No Al-Qaeda attacks on US soil since 9/11- why?

[African Herbsman]

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/articlesosama.html

 

[Gambitv01]

Not true. We funded some of the very Afghan rebels that eventually turned on us and teamed with the Taliban. So that statement is not entirely true. We essentially traded one enemy (the communist Soviets) for another (the Islamic Fundamentalist). We just didn't understand that we were getting played by the fundamentalists because we didnt understand the movement.However, we funded the winning faction. It's just that we didn't know that we were funding a future enemy. Even the Afghan rebels whom we most trusted Massoud, inherently were Anti-US. It was just that the communists Soviets were the biggest enemy at the moment.



This is not true. Bid Laden was from a family of construction. He had a construction operation in Afghanistan that built many of the transportation routes to ship munitions, troops, food, etc in the rough Afghanistan environment during the world. He was a continuous business man that ran profitable businesses thorough the middle east. Bid Laden did not "run out of funds". I do not know where you go that info. But it was not the case.



This again is not fully correct and has no barring on Osama Bid Laden. The Saud Royal Family and the Bid Ladens were very Secular. VERY. SO much so that the Saud Royal family has always been under direct threat from Wahhabism and are still seen by Bid Laden and other fundamentalist as corrupt leaders who do not follow true Islam. They have always been criticized for being two faced..the fold to Wahhabisms and the greater fundamentalism community by enforcing strict laws on the public...but their family..which numbers 100s of self proclaimed princes of 1000s of family members... enjoy a very secular...very WESTERN lifestyle behind closed doors. If you do not know what Wahhabism is you need to look it up. When Osama Bid Laden became into direct confrontation with the Saud Royal Family, he was banished not only from Saudi Arabia but was admonished by his family who were direct benefactors of the Saudi Royal Family. Politically, ideologically, philosophically, etc.. the Saud Royal Family and the rest of the Bid Ladens were in DIRECT conflict with Osama Bin Laden and he considered them infidels. Couple that with the fact that Bid Laden was the son of a lowly comcubine of his Father who was married over 20 times had over 60 children...and Bid Laden's mom was not on the favorite's list...and the fact that Bid Laden's family was disconnected and spread all through the middle east and many had little contact with the others... Again...it is the difference between separating correlation and causation. On a surface level, you may get a oh my god...there is a connection. However, when you know the details, you know it is clearly a false lead and incomplete knowledge of those relationships can cause a person to draw wild erroneous conclusions..that may seem plausible when you only have surface level knowledge. However, when you know the more intimate details, you know that Bush's associate with the Carlyle Group has absolutely nothing to do with him being aware of one of the lowely 55 children of one one of the unfavorable 22 wives of one the ceos of one of the companies who was apart of the porfolio of hundreds of companies, partnerships, and stock under the Carlyle Groups branch of operations. That should put things more into perspective for you.



I've seen the Bohemian Grove thread. I covered that stuff back in the late 80s...but they only understand a minor portion of it based on some the claims that make. But it is a good thread.

but back to your oil comment..




I wrote this years ago on BGOL..AFTER i came back from Iraq.

Do you know wut is a Wahhabi??? Excerpt from The "Wahhabi" Myth:

The word "Wahabism" is in fact nothing but a meaningless appellation which is used by people in two cases: The term "Wahabism" is often used to describe those who closely stick to the verses of the Qur'an and the narrations of the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) in all religious affairs. Consequently, instead of directly attacking Islam for those things that do not appeal to their desires, they call anyone who follows these texts "Wahabis."

Another different and contemporary usage has appeared for this term. Anybody who belongs to any of the current Qutbist type groups or movements that call for political overthrows, endless blind purported Jihads which are based upon principles other than those found in Islam and led by people who have no knowledge based background in Islamic scholarship, are entered into a giant umbrella group called "Wahabism." This is done even though these followers of Sayyid Qutb despise the Salafi/"Wahabi" scholars and their creed.

Hence, in the first case, "Wahabism" is used to mean "anything I don't like about Islam," and in the second case, "anything I don't like about what the contemporary Qutbist movements do; things that have no basis in Islam."

The media and general population are invited to actually begin to study the principles of Salafism/"Wahabism" and report about it accurately, especially as it seems that the "War Against Terrorism" seems to slowly be turning into the "War Against Wahabism."

Some Western intellectuals are doing something to contest this trend, but they are few and far between, and their knowledge of the nature of Salafism is limited. Gary Leupp, a history professor and coordinator of the Asian Studies Program at Tufts University, posed the following question concerning this current of thought: "In Saudi Arabia itself, is "Wahabism" really the threat posited by some neocons? John Esposito, director of the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, suggests otherwise."

Professor Leupp quotes Esposito as saying: "Even conforming to an ultra-conservative, anti-pluralistic faith does not necessarily make you a violent individual." Leupp adds: "There are of course millions of peaceable if ultra-conservative, anti-pluralistic Christians."

Driving in his point, Leupp cites F. Gregory Gause III, a professor of political science at the University of Vermont, when he warned the House Subcommittee on Middle East and South Asia about the "dangerous trend" of linking "Wahabism" with terrorism, wherein he explained that this phenomena "is not Saudi or 'Wahabi' in any exclusive sense. It is part of the zeitgeist of the whole Muslim world right now. It is undoubtedly true that the al-Qa'ida network was able to recruit many Saudis. But it would be a mistake to attribute this simply to some purported affinity between 'Wahabism' and al-Qa'ida's message of jihad."

Stating that although "some Saudi clerics and intellectuals have supported al-Qa'ida's message [note: the supporters of Sayyid Qutb, the Qutbists]," he adds that "the vast majority have condemned it [note: the Salafi/"Wahabi" scholars]."

"Moreover," he says, "Al-Qa'ida has been able to recruit both fighters and intellectual supporters from many countries - Egypt and Pakistan, to name but two - where 'Wahabism' is not a prominent intellectual current."

Is Osama Bin Laden Really a 'Wahhabi'?

The term "Wahhabi" is often misused for less than honest purposes...

On September 30, 2001, Roger Hardy, the BBC's Middle East analyst wrote an article entitled "Inside Wahhabi Islam." Hardy himself notes that the term "Wahhabi" is often misused for less than honest purposes, "The term 'Wahhabi' is often used very freely. The Russian media, for example, use it as a term of abuse for Muslim activists in Central Asia and the Caucasus, as well as in Russia itself - rather as the Western media use the vague and derogatory term 'Islamic fundamentalism'."

Regrettably, Hardy falls into the same trap of misappropriating this term when he states that Osama Bin Laden is a "Wahhabi": "Osama Bin Laden, named by US officials as the main suspect in the 11 September attacks against America, is Saudi-born and a Wahhabi."

The mistake that Hardy has fallen into here is that he has assumed that since Bin Laden was born and raised in Saudi Arabia, that this in turn necessitates him being a "Wahhabi". In fact, this is a superficial conclusion which has been repeatedly mentioned in the media and is worthy of refutation.

Osama bin Laden comes from a Yemeni family which is based in Hadramout, a coastal section of Yemen that is well known for being a base of a particular sect of Islam called Sufism. Sufism could be briefly summarized as being the antithesis of "Wahhabism". Bin Laden himself is not concerned with differentiating between matters of creed, and some of his statements indicate that he still acknowledges certain Sufi practices. He also embraced the Taliban as his close friends and protectors, and it is well known that the great majority of this group belong to Deobandism, a Sufi movement.

However, a differentiation is made between demonstrating that Bin Laadin acknowledges certain Sufi practices, and claiming that he is an outright Sufi. Rather, Bin Laadin has shown that he is not concerned with the same matters of belief and worship that a Salafi would concern himself with, because the sect he belongs to (Qutbism) does not distinguish between matters of belief, so long as people adhere to their “movement.”

Another misnomer which has been oft repeated in the mainstream media is the notion that the Taliban were “Wahhabis.” On December 10, 2001, The Washington Post’s Ron Kampeas wrote that “Wahhabism” is “a puritanical faith that rejects change. A brand of Islam that drives the Taliban…”

This in fact is another great inaccuracy which indicates that those who have repeated these claims have approached these intricate matters in a simplistic fashion.

Although Roger Hardy’s BBC article made the error of stating that Osama bin Laden was a “Wahhabi,” he, unlike Kampeas, stayed clear of repeating this error when addressing the Sufi Taliban movement:

“But the Taleban are not Wahhabis. They belong to what is known as the Deobandi movement, named after the small town of Deoband in the Indian Himalayas. It was here that the movement was founded, in the 1860s,
during the period of British rule in India.”

On November 9, 2001, Hamid Mir of the Pakistani daily, The Dawn, interviewed Osama Bin Laden just prior to the fall of Kabul:

Hamid Mir: "After (the) American bombing on Afghanistan on Oct 7, you told Al-Jazeera TV that the September 11 attacks had been carried out by some Muslims. How did you know they were Muslims?"

Osama bin Laden: "The Americans themselves released a list of the suspects of the September 11 attacks, saying that the persons named were involved in the attacks. They were all Muslims, of whom 15 belonged to Saudi Arabia, two were from the UAE and one from Egypt. According to the information I have, they were all passengers. Fateha was held for them in their homes. But America said they were hijackers."

Bin Laden’s statement “Fateha was held for them in their homes” is referring to the reading of the opening chapter of the Quran (al-Fatihah) for the souls of the deceased, a common practice of the Sufis. This act of worship has no basis in Islam, either from the Quran, the Sunnah, or the practice of the earliest generations. More precisely, this is an innovated practice which later generations of Sufi Muslims fabricated. This statement indicates that Osama bin Laden is neither knowlegeable in Islam, nor is he attached to the principles and practices of Salafism.

- abridged from the book: The 'Wahhabi' Myth

 

[Spectrum]

Do you know wut is a Wahhabi??? Excerpt from The "Wahhabi" Myth:

The word "Wahabism" is in fact nothing but a meaningless appellation which is used by people in two cases: The term "Wahabism" is often used to describe those who closely stick to the verses of the Qur'an and the narrations of the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) in all religious affairs. Consequently, instead of directly attacking Islam for those things that do not appeal to their desires, they call anyone who follows these texts "Wahabis."

Another different and contemporary usage has appeared for this term. Anybody who belongs to any of the current Qutbist type groups or movements that call for political overthrows, endless blind purported Jihads which are based upon principles other than those found in Islam and led by people who have no knowledge based background in Islamic scholarship, are entered into a giant umbrella group called "Wahabism." This is done even though these followers of Sayyid Qutb despise the Salafi/"Wahabi" scholars and their creed.

Hence, in the first case, "Wahabism" is used to mean "anything I don't like about Islam," and in the second case, "anything I don't like about what the contemporary Qutbist movements do; things that have no basis in Islam."

The media and general population are invited to actually begin to study the principles of Salafism/"Wahabism" and report about it accurately, especially as it seems that the "War Against Terrorism" seems to slowly be turning into the "War Against Wahabism."

Some Western intellectuals are doing something to contest this trend, but they are few and far between, and their knowledge of the nature of Salafism is limited. Gary Leupp, a history professor and coordinator of the Asian Studies Program at Tufts University, posed the following question concerning this current of thought: "In Saudi Arabia itself, is "Wahabism" really the threat posited by some neocons? John Esposito, director of the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, suggests otherwise."

Professor Leupp quotes Esposito as saying: "Even conforming to an ultra-conservative, anti-pluralistic faith does not necessarily make you a violent individual." Leupp adds: "There are of course millions of peaceable if ultra-conservative, anti-pluralistic Christians."

Driving in his point, Leupp cites F. Gregory Gause III, a professor of political science at the University of Vermont, when he warned the House Subcommittee on Middle East and South Asia about the "dangerous trend" of linking "Wahabism" with terrorism, wherein he explained that this phenomena "is not Saudi or 'Wahabi' in any exclusive sense. It is part of the zeitgeist of the whole Muslim world right now. It is undoubtedly true that the al-Qa'ida network was able to recruit many Saudis. But it would be a mistake to attribute this simply to some purported affinity between 'Wahabism' and al-Qa'ida's message of jihad."

Stating that although "some Saudi clerics and intellectuals have supported al-Qa'ida's message [note: the supporters of Sayyid Qutb, the Qutbists]," he adds that "the vast majority have condemned it [note: the Salafi/"Wahabi" scholars]."

"Moreover," he says, "Al-Qa'ida has been able to recruit both fighters and intellectual supporters from many countries - Egypt and Pakistan, to name but two - where 'Wahabism' is not a prominent intellectual current."

Is Osama Bin Laden Really a 'Wahhabi'?

The term "Wahhabi" is often misused for less than honest purposes...

On September 30, 2001, Roger Hardy, the BBC's Middle East analyst wrote an article entitled "Inside Wahhabi Islam." Hardy himself notes that the term "Wahhabi" is often misused for less than honest purposes, "The term 'Wahhabi' is often used very freely. The Russian media, for example, use it as a term of abuse for Muslim activists in Central Asia and the Caucasus, as well as in Russia itself - rather as the Western media use the vague and derogatory term 'Islamic fundamentalism'."

Regrettably, Hardy falls into the same trap of misappropriating this term when he states that Osama Bin Laden is a "Wahhabi": "Osama Bin Laden, named by US officials as the main suspect in the 11 September attacks against America, is Saudi-born and a Wahhabi."

The mistake that Hardy has fallen into here is that he has assumed that since Bin Laden was born and raised in Saudi Arabia, that this in turn necessitates him being a "Wahhabi". In fact, this is a superficial conclusion which has been repeatedly mentioned in the media and is worthy of refutation.

Osama bin Laden comes from a Yemeni family which is based in Hadramout, a coastal section of Yemen that is well known for being a base of a particular sect of Islam called Sufism. Sufism could be briefly summarized as being the antithesis of "Wahhabism". Bin Laden himself is not concerned with differentiating between matters of creed, and some of his statements indicate that he still acknowledges certain Sufi practices. He also embraced the Taliban as his close friends and protectors, and it is well known that the great majority of this group belong to Deobandism, a Sufi movement.

However, a differentiation is made between demonstrating that Bin Laadin acknowledges certain Sufi practices, and claiming that he is an outright Sufi. Rather, Bin Laadin has shown that he is not concerned with the same matters of belief and worship that a Salafi would concern himself with, because the sect he belongs to (Qutbism) does not distinguish between matters of belief, so long as people adhere to their “movement.”

Another misnomer which has been oft repeated in the mainstream media is the notion that the Taliban were “Wahhabis.” On December 10, 2001, The Washington Post’s Ron Kampeas wrote that “Wahhabism” is “a puritanical faith that rejects change. A brand of Islam that drives the Taliban…”

This in fact is another great inaccuracy which indicates that those who have repeated these claims have approached these intricate matters in a simplistic fashion.

Although Roger Hardy’s BBC article made the error of stating that Osama bin Laden was a “Wahhabi,” he, unlike Kampeas, stayed clear of repeating this error when addressing the Sufi Taliban movement:

“But the Taleban are not Wahhabis. They belong to what is known as the Deobandi movement, named after the small town of Deoband in the Indian Himalayas. It was here that the movement was founded, in the 1860s,
during the period of British rule in India.”

On November 9, 2001, Hamid Mir of the Pakistani daily, The Dawn, interviewed Osama Bin Laden just prior to the fall of Kabul:

Hamid Mir: "After (the) American bombing on Afghanistan on Oct 7, you told Al-Jazeera TV that the September 11 attacks had been carried out by some Muslims. How did you know they were Muslims?"

Osama bin Laden: "The Americans themselves released a list of the suspects of the September 11 attacks, saying that the persons named were involved in the attacks. They were all Muslims, of whom 15 belonged to Saudi Arabia, two were from the UAE and one from Egypt. According to the information I have, they were all passengers. Fateha was held for them in their homes. But America said they were hijackers."

Bin Laden’s statement “Fateha was held for them in their homes” is referring to the reading of the opening chapter of the Quran (al-Fatihah) for the souls of the deceased, a common practice of the Sufis. This act of worship has no basis in Islam, either from the Quran, the Sunnah, or the practice of the earliest generations. More precisely, this is an innovated practice which later generations of Sufi Muslims fabricated. This statement indicates that Osama bin Laden is neither knowlegeable in Islam, nor is he attached to the principles and practices of Salafism.

- abridged from the book: The 'Wahhabi' Myth

I am quite positive what Wahhabism is. I was actually the first person to actually bring it up in this thread. However, this article says more about what Wahhabism is not that what is really is. Furthermore, it is elaborating on the falsification of the direct link of wahhabism with the Taliban or Bin Laden etc. If you look within my posts, you will never see such a claim of correlation. The only link of Wahhabiism and Bid Laden that was made in this thread is that they were both opposing forces of the House of Saud which there can not be a truer statement. That book this article references discusses many of the inaccuracies attributed to the belief of the Salafi Muslims often referred to as "Wahhabis". This thread has not discussed any the beliefs of Wahhabis. What I have done is list the fact that Wahhabiism was a movement that grew within Saudi Arabia and was a threat to the Kingdom. If you are not familiar with Wahhabiism, the most important thing to know in the context of this thread is Wahhabism does not validate other sects of Islam such as sufiism,etc. This particular madhhab is distinct in that trait and considers Muslims who do not adhere to Wahhabism as non-believers. Al-Wahhab, the founder of Wahhabism, went so far as to declare Jihad against fellow Muslims. This is a precedent within Islam. That is why even more liberal Muslims often have a fear and disdain for Wahhabism and it is seen as a volatile and disruptive force within Islam. But to get back to the point, Wahhabiism has a direct link to the House of Saud when they pretty much "created a partnership" with the Wahhabiis because it posed a threat to their dynasty.

 

[smokedacane]

nAW HOMIE IT WASN'T A QUESTION. IT WAS A STATEMENT SIMPLY to EXPLAIN HOW INCOMPETENT THE BUSH ADMINSTRATION IS, AND HAS BEEN SIMPLY IN MY MIND MAKING IT IMPOSSABILE FOR THE 9/11 ATTACKS A INSIDE JOB

@DON IMUS IS A NAPPY HEADED HOE@

You're confusing their "incompetence" with simply not caring. Bush and his administration didn't care about the Katrina victims or NO. And evidence of that can be seen from their response time and their attitude towards the devastation in NO long after the Hurricane. You can guarentee if Malibu was hit by a freak Hurricane everyone would have been evacuated before hand and aid would of been already in place. They don't care about the plight that was further intrenched within the black community.


And no it's not IMPOSSIBLE for 9/11 to be an inside job because there are WAY to many HOLES in their explanation. Biggest one being there is NO PROOF a plane crashed into the Pentagon.

 

[gatorfans239]

Saudis arrest 172 in terror plot involving planes

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/27/Saudi.arrests.ap/index.html

 

[the_monsterous_monster]

good thread....nice to see a discussion/arguement about it, instead of swallowing the bullshit that's continually served on a gold encrusted platter by the media...

as for 911, there are ALOT of questions about that day, the days ( years ) before it, and the days ( after it )....when you take everything into account, how can you not scratch your head at such supposed blatant incompetence....dating back to CIA memos about the possibility of an aerial assualt and it being deemed a very credible threat, but it was poo-pooed by superiors ( doesn't make sense ).....the ability of the amateur pilots with limited fight expeience to fly square into both towers ( doesn't make sense ).....how the towers collapsed isn't consistent with how one would expect them to crumble ( doesn't make sense ).....the fact that the building's steel structure melted so easily ( doesn't make sense ).....the plane "crashing" in Pennsylvania ( doesn't make sense )....the Pentagon was basically unscathed ( doesn't make sense )....the insistance of a war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and eventually Iran, and the media going blindly along ( doesn't make sense )....the Patriot Act and other legislation ( doesn't make sense )....blah blah blah

....and in all actuality, the country is no safer now than it was yesterday....real talk...in six years since the "attack", all the government has to show for it is an emegency level color chart....that right there speaks volumes....

I remember that day ( 9/11 ) vividly....I woke up to the sound of reports on the radio about what happened, and then I heard the second plane crash....and then I saw the rest of the events unfold....and as cold as it may seem, I didn't care then, and I sure as hell don't care now...in my opinion, the country had alot of blood on it's hand and the "attack" was a form of cleansing, and that's how I saw it on 9/11/01....and that's how I see it now, albeit there are alot of discrepencies....

....and on a closing note, if Guliani wins the Presidential election ( on the strength of 9/11 alone, he was HATED in N.Y. prior ), I think one can reach the conclusion that the events of 9/11 are greater than most think....

 

[Gambitv01]

 

[Spectrum]

I'm going to read that above Gambitv01, but I was real close to bringing out the Colin Powell pic on you

 

[Gambitv01]

lol lol

 

[Twistyaaliyah]

It's is very real my friend, governments have used lies and propoganda before just to instil their will and desire to get what they want.


9/11 was nothing more than a beautifully executed plan that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of innocent people. Do you honeslty believe that a group of terrorist with limited flight skills could manuever a Boeing 757 at the speeds of Moc 10 and crash them into the twin towers? Even pilots who have 30 years of experiance can't even do that.And the mere fact that Boeing 757 can be controlled by REMOTE CONTROL doesn't raise any eyebrows?
THe fact that ONLY ONE person on both the planes that crashed into the towers had an Arabian sounding name.......


There is NO PROOF what so ever that a plane crashed into the pentagon. PLEASE find me a picture of a plane lodged into the Pentagon..........you won't find it. Because if anything it looks like a damn bomb or missile hit the Pentagon not a plane
Keep digging and you will see all the holes in the 9/11 crap we were spoon fed

( just writing however it comes to me)

im not checkin that out. I dont do physics or nuthing to do with building infrastructure.
But please explain to me how can fuel from a plane explode outside d building and somehow reach the base fast enuf for the twin towers crumple and fall in one staight line? (weren't firemen down there rescuing ppl for a while?)

I mean the plane hit it at such an angle that the fire was intense enuf to weaking the steel shouldnt the top that was hit first.. lean and fall off or some shit like dat?

And y after the the builing collapsed not one piece of furniture(besides a small piece of a telephone keypad) was found? just...dust. In a building that has many offices they can't even find a piece of a chair leg, A FUCKIN WINDOW??! BUTTTT the passports of the "terrorist" MADE OF PAPER survived those flames?
its fuckin retarded. LOL.

Now on to the plane thing.
on the news they said some shit about those men were flying the plane for an hr and some going on a route (a route most suited a roller coaster to me.)
And ive heard of some protocol - if a plane goes off route for more than 30 minutes it is intercepted by the navy or some shit like dat.( i ain from american excuse the ignorance)..if so what happened? did they have a all employee sick-out or some shit?

How is it that men with pen knives hijacked a plane and the pilots are armed with guns



Last but not least. Some one needs to fire those fuckin architects.
Ive seen buildings survive fuckin infernos going one for more than a couple minutes.. probably a whole day and some. that was built years b4 all this technology

ne ways im sleepy as hell

 

[smokedacane]

( just writing however it comes to me)

im not checkin that out. I dont do physics or nuthing to do with building infrastructure.
But please explain to me how can fuel from a plane explode outside d building and somehow reach the base fast enuf for the twin towers crumple and fall in one staight line? (weren't firemen down there rescuing ppl for a while?)

I mean the plain hit it at such an angle that if nething and the fire was intense enuf to weaking the steel shouldnt the to top that was hit first.. lean and fall off or some shit like dat?

And y after the the builing collapsed not one piece of furniture(besides a small piece of a telephone keypad) was found? just...dust. In a building that has many offices they can't even find a piece of a chair leg, A FUCKIN WINDOW??! BUTTTT the passports of the "terrorist" MADE OF PAPER survived those flames?
its fuckin retarded. LOL.

Now on to the plane thing.
on the news they said some shit about those men were flying the plane for an hr and some going on a route (most suited for the amusement part rides on a roller coaster to me.)
And ive heard of some protocol - if a plane goes off route for more than 30 minutes it is intercepted by the navy or some shit like dat.( i ain from american excuse the ignorance)..if so what happened? did they have a all employee sick-out or some shit?

How is it that men with pen knives hijacked a plane and the pilots are armed with guns



Last but not least. Some one needs to fire those fuckin architects.
Ive seen buildings survive fuckin infernos going one for more than a couple minutes.. probably a whole day and some. that was built years b4 all this technology

Yeah, I forgot to bring up the fact that it is Air traffic patrol protocol that if a plane goes off course and the pilot does not give a good reason why and the plane CONTINUES to go off course a fighter jet is then sent into the air to find the plane and see what is wrong. That didn't occur during 9/11 and the FBI has put a gag order on them and they can't even talk about it to the media or news papers.



And the architect of the twin towers doesn't need to be fired. The building looked like it was takin down by a demolition team. The building shouldn't of even feel to the ground to begin with, it just wasn't hot enough. And the building feel to the ground as if explosives were carefully placed throughout the building.

 

[Twistyaaliyah]

Yeah, I forgot to bring up the fact that it is Air traffic patrol protocol that if a plane goes off course and the pilot does not give a good reason why and the plane CONTINUES to go off course a fighter jet is then sent into the air to find the plane and see what is wrong. That didn't occur during 9/11 and the FBI has put a gag order on them and they can't even talk about it to the media or news papers.



And the architect of the twin towers doesn't need to be fired. The building looked like it was takin down by a demolition team. The building shouldn't of even feel to the ground to begin with, it just wasn't hot enough. And the building feel to the ground as if explosives were carefully placed throughout the building.

sorry i didn't clarify myself. I mean if they are tryin to make us believe that fuel from a jet could cause a skyscraper like the twin towers to fall to dust. THen those architects should be fired. Cuz buildings that were made b4 that wern't so sophisticated survived flames that engulfed the whole building ...the structure still stood

 

[Mr. Hollyhood]

No Al-Qaeda attacks on US soil since 9/11- why?


because they respect G-Unit's gangster thats why

 

[smokedacane]

[/B]

sorry i didn't clarify myself. I mean if they are tryin to make us believe that fuel from a jet could cause a skyscraper like the twin towers to fall to dust. THen those architects should be fired. Cuz buildings that were made b4 that wern't so sophisticated survived flames that engulfed the whole building ...the structure still stood

Are you trying to say that since the government is TRYING to sell us the idea that jet fuel brought down the plane then the architects should be fired?


or somethin else


Because like I said, the twin towers looks as if they were taken down by a controlled demolition.

 

[Twistyaaliyah]

Are you trying to say that since the government is TRYING to sell us the idea that jet fuel brought down the plane then the architects should be fired?


or somethin else


Because like I said, the twin towers looks as if they were taken down by a controlled demolition.

I understand what u have said.
Yea im saying just to make their story plausible . I thinkin about if ppl would want someone design a buildin that humans suppose to be in that collapses in 15mins just from jet fuel cuz i was comparing that to those that were made long time ago.

But then again what i have said is stupid tho cuz ppl would do what they've already dun, just blame it on the "terrorist"

 

[bigirl]

Heightened Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted
By Curtis L. Taylor and Sean Gardiner
STAFF WRITERS

September 12, 2001

The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday.

Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday, bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.

"Today was the first day there was not the extra security," Coard said. "We were protecting below. We had the ground covered. We didn't figure they would do it with planes. There is no way anyone could have stopped that."

Security guard Hermina Jones said officials had recently taken steps to secure the towers against aerial attacks by installing bulletproof windows and fireproof doors in the 22nd-floor computer command cente

 

[bigirl]

Upper Floors of South Tower Closed 9/8-9/9
http://prisonplanet.tv/articles/april2004/042304explosivesplaced.htm

 

[Tha Baldavenger]

remember one thing...Tower 7 was never hit by an airplane.

 

[AGYMAH]

You Guys Go To Google Video And Watch Or Download The Following Videos "eyewitness911", "loose Change", And "911 In Plane Site" These Are The 3 Best Videos On The Topic Of 911. They Make Farenheit 911 Look Like A Aname.

 

[roots69]

Americans are stupid as fuck. September 11th 2001 was a message, not the start of a war. WE accepted the bullshit propaganda and bought into that. The message was simple: YOU TOO CAN BE TOUCHED.
This was a message sent by Arabs. Why the fuck don't people undertsand that almost all of the September 11th attackers were Saudi? We are stupid as fuck as a country.

i try to tell people i work with all the time...everyone can be touched..but they dont hear me...also..let some more time pass, we americans will go to sleep again,

 

[kickrocks]

Al-qaeda didn't attack the US on 9/11. Well, unless Bush is a charter member.

 

[Spectrum]

Post a flowchart of this logic and variants; beginning with the mode of "manipulation" and the categorical outcome (e.g. power, money, revenge, etc) as the "boundaries" (so to speak).

You have good points. I like to study frameworks and then work from the derivatives of situations thereafter. Without, I skim over post like yours that I suspect to have some accurate info and commentary.

Bonus: Provide 3 examples where the flowchart is valid.


BGOL University

Create you a flowchart?

" Wtf man... I already fulfilled the request to put a condom on my head.. I aint doing shit else"

 

[Spectrum]

Eewwll,

it has been reported in open source material that there may be Islamic terrorist groups operating in the tri-border area of Brazil, Columbia, and Venezuela. There is a large Muslim immigrant population in Venezuela and possibly Brazil.

Living in Brazil, you should no that Brazil doesn't have control over large parts of the jungle.

I am not sure of the percentage of the population that is muslim in Venezuela. Though in Brasil it is just over a million. To put it in perspective, Sao Paulo is the largest city in the southern hemisphere and there all but ONE muslim school in the entire city.. However, on the metro one day when I first moved here, I saw an Arab with a HAMAS t-shirt on

Though it would be hard to control or even have oversight of what is going on on that border area. I would be willing to bet anything they don't have a base in Colombia. The cocaine cartels still control that area. I can't imagine the benefit of them allowing Islamic fundamentalists from operating there. Though not as uncontrolled as the border region as Pakistan and Afghanistan, it is at least possible that there is some presence of terrorists in that area.

 

[MATHEMATICS]

That is true, there haven’t been any new attacks since 9/11 that the public has openly heard of. There has been several attempts by Al-Qaeda operatives in the US and abroad that have been foiled my Law enforcement officials. The public just hasn’t heard about them. The US has pretty much forgotten the 9/11 attack and has continued to live their materialistic lives like nothing has happened. There are more than enough sleeper cells here and world wide awaiting the word to strike. But the public has no clue because they have been drawn away for these facts by things like global warming and Paris Hilton going to jail. We are nothing more than sheep waiting to get slaughtered because we refuse to remember and learn from past events. The next attack is coming and it is coming soon. Once again we will not be prepared or even know that it is coming because Americans don’t want to see the reality of this situation and would rather continue to ponder on who Anna Nicole Smiths baby ‘s father is. DUMB ASSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


One more thing for my brother and sisters. Don’t you see how racism has changed among our society? We are still being discriminated against. Our people have struggled to get what little equality we have today and what do we do? Treat any Arab looking person the same way that we have been treated for centuries. I’m not saying that it is all of us but I have seen a heard the same type of racism come out of our peoples mouths and actions that have left me in awe. Haven’t we learned anything? It’s just wrong no matter how you look at. For those out there that are doing this ignorant BS (And you know who you are) you really need to stop and look in the mirror and remember the plight of our ancestors. The struggle for equality brought with blood and tears. Let’s not do to others that has been done to us. Please! Stop the Madness!

 

[GameONPolish]

One Reason is because a large portion of 2 million refugees from that reigon havent been let into the country yet.

 

[Wobble Wobble]

Gentlemen. Before I was discharged in 92, I had been scheduled to do a language course. My choice was Arabic. As far back as 1985 there had been warnings about what were called "Afghan Arabs", those men from around the world (mostly Arab) who would return to their own countries when the Afghan war ended.

Those non-Afghans who fought that war, mainly from 1986/87 btw, were generally led by a Palestinian named Abdullah Azzam. He was killed by a roadside bomb in 1989 a few months after the last Soviet soldier crossed the Amu Dyra river into Tajikistan province. His killing came after he forced his organisation to accept that it should fight "the near enemy" - meaning the corrupt dictatorships of the Arab world. Others, felt they should fight "the far enemy" or the United States which is propping up Israel.

Shortly after that, Osama bin Laden took over the leadership of the administration and logistics organisation for the "Afghan Arabs". That organisation was called Offices of Services whose name was changed to al Qaeda or The Base, in Arabic. Many of those Afghan Arabs did return to their countries and began plotting against their governments, particularly the Egyptians, who were heavily influenced by Qtub.

Here is my reading on the subject:

"Afghanistan: The Bear Trap" by Brigadier Mohmmad Yousaf who ran the Pakistani ISI Afghan desk during the most important years of 83 to 87 when the money and Stingers began to flow.

"Charlie Wilson's War" by George Crile. the story of how a wild Texas congressman strong-armed the White House, Congress, the Arab governments to fund the war and how an even wilder CIA agent got the money and Stingers to the ISI. the movie is going to be out soon.

"Ghost Wars" Steve Coll. Yes, the best overall view of the war. But I like it more because it deals with 1989 to 2001 more thoroughly than anyone else. Example? Hamid Karzai spent several months as an assistant foreign minister for the Taliban in 1994/95.

"The Fragmentation of Afghanistan" by Barnett Rubin. Very academic, yes, but the best ethno historical cultural study of Afghanisan. eewwll & Bigunc, you owe it to yourselves to get this.

"Relentless Pursuit" Samuel Katz. The story of the DSS, the State Deparment's Diplomatic Security Service and how they tracked down Ramzi Yousef. It also gives details of al Qaeda's first attack in the US: The killing of the racist Jewish Defense League founder, Meir Kahane in 1990. The same guys were part of the second attack, the WTC in 1994.

"Afghanistan's Endless War: State failure, regional politics and the rise of the Taliban" Larry Goodson. Academic, but fills in where Barnett Rubin doesn't.

"See No Evil" Robert Baer. Ground level CIA guy who saw it all beginning to happen as far back as the late 70s. REally good stuff on how the Shi revolution in Iran influenced thinking on Sunnis. Plus, details on Ahmad Mungiah http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/termugniyah.htm, who killed 400+ US Marines and French paratroopers in Lebanon - and got away with it.

"Inside al Qaeda: Global network of terror" Rohan Gunaratna. CNN's favourite Asian (after Sanjay Gupta, of course). Really important on the whole suicide thing, because he's Sri Lankan, he's shown ties between Afghan Arabs and the LTTE, the Tamil group that really took suicide bombing to a new level beginning in 1982/83.

"Through Our Enemies' Eyes" and "Imperial Hubris" by Anonymous. It turns out they were written by Michael Scheuer. An analyst, not a field man, but clearly the only person with the balls to explain "why" a group of Arab men were able to organise themselves enough to run a sophisticated attack. Scheuer says we must read bin Laden's words carefully - he tells us why they're attacking.

"My Jihad" Aukai Collins. A white California boy who converted and trained in Afghanistan and lost a leg in Chechnya.

Anyone got any more that we should check out? As far as the conspiracy theories go, they jsut show ignance. They won't even admit to the posibility that it could even have been done. Nothing can be done to counter that.

 

[Spectrum]

^^^

Wobble Wobble,

Ghost Wars was the best one I've read too... by far. I mentioned it in this thread a couple of times.

I'm putting this on my wishlist based on your recommendation:


"The Fragmentation of Afghanistan"