Log in

View Full Version : 9/11 - Susan Lindauer



Workers-Control-Over-Prod
12th September 2012, 03:53
Susan Lindauer worked for the CIA in diplomatic contact with Iraq and Libyan governments. The US government alleges her "insane", "paranoid" "psychologically ill", "mentally unfit" and arrested her under the Patriot Act on March 11 2004 for charges that the New York times writes (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/29/magazine/susan-lindauer-s-mission-to-baghdad.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm):

. . . she was charged with having acted as an unregistered agent of Saddam Hussein's Iraqi government and otherwise having elevated the interests of a foreign country above her allegiance to the United States.

These are typical behavior patterns of western governments to isolate dissidents and whistleblowers. Although the United States government has frequently denied ever employing her while accusing her of practically spying, she claims that from her employment in the CIA, that hijacking attacks were talked about frequently and that the 9/11 attack was a False Flag operation; not of the US state, not of the CIA, but of the Bush administration, of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld.

The article goes on,

Fuisz confirmed that he saw Lindauer about once a week on avearage between 1994 and 2001 and that she would drop by to talk to him about her personal life as well as about her contacts with the Libyans and the Iraqis. He agreed to talk to me about Lindauer after requesting that his son, Joe, a lawyer, be present for our conversation.

''Susan, to me, is one of those people who drift into your life,'' Fuisz said, after offering me a seat on his couch. ''She would drift into the office fairly often, or call. Usually those weren't just social calls. Those were calls about what she was doing, or trying to do,'' Fuisz explained. ''In the early years, her activism generally took an approach which was Arabist, but Arabist from the standpoint of trying to lift sanctions, so that children would do better, and trying to get medicines into countries -- principally I'm talking about Iraq and Libya.''

The reporter goes on quoting Fuisz how mentally ill she is, giving a great and terrifying metaphor without without documenting any real historical cases of the insanity of a woman he spent over 6 years with on a regular basis.


One conversation John [Lindauer's brother] had with his sister in the summer of 2001 stuck in his mind for a different reason. ''So she goes, 'Listen, the gulf war isn't over,''' he told me over dinner at a sushi place on the Sunset Strip. '''There are plans in effect right now. They will be raining down on us from the skies.''' His sister told him that Lower Manhattan would be destroyed. ''And I was like, Yeah, whatever,'' he continued. When he woke up six weeks later to the news that two planes had crashed into the twin towers, and watched as ash settled on the window ledge of his sublet in Brooklyn, he had a dislocating sense of having his reality replaced by Susan's strange world -- an experience he would have again when he learned that his sister had been arrested by the F.B.I.

Although she might come off as a far too jovial nutter, when one looks at the person's history, one has to admit that this person does not seem like your average nutter, which, if you have not noticed, are most of the time not capable of graduating from the London School of Economics and becoming a long time diplomat for the US government in Libya and Iraq. Plus, a life long defence against imperialist atrocities is, at least to my knowledge, not a typical trait of the mentally insane or egotistical lunatics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAwPqfJqccA

Камо́ Зэд
12th September 2012, 04:17
You're not paranoid if the F.B.I. actually does come after you.

Workers-Control-Over-Prod
12th September 2012, 04:29
You're not paranoid if the F.B.I. actually does come after you.

LOL, I agree. Even the New York times (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html?_r=1) seems to be falling into the "paranoid world" of Susan Lindauer. Hell, the Sueddeutsche Zeitung just now wrote an editorial practically blaming Bush on the front page... 11 years later. The conspiracy theories that the New York Times pushed in its article here back up Lindauer's view that it was not the CIA, not Mossad who were complicit in the 9/11 attacks, but Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. It's quite clear really, i don't get the controversy at all, the Bush administration ignored clear cut warnings of a mass terrorist attack, and as BBC reporter Greg Palast reported, the FBI made an inquiry on two related individuals who were giving funds to an individual Osama Bin Laden in 1999.

La Comédie Noire
12th September 2012, 05:18
You mean the same woman who claimed she had psychic powers and predicted the 9/11 attacks? Yeah she's reliable.

Камо́ Зэд
12th September 2012, 05:25
You mean the same woman who claimed she had psychic powers and predicted the 9/11 attacks? Yeah she's reliable.

If thinking she's psychic keeps her confident enough to keep up the struggle against imperialism, I say let her go Gary Busey crazy.

Sperm-Doll Setsuna
12th September 2012, 05:33
your average nutter, which, if you have not noticed, are most of the time not capable of graduating from the London School of Economics

That sounds exactly like what I'd expect from the worst kind of nutter (the asstrian kind soon to be a minister of finance near you).

Belief in psychic nonsense sure suggests nutter.

Workers-Control-Over-Prod
12th September 2012, 05:37
That sounds exactly like what I'd expect from the worst kind of nutter (the asstrian kind soon to be a minister of finance near you).

Belief in psychic nonsense sure suggests nutter.

Well, either way, it seems to me to now be public record that 9/11 was a terrorist attack under acceptance of Bush administration. And what she says in her writings is quite a similar pattern that the established media editorials say, Sueddeutsche and New york Times at least.

Os Cangaceiros
12th September 2012, 05:44
Although the United States government has frequently denied ever employing her while accusing her of practically spying, she claims that from her employment in the CIA, that hijacking attacks were talked about frequently and that the 9/11 attack was a False Flag operation; not of the US state, not of the CIA, but of the Bush administration, of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld.

Well, first you seem to be agreeing with her assessment, that 9/11 was a "false flag operation" (ie, something like what some suspect the 1999 Russian apartment bombings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings) to be). But then you go on to accuse Bush, Cheney et al of not actually doing this, but rather ignoring evidence of a "mass terrorist attack", and just sort of let it happen. So which is it?

Also, any meddling couldn't have only been the result of Bush, Cheney, etc. Those guys don't do the physical work of collecting and analyzing intelligence. The FBI, CIA, NSA etc would've all had to bungle the identification of 9/11 warning signs, which they did. I'm not convinced that 9/11 was an orchestrated plot by the Bush/Cheney cabal, though, there are too many holes in that conspiracy theory.

Workers-Control-Over-Prod
12th September 2012, 05:54
Well, first you seem to be agreeing with her assessment, that 9/11 was a "false flag operation" (ie, something like what some suspect the 1999 Russian apartment bombings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings) to be). But then you go on to accuse Bush, Cheney et al of not actually doing this, but rather ignoring evidence of a "mass terrorist attack", and just sort of let it happen. So which is it?

Also, any meddling couldn't have only been the result of Bush, Cheney, etc. Those guys don't do the physical work of collecting and analyzing intelligence. The FBI, CIA, NSA etc would've all had to bungle the identification of 9/11 warning signs, which they did. I'm not convinced that 9/11 was an orchestrated plot by the Bush/Cheney cabal, though, there are too many holes in that conspiracy theory.

How would you expect me to know without any official sources? A New York Times writer (as Hexen just wrote in another thread) wrote a book about it, go read and tell me. Though i saw that even this book has some bad excuses. In the end, it is 1) public record that the FBI inquired about Bush giving Osama Bin Laden money in 1999 2) a fact that there were extremely frequent measures and warnings from the CIA warning of a Bin Laden attack on the White House, WTC buildings and Pentagon 3) WTC building 7 was demolished.

I don't know how much Bush knew, i presume nothing since he didn't seem to know much about even his tax policies. But intelligence circles knew about it, you can bet that the Corporations that work with the intelligence circles knew about it, and that rich individuals were aware of the happening beforehand. Insider-trading deals were recently found in connection to 9/11, so the attack was known before hand by many people. Do you think reactionary oil barons like Cheney didn't know about it beforehand? Hence, call it whatever you want, i will call it ruling class accepted terrorism to paint an enemy for the crusade of US/western capital in the middle east... if not outright conspiracy.

Os Cangaceiros
12th September 2012, 06:06
No, I do not believe that there was a huge circle of people in the intelligence and business community that knew of 9/11. 9/11 was a large event, and in any sort of event of it's type, there are unanswered questions. But there are awkward questions for the conspiracy theorists as well. Like why the 9/11 hijackers were mostly Saudi (none from Iraq or Afghanistan). Or why an enormously complicated conspiracy involving the systematic murder of 3,000 Americans can go off without a hitch, but not even one "WMD" could be planted to "justify" the war in Iraq when US forces occupied the country. I've found that many people invent these conspiracy theories because they find it unfathomable that the US government doesn't know EVERYTHING ALL THE TIME, like it's some panopticon entity that has it's eyes in every inch of the world 24/7. And that, when it is aware of something, that it won't bungle it in some kind of classic inept bureaucratic manner, or bungle it through simply lethargy or delusion, like what traspired in the 2008 economic crash.

La Comédie Noire
12th September 2012, 06:24
You also have to realize a lot of "intelligence" is merely rumor. In fact when the CIA was first created out of the OSS they got fucked out of so much money because they kept giving it to people who would tell them tales. "The soviets are planning to do this, if you give me guns and money we will create an insurrection in the Ukraine ect." In fact one early director of the CIA outright admitted that a lot of the intelligence they had on file was largely useless or of questionable veracity.

It would be interesting to do a survey of all the presidential debriefings from 45-01, just to see how many times the country was in "imminent danger".

Workers-Control-Over-Prod
12th September 2012, 07:10
No, I do not believe that there was a huge circle of people in the intelligence and business community that knew of 9/11. 9/11 was a large event, and in any sort of event of it's type, there are unanswered questions. But there are awkward questions for the conspiracy theorists as well. Like why the 9/11 hijackers were mostly Saudi (none from Iraq or Afghanistan). Or why an enormously complicated conspiracy involving the systematic murder of 3,000 Americans can go off without a hitch, but not even one "WMD" could be planted to "justify" the war in Iraq when US forces occupied the country. I've found that many people invent these conspiracy theories because they find it unfathomable that the US government doesn't know EVERYTHING ALL THE TIME, like it's some panopticon entity that has it's eyes in every inch of the world 24/7. And that, when it is aware of something, that it won't bungle it in some kind of classic inept bureaucratic manner, or bungle it through simply lethargy or delusion, like what traspired in the 2008 economic crash.

Hm. I guess you know more than the New York Times editors... the CIA didn't just warn Bush once in August as we knew, but we have just found out two days ago that the administration was warned frequently and in detail about Osama Bin Laden hijacking planes to attack the known targets, and urged him to take action. You are spreading idiotic fallacies claiming that they didn't know about the attacks a long time before because they did, why do you feel the need to protect the Bush administration from their obvious inaction/complicity in the "systematic murder of 3,000 Americans"?