. There is after all, a long history of terrorists taking credit for their actions. On occasion there have even been various factions vying for the ‘glory’. You would think that if he’d pulled this off he could step up and clearly say so.
What a humble guy !
So I’m not saying OBLs a poor innocent scapegoat, I’m not saying Big Bad Conspiracy by My Favorite Bad Guys, I’m simply saying ‘case not proven’. It’s dangerous to assume OBL is the guilty party, and doubly so to assume his group is the only guilty party.
It seems to me that until substantial evidence has been put forward we should remain agnostic as to OBLs guilt, and energetically investigate all the alternatives - it would be a shame to not get the guilty parties, and not ensure that it never happens again.
To be fair and balanced… the whole thing had the hallmark of the Al Qaeda style. Soon after seeing the towers falling I thought it similar enough to the embassy attacks to warrant OBL and AQ as primary suspects… no leap of the imagination there.
Now people do have a point in that investigations were not properly underway and Al Qaeda was already blamed. Evidence was too quick and too convenient I agree. Never thought of this before… since it smacked of AQ style to me.
This speed was either result of the need to blame someone fast... or that they knew alot about what was about to happen... much more than indicated. Thou I hardly think they allowed them to hit the WTC in order to garner votes and support (+300 billion extra funds)... it certainly seems that the administration knew quite a lot and somehow fumbled the investigation totally.Did the “blind cleric” that we so merrily invited into the US have ties to OBL? I think the “cleric” was implicated as the master-mind of the first WTC bombing several years ago. Maybe it was some of his riffraff involved with the final disaster?
Why bother making things obvious when subtlety is working just dandy?