squinney wrote: Much more likely that 9/11 was allowed to happen.... That such an incident was necessary for the PNAC plans to go forward is clearly stated in their own papers.
That corresponds exactly with what I believe.
Only the scale of the strike was a surprise to George and his team.
Only problem is bin Laden "received his TRAINING from American agents" back in the 80s I believe, when he was still fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, right? So how do Clinton's eight years figure in here?
If AQ was "allowed" to prepare and execute its terrorist attacks - a LOT of preparation must have gone into 9/11, getting people in the country, activating sleeper cells, recruiting people, training 'em - you're saying all that was quickly done in the less than a year Bush was in power? AQ just kinda charged into action as soon as Bush was elected, yeah, how did they get them to do that?
If you say that the Americans must have had their agents in AQ and thus must have known what Osama was up to and let him do it, then the same must have gone for the preceding years as well right? You dont suddenly plant your agents in the core of an organisation like that overnight. And if they had agents in AQ over the years and "let" them do what they did, then how does that align with the theory that the devious PNAC plans were behind it all? I mean, those plans were hardly charging US policy in Clinton's years, were they?
McTag wrote:squinney wrote: Much more likely that 9/11 was allowed to happen.... That such an incident was necessary for the PNAC plans to go forward is clearly stated in their own papers.
That corresponds exactly with what I believe.
Only the scale of the strike was a surprise to George and his team.
9-11 was allowed to happen by Jamie Gorelick's "WALL" betwen the CIA and the FBI, constructed to prevent any federal investigation of Chinagate. 9-11 was a direct consequence of the criminality and corruption of the Clinton administration.
The seeds of 9/11 were sown MUCH earlier than Clinton.
We're talking major plotting, scheming and double-dealing.
Poppy Bush was a NIXONIAN supporter, a member of Nixon's cabinet... Poppy was in the clicque.
Nixon Appointed him as Ambassador to the UN.
After Nixon's forced resignation, Poppy was named Head of the Agency by Gerald Ford.
He was replaced once Jimmy Carter got into the Oval Office... but we see what happened to Jimmy Carter, and how the Iran Hostage Affair took care of Jimmy, facilitating Poppy's return with Reagan.
Poppy's spook connections stood him in good stead during the Reaganista Regime...
Poppy MUST have had his hands deep into Iran-Contra AND in the funding and training of the Afghanistan "rebels".
The seeds of 9/11 were sown DECADES before the event, and long before Clinton emerged from Arkansas.
Yeah, but - if there was some big conspiracy dating to Reagan's times to help Al-Qaeda prepare 9/11 in order to further the PNAC agenda, how did it work then during the eight years directly preceding the year of 9/11 - when none of the PNAC people were anywhere near government?
As soon as Bush got into power the neocon agents instantly merged back into the AQ ranks and then bam, within 8 months, 9/11 happened, is that how you see it?
And what about the AQ attacks before 2001, the USS Cole for example - those did happen spontaneously without US agents involved? Why would that be the case in one case and not in the other?
Like I said, I NEVER admitted that I ACCEPTED this conspiracy theory, nor have I taken one side or another in explaining what happened to the Pentagon on 9/11. But GOD it sure is fun watching the continuing spinning (albeit tangentially at times) on this thread.
And STILL, why can't anyone answer the simple question regarding the missing video from other sources taken by the F.B.I.?
Why can't anyone answer the simple question of the missing black box by the F.B. (with a link)?
There are still questions that have YET to be answered.
I haven't heard those answers.
Oh yeah, the "continuing spinning" by such known Bushite spinners as dlowan, Craven, nimh, panzade and Freeduck ..
When those people imply that the conspiracy theory you put up for discussion aint worth much, you just know that it's more partisan spinning from those who dont want the truth about Bush and his neocons outed.
One wonders if "the Truth about Bush and his neocons" wouldn't tend to diminish us all...
Nimh, in the Netherlands there can you get BBC2?
There is a terrific documentary series running on Tuesday nights which started last Tuesday, and which touches on these matters.
McTag:
Is there a companion website to go along with this series?
McTag wrote:Nimh, in the Netherlands there can you get BBC2?
There is a terrific documentary series running on Tuesday nights which started last Tuesday, and which touches on these matters.
Sorry, correction, it's on Wednesdays at 21:00 British Time.
Dookiestix wrote:McTag:
Is there a companion website to go along with this series?
Look here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/whatson/search/advance_search.cgi?keyword=the+power+of+nightmares
I cannot get a better description at the moment (I've looked, but it's a very big website- although I've seen more info before on the site, maybe I'm overlooking something obvious)
I think if you visit the BBC website on Wednesday, ie. the day of transmission, more info will be available then.
Or have a browse yourself, you may well have better luck than me. It's on BBC2.
BTW all the TV reviewers on the 'heavy' papers I've seen were full of praise for the first episode- it's a very impressive piece of work.
McTag wrote:Dookiestix wrote:McTag:
Is there a companion website to go along with this series?
Look here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/whatson/search/advance_search.cgi?keyword=the+power+of+nightmares
I cannot get a better description at the moment (I've looked, but it's a very big website- although I've seen more info before on the site, maybe I'm overlooking something obvious)
I think if you visit the BBC website on Wednesday, ie. the day of transmission, more info will be available then.
Or have a browse yourself, you may well have better luck than me. It's on BBC2.
BTW all the TV reviewers on the 'heavy' papers I've seen were full of praise for the first episode- it's a very impressive piece of work.
There is a little more here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/listings/programme.shtml?day=wednesday&service_id=4224&filename=20041027/20041027_2100_4224_43282_60
McTag:
Thanx so much for the valuable insight. I sincerely hope we can get rid of the absolute incompetence of the Bush administration. I can't believe the election is a week from today.
Dookiestix wrote:McTag:
Thanx so much for the valuable insight. I sincerely hope we can get rid of the absolute incompetence of the Bush administration. I can't believe the election is a week from today.
Some more on the BBC website about tonight's programme, #2 of 3 episodes.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/3951615.stm
