And we are supposed to believe some guy sitting in a cave planned 9/11?

The Saudis gave money to the terrorists. The Pakistan ISI delivered money to the terrorists. And I think other governments were involved too. And we are supposed to believe Osama bin Laden sitting in an Afghan cave pulled this off? Sorry. Don't buy it.

Don

...those caves could be decked out quite nicely. :evilgrin:

And don't forget, he also had training camps, for mor conventional facilities.

Only drawings of what someone thought they would look like. The only caves I have seen pictures of looked like....well, they looked like caves. Like something a cave man would live in. And I didn't forget the training camps either. Looked like a couple of jungle jims, a few ropes hanging down, and some water filled trenches. Not very useful training equipment to learn how to hijack airliners and smash them into buildings.

Don

My hubby and I have said that SAME THING about the training camps since they started showing those same, rehashed 'camp training videos' after 9/11---you know the ones I'm talking about---the guys in the black masks running through the tires, then OBL kneeled down with the gun.... :eyes:

Yah--my total thought is "okay. They're teaching these guys how to beat Marine Corps boot camp---"

If they're such masterminds, why not a Dr. Evil-style super tech mansion with jet-packs and retna-scanners? Why the desert? Why old tires?

just doesn't make sense

Jihadz and Hustlas Biach

James Bond evil villain caves?

I think Osama is a financier and and cheerleader, if you will. Somebody else is the technical whiz.

Having said that, the 9-11 attacks weren't very high tech. No black helicopers, no stinger missles, no night vision goggles.

Conventional commercial airplanes, security loopholes a mile wide, and buildings with vulnerabilities nobody thought about. They were highly creative, and therefore deadly effective.

Every dollar traced to the 19 hijackers so far has come from the Pakistan secret service, and the Saudi ruling family. Perhaps I am missing something here?

Don

...raising funds from "charitable donations" from wealthy Saudis.

...ever recieved came from the CIA and was funneled to the mujahideen through the Pakistani secret service (here we go with them again). bin Laden and his crew never relied on rich Saudis to fight the Russians with good old Uncle Sam around. I alway remember bin Laden being described as a brave freedom fighter going up against the Russians during that period. Never as a money man.

Don

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0403/p19s01-bogn.html

A congressman, a spy, and some Afghan rebels plot to save the world

<snip>According to Diane Sawyer, who knew him well in the 1980s, Wilson was "untamed." He had a very clear view of what was right and what was wrong, and never bothered to investigate beyond first impressions. The Afghan mujahideen were heroes for the simple reason that they were fighting Russians. The primitive nature of their struggle made them all the more heroic, according to Wilson, who considered their "cause only slightly below Christianity."

Wilson was not a well-known congressman, but he was a powerful one. His position on the Appropriations Committee meant that he had a hand in controlling the virtually limitless funds that could be used for covert operations. He also had an impressive talent for manipulating colleagues to support his pet projects.

The United States was not supposed to be supporting the Afghans against the Soviet Union. Money for the rebels was therefore funneled through the CIA, which bought weapons that were in turn passed to the Pakistanis, who transported them to the Afghans. One of the great and ultimately tragic ironies of this arrangement was that most mujahideen rebels never learned who was helping them, an omission that went on to complicate America's war on terrorism considerably.

We should remind ourselves that Wilson's antics occurred against the backdrop of the Iran-contra debacle. Circumspect CIA agents initially decided that Wilson spelled danger. But then a bit of luck came his way. The CIA's Afghan operation was taken over by agent Avrakotos, who shared Wilson's simplistic sense of right and wrong and also his willingness to bend the rules in service to the greater good.

The CIA stipulated that weapons for the Afghans not be traceable to the US. To meet this requirement, the agents had to find Russian arms that the Afghans could claim had been captured from their enemies. Soviet weaponry was gathered from some unlikely places. Wilson somehow managed to persuade the Israelis to provide Soviet weapons captured from the PLO to Muslim fundamentalists in Afghanistan. It's a crazy world.

more

Nineteen guys with limited training and some box-cutters. The Oklahoma City bombing was more complex from a technical standpoint. Someone actually had to build a bomb there.

The coordination was pretty remarkable, but even that would have required little more than some flight schedules and a map.

The maneuver to fly into the Pentagon was very difficult from a technical standpoint (assuming that it was indeed a Boeing, which is not proven). The plane had to fly at a very high speed very very low above the ground. One guy at a radar screen thought it must have been a military plane, because the plane was so maneuverable. That requires excellent piloting skills.
And: under normal circumstances fighters would have been scrambled. Technically it had been possible to stop flight 77 to the Pentagon (hearing of the independent commission, May 23), so it is NOT easy to be successful.
But that is only a detail. The whole group was watched for many years, in the USA, and in Germany, too, some (I think, 2 at least) were on a watch list. They behaved strangely in flight schools, which was reported to the FBI. So their preparations did not go unnoticed. That shows how difficult it is to prepare such an operation without being noticed.
Why, however, they could accomplish it nevertheless (if they really did it), is a question that should have caused some problems and rolling heads at least in the intelligence community – and probably in the Administration.

...learn how to drive that Ryder truck to the Murrah Federal Building? One doesn't learn how to fly jumbo jets into buildings with a 100% accuracy rate using Microsoft's Flight Simulator on their PC. The Murrah bombing could have required less than a few months from planning to execution. 9/11 required years of preparation and planning to pull off. And that included succeeding in not drawing attention to themselves in any way that might alert them to the authorities for that entire time. Think about that for a moment? These were not a couple of all Ameican, apple pie eating, Gulf War Veterans, running around the country for a few months without no one noticing. They were a bunch of guys from other countries, with accents, regularly running through our airports of which some I might add, were on watch lists, like they owned the place for years. Something is wrong with this picture.

Don

to plot out their plan to topple the US government.

I can't get the ugly vision out of my mind, the one of Bush family get togethers in the 90s where Big Daddy and the Bunkhouse boys rehashed their failures, and plotted their next moves. How many times did they go over the present game plan, rubbing their hands in malodorous glee over the idea of a showdown with Saddam and the Hussein Boys. Prancing before a mirror trying to learn how to walk two inches taller, committing to memory the plan for the new world order, extorting money, socializing and making business arrangements with terrorists.

And all the while, the vacuous Barbara Bush tipping her martinis back and baying at the moon in Kennebunkport, her naked flanks aquiver, her triple strand of pearls glowing around her wrinkled jowls.

...And all the while, the vacuous Barbara Bush tipping her martinis back and baying at the moon in Kennebunkport, her naked flanks aquiver, her triple strand of pearls glowing around her wrinkled jowls...

i could've gone all day without that mental image...

For some reason, I'm imagining it as a Ralph Steadman piece to boot...

(Shudder....)

Is it my fault she was luring unsuspecting sailors to their deaths?

Don't spread this kind of bullshit, theboss.

Really, this isn't even worth refuting, it's that stupid.

Eric

remember that some of those 19 turned up alive and well. also what kind of religious people go to strip clubs and show off there.

these flights using FAA standard operating procedure.

also you forget, bush stole the election .....and was gonna get caught (NORC) when 911 rescued them. You also forget that the only one who could have benefitted from the catastrophe was also the only one capable of arranging it....ie rightwing elements of our corporate/military(?) elite ...
911 the scenerio was written before the actual events.....the events were fitted in as the neocons and the mediasluts went along, with the freaky parts hurried past (flight 587), ph call from olsen, the passport found in rubble of wtc etceteraaaaa...
believe it, there could not have been any hijackers on any of the planes except on flight 93, the one crashed in pennsylvania, and it's probable those guys were just as surprised as...well as you or me!
I think most people are incapable of accepting the fact that a gang of utterly depraved criminals has seized control....in an utterly depraved manner.
If we're gonna fight it, let's stop dancing their jig:

>>There is another level to the coverup in this case. That coverup really lies behind the murder. “I’m afraid we’ve been misled,” attorney and former assassination researcher Vincent Salandria told Gaeton Fonzi, a journalist and investigator for the House Assassination Committee. “All the critics, myself included, were misled very early. I see that now. We spent too much time and effort microanalyzing the details of the assassination when all the time it was obvious, it was blatantly obvious that it was a conspiracy. Don’t you think that the men who killed Kennedy had the means to do it in the most sophisticated and subtle way? They chose not to. Instead, they picked the shooting gallery that was Dealey Plaza and did it in the most barbarous and openly arrogant manner. The cover story was transparent and designed not to hold, to fall apart at the slightest scrutiny. The forces that killed Kennedy wanted the message clear: ‘We are in control and no one-not the President, nor Congress, nor any elected official- no one can do anything about it.’ It was a message to the people that their government was powerless. And the people eventually got the message. Consider what has happened since the Kennedy assassination. People see government today as unresponsive to their needs, yet the budget and power of the military and intelligence establishments have increased tremendously.
“The tyranny of power is here. Current events tell us that those who killed Kennedy can only perpetuate their power by promoting social upheaval both at home and abroad. And that will lead not to revolution but to repression. I suggest to you, my friend, that the interest of those who killed Kennedy now transcend national boundaries and national priorities. No doubt we are dealing now with an international conspiracy. We must face the fact- and not waste any more time microanalyzing the evidence. That’s exactly what they want us to do. Thay have kept us busy for so long. And I will bet, buddy, that is what will happen to you. They’ll keep you very very busy and eventually they’ll wear you down.” <<
(from Harrison Edward Livingston’s ‘Killing Kennedy’ pg363, 1995)

http://www.standdown.net/index.htm

I can believe this.

i don't even think there's any such organization as al quada.
it's the matrix for real

It seemed like they just "created" Al Queda all of a sudden. I don't think it was anything to write home about, that is, until we created it after 9-11. Now its the perpetual boogeyman, the Emanuel Goldstein of our time.

That's not to say that I have a competing explanation, but that I've not seen sufficient proof that the alleged '19 hijackers' were, in fact, exactly (no more, no less) those who actually carried out these acts. Were I on a jury, I'd be nowhere near a 'guilty' verdict on any of those thus far accused.

I'm still extremely skeptical that the FBI could come up with virtually everything "known," even today, within 48 hours of the terrible events of 9/11. It just doesn't pass my "cover story" filters. The whole thing smells like a pre-contrived "conspiracy theory" to me. Indeed, it has an even greater stench than most of what's been derided as "conspiracy theories" since then.

Obviously, YMMV :silly:

The guy's got a serious hate-filled hard-on for Zionism, but there is something to be said for the guy's research:

<http://www.joevialls.co.uk/transpositions/concorde.html>

The FAA hasn't mentioned the existence of "Home Run" third party remote control in years, but it does exist, even to this day on most commercial planes.

Eric

But right now, I have no basis . . . not even a good conspiracy theory . . . to refute that OBL was the mastermind of 9-11.

that OBL was the mastermind.
At first, it should be proven that he was indeed responsible, and that the events unfolded like the Administration and the media explained it.
THAT is a first-grade conspiracy theory.

That's what I've been saying.

The theory that Osama bin Laden was behind the 9/11 attacks is a conspiracy theory itself with very little proof.

The administration promised that they would present us with the 'ironclad proof' that bin Laden was behind the attacks almost two years ago, and they've shown us nothing but a 'magic passport' that supposedly survived it's bearer crashing into a fireball at the WTC. Worse than that, the guy ON the passport (as well as most of the other identities that we are told were the hijackers) turned up ALIVE in the Middle East. They were apparently using false IDs.

I have seen absolutely no proof that Osama bin Laden was behind 9/11. He cheered it on after it happened (which is all he did on that 'tape' people point to as a confession), but there is more proof that Pakistan was behind the attacks than OBL.

talking about the attacks, taking credit for the attacks, and EVEN explaining that "as an engineer" he didn't plan on the buildings collapsing. "That" he said "was a bonus from Allah".

and/or understand Arabic?

Just a few little words and you become a propagandist for the BFEE.

"as an engineer" he didn't plan on the buildings collapsing"

should read:

"as an engineer" he was surprised the buildings collapsed.

He also said in that same tape that he was not responsible but never mind, believe what Bush tells you.

As I watched the the WTC implode from my Greenwich Village office, once the shock wore off my first thought was "how convenient this is for the Bush administration". Everyone then thought I was out of my mind.

Two years later, I still don't believe that a bunch of Arabs in caves, however sophisticated those caves may be, carried this out without assitance and cooperation from the lunatic fringe of the Republican party. What was Cheney doing in his "cave?" So much to be answered, so little willingness to cooperate on the part of the * administration....:grr:

I watched from a high-rise office building in Chelsea.

First off, I don't believe OBL was living in caves BEFORE September 11. He has a lot of his own money and pretty much lived where he wanted and did as he pleased, as long as he was careful. And he was getting money from admirers all over the Muslim world, especially the Saudis.

The Clinton Administration was convinced OBL was behind the embassy bombings in 1998 and the Cole bombing in 2000. Best book on this --"The Age of Sacred Terror" by Benjamin and Simon. This is the book you wish freepers would read every time they say Clinton did nothing about terrorism.

So I don't understand why it would be incredible that OBL was behind September 11.

The REAL questions surround the fact that the United States was getting tons of intelligence from many sources saying that al Qaeda was about to do something big, involving airplanes, in the United States. And the Bushies did NOTHING to prepare for this, other than arrange for their own to take charter jets instead of commercial flights. As this...

(A) incompetence?
(B) hubris?
(C) deliberate?
(D) all of the above?

It's just that there isn't a shred of proof he did.

What you are saying is that because he's a 'usual suspect', it must be him. That's really not much proof to start a war in Afghanistan over -- it certainly wouldn't be enough to convict (or even charge) someone in our courts. (and note: he hasn't been charged with the crime of being behind 9/11 -- only Moussaoui has ever been charged in relation to it).

And BTW, OBL was keeping a very low profile well before 9/11. Remember when Clinton had some cruise missiles thrown his way back around '98-'99? I think I read that he stopped using a satellite phone after that, since that's how they pinpointed him (although they missed...). He certainly wasn't living la vita loco in Monaco by that point.

I don't believe it's true that there is NO proof. IMO the probability is very large that it was him, and if it wasn't him it was somebody in the same general sect of radical Islam.

You do know the Bushes and bin Ladens have lots of old business ties, yes?

The closest thing I've seen (and that all the 'bin Laden did it' people point to) is in one of the 'tapes' (I think it was the 'fat Osama' one...dubious all by itself). The 'fat Osama' applauds the hijackers for what they did.

That's it. He doesn't say he was behind it, just that he applauds it. He wasn't exactly the only one to express that sentiment, so that's certainly not 'proof'. In fact, right after 9/11, he released a statement denying that he had anything to do with it.

What other proof has EVER been made public? The guy who was going by the name of Mohammed Atta was known to have received $100,000 from agents of Pakistan's ISI. That's pretty good proof that Pakistan's ISI was involved or at least knew of it ahead of time. What sort of proof on that level is there that bin Laden was involved?

As far as whether it was somebody in the same general sect of Islam -- of course it's possible, but who cares! We invaded a country and killed thousands because we said bin Laden did it.

And yes, I knew that bin Laden and the Bush family go WAY back. George W. Bush has been involved with in a number of companies (Arbusto, Harkin) that Salem bin Laden (Osama's brother) invested very heavily in. So maybe Bush framed him up for some personal reasons, who knows.

But still, there's been absolutely no proof that I have seen made public that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks. The closest link from 9/11 to Osama bin Laden is Pakistan's ISI.

The highjackers were al Qaeda and al Qaeda is Osama bin Laden's outfit. I haven't seen the documentation about this with my own eyes, but as former staff members of the National Security Council under CLINTON, people who have no reason to cover Bush's butt, say this is so, then I am inclined to believe it until somebody comes up with evidence to the contrary.

(Highly recommended: Daniel Benjamin, Steven Simon, The Age of Sacred Terror. These guys were Clinton's director and senior director for counterrorism.)

As an eyewitness to the destruction of the World Trade Center I was behind the military action in Afghanistan. However, Bush and Rummy screwed it up and allowed most of al Qaeda to escape.

The Iraq war, of course, made no sense at all.

The faith in the people who you trust who are saying what they think to be fact, combined with what you assumed to be logical. That is one way to base a conclusion here. And if you feel that is adequate enough to convince you that those conclusions are correct I have no problem with that.

But why suggest to someone else to give it a rest when the person does not consider your faith and hearsay testimony from someone who is not under oath to tell the truth as adequate proof for them?

I am sure you realize that what you have based your decision on could never hold up in any court of law. But yet you supported going to war with that same evidence? Something doesn't seem right here to me.

Don

beginning where seed money originated might be a clue. To bank with the big boys, you have to have bank like the big boys. I would say the impetus of the current situation started with the humiliation of Nixon, the joke that was Gerald Ford and willingness to get even that transpired into secret teams, off the books and off shore enterprises and so many other things.

One only need remember of the current size of the budget of the D.O.D., how does half a trillion a year roll your eyes. That is just the budget for the US what about all the rest of them countries that also buy weapons from the US. They need enemies at all costs, otherwise their business flounders.

I do have to admit on the face of it, some lowly engineer from a little backward monarchy that owes it whole existence to the US military alone was responsible for such an elaborate plan. Carried out with such ease, again too many co-winky-dinkys. Another good clue is Pakistan and the money that was funneled trough their secret service to fund Rayguns Afghan Freedom fighters. Does any think since the Soviets withdrawal the Pakistani secret service wanted the money to stop?

Anybody read any of this

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/AAsaudi.html

Bin_Laden_family,_Saudi_Arabia_corruption
and_support_of_terrorists,_connections_to_Bush

by Paul Thompson.
See forums to discuss 9/11 and this timeline


December 26, 1979: Soviet forces invade Afghanistan. They will withdraw in 1989 after a brutal 10-year war. In a 1998 interview, Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter's National Security Adviser, reveals that the CIA began destabilizing the pro-Soviet Afghan government six months earlier, in a deliberate attempt to get the Soviets to invade and have their own Vietnam-type costly war: "What was more important in the world view of history? The Taliban or the fall of the Soviet Empire? A few stirred-up Muslims or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?" The US and Saudi Arabia give a huge amount of money (estimates range up to $40 billion total for the war) to support the mujaheddin guerrilla fighters opposing the Russians. Most of the money is managed by the ISI, Pakistan's intelligence agency.

(snip)

Didn't * say, and isnt part of the "* doctrine" something to the effect of;

'we will make no distinction between terrorists states and those states that support and harbour terrorists'

whcich type of state is Saudi Arabia, and why are they being given a pass? (hint: the answer contains 3 letters)

Even Cheney energy plan said so well before 9/11. Get the timeline right, for heaven sake!

No sarcasm here.

Did Bin Laden arrange that too? After being warned that an attack against the U.S. involving a hijacking was extremely likely to occur in that time frame - FOUR commercial airliners are hijacked almost simultaneously, and yet the skies over D.C. allow for clear sailing - the hijacked plane having its pick of targets from the White House, to the Capitol Building, to the Pentagon (one of the potential targets explicitly listed in the warning) - not to mention ANY nuclear power plant on the eastern seaboard. Standard rules of procedure for INTERCEPTING off course flights are NOT followed, once, twice, three times, FOUR times in a row - the system fails!! Amazing! And yet no one has been fired or even held accountable for this unprecendented "lapse." A lapse, no doubt orchestrated by the ubiquitous evil one, Osama Bin Laden!

Of course, not a single soul in the Bush Administration EVER heard of, nor EVER contemplated the POSSIBILITY of a plane being used as a weapon to hit targets (NOT EVEN after that very thing occured after One Trade Center was hit) evidently implying there we no WWII - Pacific theater historians among them - the Japanese Kamakazi tactic - a tactic used extensively against American forces - unknown to them, as was the FOX TV show in 2000 - centered around a 747 used as weapon to hit the WORLD TRADE CENTER, as was the Tom Clancy novel, describing the same thing, as was the discovery in '95 of a terrorist plot in the Phillipines to use hijacked American commercial jets as weapons to strike buildings, as was the Genoa Conference in Europe, attended by the POTUS just several weeks before Sept. 11 - which the threat of a plane being used by Al-Qada was felt to be so great that plans were made for the meeting to be held at sea, where they could be protected at all times by a squadron of fighter jets. ALL of these extensive lapses in memory due, no doubt, to the powers of the evil Osama Bin Laden! (Not to mention the fact that "vice-president" Cheney and the POTUS knew to take the anthrax vaccine almost 4 weeks before ANY anthrax attack occurs - an attack that employs home grown anthrax - enough in one letter to kill 100,000 people - which is randomly sent to one of 280 million Americans - of all vaccine people - OPPOSITION party LEADER Tom Daschle - at that time the MAIN OPPONENT of the PATRIOTIC ACT!!! Just another little tidbit easily explained away yet another plot by that cleverest of cave dwellers!!

at an undisclosed location.

that's where the training took place too.

People's misconception of al-Qaeda is that it is a terrorist organization in and of itself. al Qaeda is a clearinghouse, if you will, with Osama as it's titular head(like a General Manager or CEO). There are many terror organizations that are affiliated with al Qaeda and some 'stand alones' that use it for logistics, planning, financial assistance for operations, communication services and whatnot. The crew that did the hijackings was most likely hand picked from other organizations or groomed as a 'house crew' of sorts.

al Qaeda most likely has a compartmentalized hierarchy consisting of Operations, Finance, Quartermastering, Housing, Communications.

That's my theory.

I don't think the organization is very structured though. That's the way the administration and all the so called terrorism "experts" have said and it really doesn't play out. Bin Laden himself, is probably more of a figure head or "spiritual leader" for the collection of terrorist outfits -- including those fighting in Kashmir, Chechnya, Bosnia.

As for the 9/11 attacks, bin Laden most likely had some role in the planning and I'm sure he gave his blessing for the attacks to happen, but the actual nuts and bolts of the operation seems like it's the ISI's work. The money itself is obviously Saudi. Pakistan itself is a virtually bankrupt nation, and it is being supported at the present by the US, Saudi Arabia, and China. The aftermath has worked out very nicely for Pakistan, and despite everything said in the media, for the extremely "courageous" Musharraf as well. Musharraf has been able to strengthen his mandate in the country and legitimize his rule in the eyes of western leaders, not to mention gain a windfall of cash, military aid, forgiven debt, and what else have you.

The modus operandi of the attacks are very similar to the hijacking that Indian Airlines jet that ended on New Years of 2000. It was obvious that this was an Al Queda supported attack and it seemed very convenient that the jet landed in Kandhahar, a taliban stronghold. Documents later found in Afghanistan related to the hijacking were also found.

Rather than pressuring the Pakistanis to actually reform their government and educational system, we are instead increasing the instability of an already unstable region. I'm actually surprised that the administration hasn't given the F-16s Mush. came to the US begging for. Granted that doesn't matter considering they were given 3 billion dollars in military aid (how come many on DU are angry about the Israelis recieving aid, but other nations like Pakistan, egypt, turkey, etc get a free pass?). It's quite obvious that our nation, along with China, Russia, Israel, North Korea, and Pakistan is one of the biggest weapons proliferators in the world. For all we harp on about stablility in other nations, we haven't shown much leadership in this regard.