Susan Lindauer

[Enki]

yeh, any long term conspiracy thoery that requires more than a room full of like minded people is lunacy imnho.

it just doesnt happen, for all the reasons mentioned and many more besides..

It does though. Iran Contra went on for a while before it was exposed.

[noddy]

yeh, any long term conspiracy thoery that requires more than a room full of like minded people is lunacy imnho.

it just doesnt happen, for all the reasons mentioned and many more besides..

It does though. Iran Contra went on for a while before it was exposed.

all neat dichotomous statements have areas of grey and "exceptions that prove the rule"

i was under the impression iran contra was a single presidency and only involved a relatively small room of like mindeds (reagan officials and do-as-your-told millitary/cia types) and even then it went public during the same presidency.

as contrasted to a conspiracy that requires both parties operating in tandem and the cohesive cooperation of many different public agencies and is still opaque after a decade.

[Parodite]

A cover-up and conspiracy doesn't need to include the weather, and many other things. Indeed grand-scheme conspiracies where thousands of little details and events were scripted, planned and executed tends towards paranoia or just biased gossip. On par with "the Mossad did it". But things that simply don't come off well, little failures and questionable performences with great consequences, lies that appear small can be of great significance to individuals, notably their careers... and mushroom almost parallel with any genuine question on dirty money and covert politics involved. I suspect especially President Murphy playing a much bigger role in these things - as in life in general.

But has 9/11 been investigated properly, objectively according to y'all Americans here?

[Parodite]

Now that the Gulf War has been over for a long time, and the leaders of the three countries -- Libya, Iraq and Syria -- at that time are dead, the government may as well un-gag Fuisz. We no longer need to put pressure on the now-dead Gaddafi, or need a coalition against the now-dead Saddam and can use the truth -- finally -- to put pressure on the Syrian regime and Fatah's rivals in the Palestinian movement. What would Obama have to lose by issuing an executive order un-gagging Fuisz?

I spoke with Fuisz wife for about a minute. She is willing to talk, but via a covert agent. They have documents, transscripts. Her husband is close to a breakdown since they are being stalked now much more intensely by the federal government for the last months. Codename=war.

7xnNhzgcWTk

[Enki]

yeh, any long term conspiracy thoery that requires more than a room full of like minded people is lunacy imnho.

it just doesnt happen, for all the reasons mentioned and many more besides..

It does though. Iran Contra went on for a while before it was exposed.

all neat dichotomous statements have areas of grey and "exceptions that prove the rule"

i was under the impression iran contra was a single presidency and only involved a relatively small room of like mindeds (reagan officials and do-as-your-told millitary/cia types) and even then it went public during the same presidency.

as contrasted to a conspiracy that requires both parties operating in tandem and the cohesive cooperation of many different public agencies and is still opaque after a decade.

Actually Iran-Contra involved thousands of people in three countries. It's the perfect example that disproves the notion that a cover-up can occur involving thousands. Most people just don't know what's going on. But what about the soldiers that delivered the actual missiles to Iran? What about the CIA operatives that brokered the deal with the iranians? What about the CIA operatives that were training the contras in Nicaragua? What about the people who supplied the arms to Nicaragua?

And you can say it was one administration, except that the primary actors were at the highest levels in four administrations. And the principle architect behind it all was the head of the CIA before being the Vice President.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

yeh, any long term conspiracy thoery that requires more than a room full of like minded people is lunacy imnho.

it just doesnt happen, for all the reasons mentioned and many more besides..

It does though. Iran Contra went on for a while before it was exposed.

all neat dichotomous statements have areas of grey and "exceptions that prove the rule"

i was under the impression iran contra was a single presidency and only involved a relatively small room of like mindeds (reagan officials and do-as-your-told millitary/cia types) and even then it went public during the same presidency.

as contrasted to a conspiracy that requires both parties operating in tandem and the cohesive cooperation of many different public agencies and is still opaque after a decade.

Actually Iran-Contra involved thousands of people in three countries. It's the perfect example that disproves the notion that a cover-up can occur involving thousands. Most people just don't know what's going on. But what about the soldiers that delivered the actual missiles to Iran? What about the CIA operatives that brokered the deal with the iranians? What about the CIA operatives that were training the contras in Nicaragua? What about the people who supplied the arms to Nicaragua?

And you can say it was one administration, except that the primary actors were at the highest levels in four administrations. And the principle architect behind it all was the head of the CIA before being the Vice President.

The big difference being that all these people were looking to screw Nicaraguans and Iranians, not fellow countrymen.

What you are suggesting is that thousands of Americans, regardless of party and affiliation, were alright with the causality of civilians for some grand project. If we were to suss out this thinking as to what that project would be, it could only lead to conspiracies about a global elite.

If that is the case, we'd have no recourse but to openly revolt for any discussion of reforming the government, or improving upon it, is moot if this political class is so hostile as to carry this out.

In reality though, as big and powerful as they are, they have no power over anything; murphy's law (as it gets thrown about) and the bitter realization that chance determines these outcomes is a much more likely scenario. Paranoia can only lead to eternal conflict without the ability to change. Some of us like change and peace and will pursue both as much as possible.

[Enki]

That is a fair point. I don't really believe 9/11 was an inside job, but I do think that the admin cynically used pretexts to go to war.

[Parodite]

A 9/11 inside job doesn't need thousands of people. All you need is intelligence discovering that a group of terrorists is plotting a 9/11 type of attack. You check them out, and realize they might give you a perfect Pearl Harbor on a silver platter. You coordinate this covert surveillance with other intelligence such as Mossad. If one organization champions in penetrating behind enemy lines and play double games it is Mossad. So you allow the dog to prepare its attack, but you are so close on its skin that you can influence its moves to a degree still, without the dog knowing it. And who knew this and organized this covert surveillance? Not necessarily the big CIA players. The CIA is a compartmentalized organization for security reasons, which also allows compartments to execute covert missions to a degree on their own. And they are good at this, which is why they work for the CIA. Same for Mossad: within Israeli intelligence some individuals could have decided to play their own covert game together with their CIA counter parts.

So then you do have only a handful of people able to "allow" 9/11 to happen and doing everything they can to make it the perfect Pearl Harbor pretext to go to war with Iraq. This is I think entirely possible and even likely. What remains unclear, is how much they actually contributed, plotted themselves to make drama as big as possible. Maybe there was nothing more but passive knowledge with the hope that it would be a nice Pearl Harbor. If true however, this already would be a shocking fact to say the least; CIA officials doing nothing to prevent this attack to happen, knowingly and even hoping it succeeds! That would severely incriminate many more colleagues as well...if not just via guilt by association: result being that no one wants to know, nor talk.

I would call the above the most likely conspiracy, Conspiracy Light (CL), if any occurred. The shitty thing being that some very weird other facts occurred, that strongly suggest that more lavender was flying in the air that hit the fan. Notably: the absence of airplane debris to be expected at the Pentagon crash site as well as the other crash site (forgot the name) of an airplane that went down - resembling more the crash site of rockets. The secrecies put up around those crash sites. Plus the collapse of especially the third WTC building that had also a perfect fingerprint of a controlled demolition. The incredible coincidence that the air force were doing a drill that day, emulating exactly such an attack and not being as on guard because of it as they would have been under normal circumstances. The finds of molten cuts in the steel columns that suggest sulfur and thermite used. Commissions investigating these things that cannot be called entirely independent and seem to have been supervised and influencing what ended up in reports or not. Note that this USA government later proved re Iraq to bend and twist all the facts, in order to concoct "evidence" for WMD in Iraq, contrary to the reports of the weapons inspectors that concluded it unlikely that much WMD would be still present in Iraq at the time. So they had the mentality and the skills to lie, if needed.

Given that, it should not be surprising that many people not only believe there was some Conspiracy Light... but something much bigger and more sinister. The government did not make sure this public distrust would be removed by allowing 9/11 to be investigated as thoroughly, independently as any group of top-notch scientists would investigate something considered of extreme importance. So the unthinkable became thinkable. Add the current financial crisis and the criminality involved in it by bankers and government officials (the bribe industry).. it is no surprise that the USA got into the miserable and bipolar mode of despair it is in now. Obama fitted in perfectly perhaps; messianic with a cunning unrealism to believe the unbelievable in the positive: Yes we can. Just to counter-balance the unthinkable nightmare of a big 9/11 inside job.

How I know all this, well I read it on the Internet

[Enki]

Well we know for a fact the Bush administration had advance warning of the attacks on 9/11 because the Clinton Administration warned them about it when they handed the power over.

[Parodite]

Well we know for a fact the Bush administration had advance warning of the attacks on 9/11 because the Clinton Administration warned them about it when they handed the power over.

True. As Condolita Rice reluctantly admitted on camera.

[Enki]

The most suspicious thing about this whole thing is that the day after being attacked by Saudis the only civilian flights allowed out of the country were Saudis.

After being attacked by Saudis we attacked Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Parodite]

The most suspicious thing about this whole thing is that the day after being attacked by Saudis the only civilian flights allowed out of the country were Saudis.

Ah yes I remember that now. But is it really true beyond reasonable focking doubt?? Nasty stuff...

After being attacked by Saudis we attacked Iraq and Afghanistan.

Well at least that part makes some sense. You don't blow up the foodstore you depend on for food. Just that lil asshole around the corner who has plans to set up shop too. Royal Monopolists never like competition. And Bin-Laden? Framed by his family in the USA. More construction contracts for them anywhere. To allow the USA go after Bin-Laden was for his family like an honor killing.

[noddy]

the most suspicous thing for cynical ole me was watching the tv of the planes hitting the towers and immediately thinking, "oh crap, paranoid security++" and then both bush and howard appearing within the hour with almost identical speeches on "how the world had changed"

queue lots of gobledegook on one must give up all ones freedoms to protect them, i do wish my cynical pessimistic side didnt get fed so well.

[Enki]

Ah yes I remember that now. But is it really true beyond reasonable focking doubt?? Nasty stuff...

Yeah, it was reported on the news and the administration confirmed it IIRC.

Well at least that part makes some sense. You don't blow up the foodstore you depend on for food. Just that lil asshole around the corner who has plans to set up shop too. Royal Monopolists never like competition. And Bin-Laden? Framed by his family in the USA. More construction contracts for them anywhere. To allow the USA go after Bin-Laden was for his family like an honor killing.

We should've attacked Saudi Arabia. Our antipathy to Iran makes no genuflecting sense, and our sympathies for Saudi Arabia make no genuflecting sense. We make an enemy of a natural ally and a friend of our natural enemy.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

The reason the Saudis get special treatment is because they have both oil and a more uncertain future with those million prince-lings running about. That's why the House of Saud was chosen by the Brits; much easier to control in theory if not practice. It is ridiculous to look at everything but this with a cynical eye. And it is so far removed from pragmatic concerns- you are suggesting that we should have attacked the land that holds Mecca. Didn't us having troops in Saudi Arabia set all of this off to begin with? So we are supposed to go John Wayne on the territory now, and that would've lead to a better outcome?

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

A 9/11 inside job doesn't need thousands of people. All you need is intelligence discovering that a group of terrorists is plotting a 9/11 type of attack. You check them out, and realize they might give you a perfect Pearl Harbor on a silver platter.

Except, part of the package is that the terrorists were working directly for the US government, so that idea quickly goes out the window. And I think you are overestimating the ability to manipulate and underestimating the need for a significant portion of men and women who have no qualms screwing their meal ticket.

Most people believe in conspiracy theories because it gives an authority to chance and risk. Odysseus didn't simply get blown off course, it was a conspiracy between him and Poseidon to give him cover for a wild bender.

[Enki]

The reason the Saudis get special treatment is because they have both oil and a more uncertain future with those million prince-lings running about. That's why the House of Saud was chosen by the Brits; much easier to control in theory if not practice. It is ridiculous to look at everything but this with a cynical eye. And it is so far removed from pragmatic concerns- you are suggesting that we should have attacked the land that holds Mecca. Didn't us having troops in Saudi Arabia set all of this off to begin with? So we are supposed to go John Wayne on the territory now, and that would've lead to a better outcome?

My point is there are the actual enemies, and it wasn't Iraq or Afghanistan. I do understand it cynically. I understand why we pal around with the Saudis. But we continue to enrich Saudi Arabia, the font of Wahhabism. I understand that the Saudi Royal Family is a check on the excesses of Wahhabism. But there is also the reality that the hijackers and their financial backers were Saudis, upper-class Saudis in fact. There is also the reality that there are personal relationships that have been crafted between certain cabals within our government and certain factions in the Middle-East. The Bush family and their attendants such as Cheney and Rumsfeld are all bound to the rulers of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Bahrain. So obviously those groups get preferential treatment. Not because it's in the best interests of America, but because its in the best interests of that political faction.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

The reason the Saudis get special treatment is because they have both oil and a more uncertain future with those million prince-lings running about. That's why the House of Saud was chosen by the Brits; much easier to control in theory if not practice. It is ridiculous to look at everything but this with a cynical eye. And it is so far removed from pragmatic concerns- you are suggesting that we should have attacked the land that holds Mecca. Didn't us having troops in Saudi Arabia set all of this off to begin with? So we are supposed to go John Wayne on the territory now, and that would've lead to a better outcome?

My point is there are the actual enemies, and it wasn't Iraq or Afghanistan. I do understand it cynically. I understand why we pal around with the Saudis. But we continue to enrich Saudi Arabia, the font of Wahhabism. I understand that the Saudi Royal Family is a check on the excesses of Wahhabism. But there is also the reality that the hijackers and their financial backers were Saudis, upper-class Saudis in fact. There is also the reality that there are personal relationships that have been crafted between certain cabals within our government and certain factions in the Middle-East. The Bush family and their attendants such as Cheney and Rumsfeld are all bound to the rulers of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Bahrain. So obviously those groups get preferential treatment. Not because it's in the best interests of America, but because its in the best interests of that political faction.

And I am saying that is is never in the best interests of the American people to have their leaders attacking their gas supply and a Holy Land to billions of people.

I fear that the British idea of giving it to the large house of Saud has not worked out as hoped. There are what? 10,000 Princes running about, and we are no closer to seeing the House of Saud collapsing in on itself as hoped.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

Was Saudi Arabia involved ?




.

[Enki]

And I am saying that is is never in the best interests of the American people to have their leaders attacking their gas supply and a Holy Land to billions of people.

We were getting oil from Iraq before Desert Storm as well. The Holy Land bit makes sense, but at the end of the day, we are attacking everything else in the Muslim world.

I fear that the British idea of giving it to the large house of Saud has not worked out as hoped. There are what? 10,000 Princes running about, and we are no closer to seeing the House of Saud collapsing in on itself as hoped.

I am tired of us trying to manage the British Empire, we should've let the British Empire fall and just made deals with the nations that formed in the collapse.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

.
I fear that the British idea of giving it to the large house of Saud has not worked out as hoped. There are what? 10,000 Princes running about, and we are no closer to seeing the House of Saud collapsing in on itself as hoped.

I am tired of us trying to manage the British Empire, we should've let the British Empire fall and just made deals with the nations that formed in the collapse.
.

2nd it

long overdue

you should have done this 1950

If so, Iran would be now a paradise


.