rickmcfc
Well-Known Member
buzzer1 said:
Yawn.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
9/11 - More evidence it was set up by people in the shadows
- Thread starter HelloCity
- Start date
Yawn.
Mayor West
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 16 Dec 2008
- Messages
- 9,953
Johnsonontheleft said:Unbelievable that this thread hasn't been removed. A total lack of respect for those who died, someone close to me died in the 9/11 attacks. Anti-American crap by Islamic apologists.
This is akin to someone suggesting the holocaust was an inside job by the Jews.
Some of you on here are a disgrace.
It seems the only people actually 'offended' by the idea 9/11 was a set up are people who lost relatives or friends in the attacks.
This has always baffled me, surely these are the very people who want/need to know the truth more than anyone.
They just seem to be in denial that they have lost someone close due to an evil government and not simply an unavoidable terrorist attack.
rickmcfc said:buzzer1 said:No pal, you and your ilk are the disgrace and it is you that are the real Danger to mankind.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryp4ZA8ocyY&feature=related[/youtube]
Yawn.
I know mate, how can yer' take life serious when you have the Shitbag thread. :)
rickmcfc
Well-Known Member
buzzer1 said:rickmcfc said:Yawn.
I know mate, how can yer' take life serious when you have the Shitbag thread. :)
hahaha, still laughing at that thread!
Well I have always been a firm believer in the theorists are just nutters but the OP's video link is most compelling and for the first time i'm having a bit of a wobble towards their conspiracy beliefs.
No disrespect to any victims families or friends.
No disrespect to any victims families or friends.
Citizen52
Well-Known Member
I would suggest you read the book Masterminds of Terror - the truth behind the most devastating terrorist attack the world has ever seen. The author visited my University in 2004/5.
JoeMercer'sWay
Well-Known Member
so...america destroyed it's own trade centers so it could launch a war into oil rich territories?
so Osama is in on it?
just asking...
so Osama is in on it?
just asking...
again interesting.... (taken from another site)....
Chilcot correspondence underlines Wikileaks allegation.
Correspondence from the Chilcot Inquiry appears to confirm that the committee's secrecy protocols exposed by Wikileaks go further than the Inquiry has admitted. The recent release by Wikileaks of US diplomatic cables implied that secret promises were made by the Brown government that the Chilcot Inquiry would not do anything to embarrass Washington.
Following the Wikileaks revelations, the Chilcot Inquiry said in a statement "The Iraq Inquiry is independent of the British government. The protocol, agreed between the Iraq Inquiry and the government, allows for material to be withheld from publication if publication would damage international relations or breach the third party rule governing non-disclosure of intelligence material."
Now correspondence released by the pressure group Reinvestigate 911 shows a bizarre U turn by Chilcot which suggests the secret undertakings go much further than this. Reinvestigate 9/11, supported by international lawyers and other experts, wrote to the Inquiry asking why they were not asking any questions about the 9/11 attacks, even after the attacks were cited by Blair as a major element of the decision to invade Iraq.
Initially it was claimed that the unprecedented and spectacular attacks succeeded because Al Qaeda was a vast and powerful organisation funded with billions of dollars. Now it is widely recognised that the attacks succeeded mainly as a result of failures of communication between US agencies and failure in the summer of 2001 to heed the many warnings of impending attacks. In the words of the 9/11 Commission chief Thomas Kean, 9/11 "could have and should have been prevented".
Reinvestigate 9/11 wants Chilcot to ask Blair whether he tasked MI6 to check the official 9/11 story coming out of Washington and if he did what they concluded. The Inquiry declined, writing that 9/11 was only relevant "insofar as it bears on the decision to invade Iraq".
Reminded that Tony Blair repeatedly told the Inquiry that a key element in the decision to go to war in Iraq was that 9/11 had changed the "calculus of risk" they sent a short note stating that they would not investigate the causes of 9/11 or the US investigation into the events. (Chilcot note attached).
Ian Henshall of Reinvestigate 9/11 said "They appear to have misunderstood our point entirely. Chilcot's bizarre and contradictory responses to our submissions cannot be justified by this protocol. We suspect this is because the promises revealed by Wikileaks are wider than they admit. We are asking them about Blair and the UK government. Whether or not Blair conducted a review is not a third party matter. Are they seriously suggesting that it would damage international relations to ask the Foreign Office for an independent assessment of the claims coming out of the Bush White House? If so we may as well subcontract the whole place to the US State Department.
"We are in Iraq and Afghanistan because US agencies failed to prevent 9/11 and the Bush government preferred to go to war rather than face up to this incompetence. After Blair's testimony on the 9/11 attacks this is at the heart of the Chilcot Inquiry.
"British soldiers, their families and the people of Afghanistan and Iraq are entitled to feel angry. We hope that Chilcot will tear up any illegitimate promises he has made and start asking questions about the 9/11 attacks."
Notes
Attached: this press release, letter from Chilcot Inquiry, RI911 response to Chilcot' letter
In summer 2001 when the Chilcot terms of reference begin, warnings were flooding into the White House. The FBI criminal division, under its new Bush appointee Michael Chertoff, was ordering FBI officers off the case for reasons that remain unexplained. Some reports suggest that Israeli intelligence agents were also on the trail of the presumed 9/11 hijackers. Four Israelis seen filming the collapse of the Twin towers were arrested by local FBI officers but released on the orders of the White House.
Chertoff went on to become Homeland Security chief presiding over the New Orleans disaster. He now sells body scanners for airports which have never been properly tested for radiation risk and led to an outcry over the Thanksgiving holiday. The machines were ready but their public introduction followed the incident of the failed "Christmas bomber". It has never been explained how the Christmas bomber came to be ushered onto his US bound plane or why his visa was not revoked after he was identified as a potential terrorist. Media reports quoted unnamed sources as saying it was all a mix-up but a State Department official told the Homeland Security committee they had been asked by of an unnamed section of the "intelligence community" to leave his US visa in place.
Henshall comments: "Chertoff was a defence lawyer for terrorist suspects before he took over the FBI role. He was in charge of the FBI when they closed down three 9/11 related investigations, he was in charge of the FBI investigation after 9/11 and now he has made a fortune out of what looks like a contrived event. When will the US media wake up?"
Reinvestigate 9/11
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.reinvestigate911.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">www.reinvestigate911.org</a>
info@reinvestigate911.org
01273 326862
We will support any new investigation of the 9/11 attacks so long as
*it is run by uncompromised people with a range of opinion including those inclined to disbelieve the official 9/11 story,
*it has full legal authority to demand immediate access to any evidence and any witness it chooses
*it follows the evidence wherever it leads
*it is given all the resources it requires to carry out its investigation
Chilcot correspondence underlines Wikileaks allegation.
Correspondence from the Chilcot Inquiry appears to confirm that the committee's secrecy protocols exposed by Wikileaks go further than the Inquiry has admitted. The recent release by Wikileaks of US diplomatic cables implied that secret promises were made by the Brown government that the Chilcot Inquiry would not do anything to embarrass Washington.
Following the Wikileaks revelations, the Chilcot Inquiry said in a statement "The Iraq Inquiry is independent of the British government. The protocol, agreed between the Iraq Inquiry and the government, allows for material to be withheld from publication if publication would damage international relations or breach the third party rule governing non-disclosure of intelligence material."
Now correspondence released by the pressure group Reinvestigate 911 shows a bizarre U turn by Chilcot which suggests the secret undertakings go much further than this. Reinvestigate 9/11, supported by international lawyers and other experts, wrote to the Inquiry asking why they were not asking any questions about the 9/11 attacks, even after the attacks were cited by Blair as a major element of the decision to invade Iraq.
Initially it was claimed that the unprecedented and spectacular attacks succeeded because Al Qaeda was a vast and powerful organisation funded with billions of dollars. Now it is widely recognised that the attacks succeeded mainly as a result of failures of communication between US agencies and failure in the summer of 2001 to heed the many warnings of impending attacks. In the words of the 9/11 Commission chief Thomas Kean, 9/11 "could have and should have been prevented".
Reinvestigate 9/11 wants Chilcot to ask Blair whether he tasked MI6 to check the official 9/11 story coming out of Washington and if he did what they concluded. The Inquiry declined, writing that 9/11 was only relevant "insofar as it bears on the decision to invade Iraq".
Reminded that Tony Blair repeatedly told the Inquiry that a key element in the decision to go to war in Iraq was that 9/11 had changed the "calculus of risk" they sent a short note stating that they would not investigate the causes of 9/11 or the US investigation into the events. (Chilcot note attached).
Ian Henshall of Reinvestigate 9/11 said "They appear to have misunderstood our point entirely. Chilcot's bizarre and contradictory responses to our submissions cannot be justified by this protocol. We suspect this is because the promises revealed by Wikileaks are wider than they admit. We are asking them about Blair and the UK government. Whether or not Blair conducted a review is not a third party matter. Are they seriously suggesting that it would damage international relations to ask the Foreign Office for an independent assessment of the claims coming out of the Bush White House? If so we may as well subcontract the whole place to the US State Department.
"We are in Iraq and Afghanistan because US agencies failed to prevent 9/11 and the Bush government preferred to go to war rather than face up to this incompetence. After Blair's testimony on the 9/11 attacks this is at the heart of the Chilcot Inquiry.
"British soldiers, their families and the people of Afghanistan and Iraq are entitled to feel angry. We hope that Chilcot will tear up any illegitimate promises he has made and start asking questions about the 9/11 attacks."
Notes
Attached: this press release, letter from Chilcot Inquiry, RI911 response to Chilcot' letter
In summer 2001 when the Chilcot terms of reference begin, warnings were flooding into the White House. The FBI criminal division, under its new Bush appointee Michael Chertoff, was ordering FBI officers off the case for reasons that remain unexplained. Some reports suggest that Israeli intelligence agents were also on the trail of the presumed 9/11 hijackers. Four Israelis seen filming the collapse of the Twin towers were arrested by local FBI officers but released on the orders of the White House.
Chertoff went on to become Homeland Security chief presiding over the New Orleans disaster. He now sells body scanners for airports which have never been properly tested for radiation risk and led to an outcry over the Thanksgiving holiday. The machines were ready but their public introduction followed the incident of the failed "Christmas bomber". It has never been explained how the Christmas bomber came to be ushered onto his US bound plane or why his visa was not revoked after he was identified as a potential terrorist. Media reports quoted unnamed sources as saying it was all a mix-up but a State Department official told the Homeland Security committee they had been asked by of an unnamed section of the "intelligence community" to leave his US visa in place.
Henshall comments: "Chertoff was a defence lawyer for terrorist suspects before he took over the FBI role. He was in charge of the FBI when they closed down three 9/11 related investigations, he was in charge of the FBI investigation after 9/11 and now he has made a fortune out of what looks like a contrived event. When will the US media wake up?"
Reinvestigate 9/11
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.reinvestigate911.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">www.reinvestigate911.org</a>
info@reinvestigate911.org
01273 326862
We will support any new investigation of the 9/11 attacks so long as
*it is run by uncompromised people with a range of opinion including those inclined to disbelieve the official 9/11 story,
*it has full legal authority to demand immediate access to any evidence and any witness it chooses
*it follows the evidence wherever it leads
*it is given all the resources it requires to carry out its investigation
tueartsboots
Well-Known Member
Interesting the above post says we are in Iraq because of 9/11
Lets Not Forget: Bush Planned Iraq 'Regime Change' Before Becoming President
By Neil Mackay
15 September 2002: A SECRET blueprint for US global domination reveals that President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' even before he took power in January 2001.
The blueprint, uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), George W Bush's younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says: 'The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.'
The PNAC document supports a 'blueprint for maintaining global US pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests'.
This 'American grand strategy' must be advanced for 'as far into the future as possible', the report says. It also calls for the US to 'fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars' as a 'core mission'.
The report describes American armed forces abroad as 'the cavalry on the new American frontier'. The PNAC blueprint supports an earlier document written by Wolfowitz and Libby that said the US must 'discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role'.
The PNAC report also:
l refers to key allies such as the UK as 'the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership';
l describes peace-keeping missions as 'demanding American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations';
l reveals worries in the administration that Europe could rival the USA;
l says 'even should Saddam pass from the scene' bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently -- despite domestic opposition in the Gulf regimes to the stationing of US troops -- as 'Iran may well prove as large a threat to US interests as Iraq has';
l spotlights China for 'regime change' saying 'it is time to increase the presence of American forces in southeast Asia'. This, it says, may lead to 'American and allied power providing the spur to the process of democratisation in China';
l calls for the creation of 'US Space Forces', to dominate space, and the total control of cyberspace to prevent 'enemies' using the internet against the US;
l hints that, despite threatening war against Iraq for developing weapons of mass destruction, the US may consider developing biological weapons -- which the nation has banned -- in decades to come. It says: 'New methods of attack -- electronic, 'non-lethal', biological -- will be more widely available ... combat likely will take place in new dimensions, in space, cyberspace, and perhaps the world of microbes ... advanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool';
l and pinpoints North Korea, Libya, Syria and Iran as dangerous regimes and says their existence justifies the creation of a 'world-wide command-and-control system'.
Tam Dalyell, the Labour MP, father of the House of Commons and one of the leading rebel voices against war with Iraq, said: 'This is garbage from right-wing think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks -- men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam war.
'This is a blueprint for US world domination -- a new world order of their making. These are the thought processes of fantasist Americans who want to control the world. I am appalled that a British Labour Prime Minister should have got into bed with a crew which has this moral standing.'
The full report
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... fenses.pdf</a>
Lets Not Forget: Bush Planned Iraq 'Regime Change' Before Becoming President
By Neil Mackay
15 September 2002: A SECRET blueprint for US global domination reveals that President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' even before he took power in January 2001.
The blueprint, uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), George W Bush's younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says: 'The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.'
The PNAC document supports a 'blueprint for maintaining global US pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests'.
This 'American grand strategy' must be advanced for 'as far into the future as possible', the report says. It also calls for the US to 'fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars' as a 'core mission'.
The report describes American armed forces abroad as 'the cavalry on the new American frontier'. The PNAC blueprint supports an earlier document written by Wolfowitz and Libby that said the US must 'discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role'.
The PNAC report also:
l refers to key allies such as the UK as 'the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership';
l describes peace-keeping missions as 'demanding American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations';
l reveals worries in the administration that Europe could rival the USA;
l says 'even should Saddam pass from the scene' bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently -- despite domestic opposition in the Gulf regimes to the stationing of US troops -- as 'Iran may well prove as large a threat to US interests as Iraq has';
l spotlights China for 'regime change' saying 'it is time to increase the presence of American forces in southeast Asia'. This, it says, may lead to 'American and allied power providing the spur to the process of democratisation in China';
l calls for the creation of 'US Space Forces', to dominate space, and the total control of cyberspace to prevent 'enemies' using the internet against the US;
l hints that, despite threatening war against Iraq for developing weapons of mass destruction, the US may consider developing biological weapons -- which the nation has banned -- in decades to come. It says: 'New methods of attack -- electronic, 'non-lethal', biological -- will be more widely available ... combat likely will take place in new dimensions, in space, cyberspace, and perhaps the world of microbes ... advanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool';
l and pinpoints North Korea, Libya, Syria and Iran as dangerous regimes and says their existence justifies the creation of a 'world-wide command-and-control system'.
Tam Dalyell, the Labour MP, father of the House of Commons and one of the leading rebel voices against war with Iraq, said: 'This is garbage from right-wing think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks -- men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam war.
'This is a blueprint for US world domination -- a new world order of their making. These are the thought processes of fantasist Americans who want to control the world. I am appalled that a British Labour Prime Minister should have got into bed with a crew which has this moral standing.'
The full report
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... fenses.pdf</a>
Maintainin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 7,244
BBC FOUR