Castro joins "conspiracy nuts"

[peaccenicked]

With Chavez calling for a new 9/11 inquiry. Cindy Sheenan, America's leading peacemom issuing a warning of a new 9/11 type attack. Castro takes his first step
into "conspiracy theory". http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/07/16/...Cuba-Castro.php (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/07/16/news/CB-GEN-Cuba-Castro.php)

What is all this talk of right wing conspiracy theory. I suggest it is pure nonsense.
What is more it is cowardly non sense.

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 06:05 am
With Chavez calling for a new 9/11 inquiry. Cindy Sheenan, America's leading peacemom issuing a warning of a new 9/11 type attack. Castro takes his first step
into "conspiracy theory". http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/07/16/...Cuba-Castro.php (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/07/16/news/CB-GEN-Cuba-Castro.php)

What is all this talk of right mwing conspiracy theory. I suggest it is pure nonsense.
What is more it is cowardly non sense.
when did he say this?

[peaccenicked]

Obviously it is a conspiracy against Castro. Associated Press are liars.

[bootleg42]

And the article was very mal-worded. He's not joining in that conspiracy.

And I think Chavez only believes that because he hates that U.S. government SO MUCH for well........................do I have to say anything?? Personally I don't blame him.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Look, a major problem with terrorism is that it clouds things. None of us can know who actually carried out the attacks on 9/11, because of the very nature of the acts.

Having suspicions that the U.S. government was either involved in, or didn't actively work to prevent those attacks does not make one a "right wing conspiracy nut" (though surely, many of those types do believe such).

There is precedence for all sorts of false flag operations, purposely letting one's guard down, etc., to help win over the population to military endeavours.

[peaccenicked]

Castro according the AP has joined the ranks of the Let it happen brigade which
seems to be the growing alternative to the Made it happen brigade. There is absolutely no doubt about that assuming AP is not manufactured this story.
It is also in the Scotsman. AP are a well established source of international news and on this I doubt they would betray professional standards of journalism.

Let it happen delibrately and made it happen are not that far away from one another, both require conspirators. Castro is in fact a conspiracy theorist. It can not be denied. It is not me who is looking stupid here.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Umm... you're talking about "professional standards of journalism" in reference to the bourgeois press?

Let's not forget that everything has a class character / content.

Anyway, you can read what Fidel wrote yourself here: http://granma.cu/ingles/2007/julio/lun16/reflexion.html

Everything I said in my above post applies.

[peaccenicked]

to quote Castro from your reference to granma.
"They can prevent any attack on their people, unless there is some imperial need to deliver a bang so that they can carry on with and justify the brutal war "


That says Let it happen to me; I sugest you are either in shock or delibrately lying to me.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

I guess you're not reading my posts...


Having suspicions that the U.S. government was either involved in, or didn't actively work to prevent those attacks does not make one a "right wing conspiracy nut" (though surely, many of those types do believe such).

There is precedence for all sorts of false flag operations, purposely letting one's guard down, etc., to help win over the population to military endeavours.

In other words, Fidel can suspect foul play without being a rightist..

Though even associating Fidel with rightism is such a joke it probably doesn't really deserve a response.

[peaccenicked]

Ok, I think I get you, you are right about Castro but you are wrong about conspiracy theories. If anybody suspects foul play, they get attacked as a right wing conspiracy nut. So is it ok for Castro to suspect foul play and not for me, a life long communist who merely wants an independent inquiry because the accusations are indeed trully baffling, take this one. www.voxfux.com (http://www.voxfux.com)

[TC]

Err, the "made it happen" notion implies a conspiracy, the "let it happen" only implies negligence. Its a documented fact that the US was warned by multiple foreign intelligence about 9/11 type plots and that the Bush administration reduced the efforts of the Clinton administration against Osama Bin Laden's organization. It doesn't take a conspiracy to de-prioritize an area of 'national security' that doesn't serve a particular administration.

[peaccenicked]

hmm! tragic clown. The thing is Castro implies that they deliberately let it happen.

Perhaps you should read it again.


They can prevent any attack on their people, unless there is some imperial need to deliver a bang so that they can carry on with and justify the brutal war "

[Luís Henrique]

Conspiracies do exist. Some fail, some attain their ends. That's no secret.

Conspiracies do not run the world. The knowledge and power of conspirators are limited, and they are not all of them on the same side*. Stupidity, negligence, corruption, lazyness, randomness, also exist, and play important roles in human history. There is no use in mistifying our enemies into invincible fiends.

Originally posted by attributed to Castro
They can prevent any attack on their people, unless there is some imperial need to deliver a bang so that they can carry on with and justify the brutal war

If Castro said that, then Castro is purely, plainly and simply wrong. "They" certainly cannot prevent all attacks on "their people"; there is no way to prevent everything. The machine is not - thankfully! - perfect, it is full of flaws - technical flaws, human flaws, ideological flaws.

If Castro, besides saying that, is also now believing in it earnestly, systematically - then yes, he is spreading bourgeois ideology. If he came to make beliefs of that nature the core of his interpretation of events, then yes, he did become a "conspiracy nut". Probable? I don't think so; I think he, at worst, made a punctual mistake. Possible? Yes. He's of old age now, this is known to affect the way people's brains work.

* for instance, everybody knows the CIA has repeatedly tried to kill Castro. This is no "conspiracy theory". Also everybody knows that the CIA has repeatedly failed in this regard. Conspirations fail, even backfire. A conspiracy theorist will try to prove you that the CIA failed in murdering Castro because they wanted to fail (perhaps to prove that they don't rule the world?). This we know is false. They failed because they were outsmarted by the Cuban intelligence, or because their plans were ill-thought, or because the people who should execute the plans made mistakes, etc.

Luís Henrique

[peaccenicked]

Thank you Luis Henrique for your wisdom as it is as such.
Some flaws, who said conspiracies rule the world. Is their a quote I have missed or something. Now there is a little matter of Imperialism. Does Imperialism have leading imperialists? Are there not people at the top deciding the price of tea in Brazil for instance? Are they conspirators or not?

It is just plain silly to talk of conspiracies in general. Conspiracies are specific.
If Castro is just plain wrong, then we know that he is for it is not impossible for
America to be attacked unawares. As it is not impossible for Goliath to be knocked out by David.


But is it wrong to smell a rat? Is it wrong to wonder if there is a conspiracy to wonder how deep it might go. Did not that govern the Watergate investigation. All I have said is Castro smells a rat, I smell a rat, I say it should be investigated again so does Chavez. It is feeble to say he wants that only because he hates America. There is plenty of new material coming out.

The question about the Illuminati is obscure. It is pretty faceless and speculative, but new eye witnesses and new scholarship has shown the original 9/11 commission to be a sham. 'Press for Truth' shows ample proof that it was a sham. It is not a necessary condition of wanting a new investigation to believe that a few, a very small group of people make the most important decisions in the lives of ordinary people.

[Colonello Buendia]

Originally posted by Luís [email protected] 29, 2007 03:35 pm



* for instance, everybody knows the CIA has repeatedly tried to kill Castro. This is no "conspiracy theory". Also everybody knows that the CIA has repeatedly failed in this regard. Conspirations fail, even backfire. A conspiracy theorist will try to prove you that the CIA failed in murdering Castro because they wanted to fail (perhaps to prove that they don't rule the world?). This we know is false. They failed because they were outsmarted by the Cuban intelligence, or because their plans were ill-thought, or because the people who should execute the plans made mistakes, etc.

Luís Henrique

it failed because there was a right wing american bastard at the helm of the CIA operation, oh and the agents were probably spastics

[Red Rebel]

Way to miss the whole point of the reflection AP.

Read what Fidel actually said in Bush, Healthcare and Education (http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/discursos/2007/ing/f140707i.html).

[NorthStarRepublicML]

on a broader topic ... would you all consider the following events in history to be similar in any way to the events of 9-11:

1) Nero Burns Rome 64
2) The Gunpowder Plot 1605
3) Sinking of the Maine in Havana harbor 1898
4) the Reichstag Fire 1933
5) Attack on Pearl Harbor 1941
6) Operation Northwoods 1962
7) the Gulf of Tonkin incident 1964

how are these events similar and how are they different?

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 04:25 pm
Some flaws, who said conspiracies rule the world. Is their a quote I have missed or something. Now there is a little matter of Imperialism. Does Imperialism have leading imperialists?
Of course. They are just that, leaders, though. Not owners or something.


Are there not people at the top deciding the price of tea in Brazil for instance? Are they conspirators or not?

Of absolutely course, no!

The price of tea is given by how supply and demand adequate it around its value, which is just labour embodied in it. There is absolutely no need of "people at the top" deciding its price in a secret room, while laughing "mbwahmwahwahah".


But is it wrong to smell a rat? Is it wrong to wonder if there is a conspiracy to wonder how deep it might go.

If you have any elements to indicate there was a conspiracy, then no. The problem starts when the absence of such evidence is taken as proof that there is a conspiracy:

- The government did 9/11 itself.
- Well, do you have some evidence of that?
- No, there is no evidence, which proves that the government, besides doing 9/11, also suppressed all evidence of doing it.


The question about the Illuminati is obscure. It is pretty faceless and speculative, but new eye witnesses and new scholarship has shown the original 9/11 commission to be a sham.

1. I have seen no evidence that it was a sham.
2. Even if it was a sham, this is no evidence of governmental participation in 9/11. The "sham" could be intended to hide blatant incompetence or stupidity.


'Press for Truth' shows ample proof that it was a sham. It is not a necessary condition of wanting a new investigation to believe that a few, a very small group of people make the most important decisions in the lives of ordinary people.

It would do all of us a lot more good if, instead of a new investigation on 9/11, we had a complete investigation on the whole of Washington's Middle Eastern policies. This is the correct reasoning: the US meddling with Middle Eastern affairs spreads anger and discontent among Middle Eastern people, to the point that some of them are willing to blow themselves into pieces to take revenge. This makes American people potential targets for terrorist acts.

Luís Henrique

[peaccenicked]

It is strange that you see no evidence. Is it not true that you would accept no evidence? That seems to be the prejudice here.
There is evidence and counter evidence all over the net. To say different is to be both dishonest and foolish. An enquiry would be useful.


An enquiry into US war crimes would be very useful indeed.

But to blame Arabs for 9/11 is still very iffy to any open mind that has looked both sides of the ball game. There is no real evidence that is not open to refutable analysis.
The document Blair produced had no evidence in it whatsoever.

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 06:37 pm
on a broader topic ... would you all consider the following events in history to be similar in any way to the events of 9-11:

1) Nero Burns Rome 64
Well, there seems to be no conclusive proof that Nero actually burnt Rome. This is a version spread by historians belonging to the Senatorial Class, which was at odds with Nero and Nero's policies. It is possible that Nero took the fire as a pretext to unleash a brutal anti-Christian persecution.


2) The Gunpowder Plot 1605

As far as I know, it was an earnest attempt to explode the houses of Parliament, in order to kill James the First. It seems it was used as a pretext for persecution against Catholics and other oppositionists, but I have never seen the plot's authenticity, in itself, questioned.


3) Sinking of the Maine in Havana harbor 1898

Apparently an accident, use by some (but not by the US administration itself) to stir anti-Spanish feelings in the United States.

4) the Reichstag Fire 1933

A forgery: a mentally ill person setting a governmental building (which the government in fact cared not about) afire. The (Nazi) government was in the know of what happened, and deliberately used the incident to justify a crackdown on all opposition.

5) Attack on Pearl Harbor 1941

An open act of war of a great power against other.

6) Operation Northwoods 1962

A proposed, and never implemented, series of false-flag operations aimed at provoking popular ire against Cuba. Most of them included actions that would result in no deaths, fake deaths, or deaths of foreigners (Haitian and Dominican, besides of Cuban refugees).

7) the Gulf of Tonkin incident 1964

Probably an undercover act of war by the United States against Vietnam, busted, resulting in a North Vietnamese counter-attack. Minor damage, no casualties, and a huge hubbub about those evil North Vietnamese daring attack an American military vessel.


how are these events similar and how are they different?

There seem to be more differences than similarities between them, even if most of them (Pearl Harbour being the exception) imply the use of misinformation to justify acts of aggression.

How about the USS Liberty incident?

Luís Henrique

[peaccenicked]

A small appendix http://www.familyfarmdefenders.org/pmwiki....cantileExchange (http://www.familyfarmdefenders.org/pmwiki.php/FairTrade/DemandAnInvestigationOfPriceFixingAtTheChicagoMerc antileExchange)


BTW Would you tell the wives or rather widows of the victims of 9/11 who want an new enquiry that
you see no reason why they should have one?

[Luís Henrique]

How Can We Bring Fair Trade to the Global Market?

We can't. Trade in the Global Market is inherently unfair.

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 09:26 pm
BTW Would you tell the wives or rather widows of the victims of 9/11 who want an new enquiry that
you see no reason why they should have one?
No. I would tell them that they should ask more, not less. That they should ask what kind of things their government is doing abroad that makes people feel the need to kill Americans?

Luís Henrique

[peaccenicked]

That was not an answer at all, and plus you know it. you merely quoted one question which you answered correctly. It was not that clever. Perhaps you should spend more time studying the subject matter before you commit yourself to talking nonsense.

[peaccenicked]

It seems we both posted at the same time.

The Idea that you would ask them to ask more questions is utterly inhuman. These woman testified at the 9/11 commision, shared their private grief with TV journalists to get their questions aired and you assume that they must accept the official story that arabs did it. How dare you? I dont think you would be so disrespectful in their company.

[Tatarin]

A forgery: a mentally ill person setting a governmental building (which the government in fact cared not about) afire. The (Nazi) government was in the know of what happened, and deliberately used the incident to justify a crackdown on all opposition.

Uhm, didn't the nazis set fire to the Reichtag and blamed it on a mentally ill person?

[peaccenicked]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire

This is as good a place to start as any.

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 09:51 pm
The Idea that you would ask them to ask more questions is utterly inhuman.
Not more inhumane than the idea that they should ask the wrong questions.


These woman testified at the 9/11 commision, shared their private grief with TV journalists to get their questions aired and you assume that they must accept the official story that arabs did it.

They may accept it or not, it's not up to me to decide. If they ask me, if you ask me, I am going to say what I believe to be the truth. Some arabs, working for a extremist fundamentalist organisation, did it. Truth is sometimes cruel, it does not bend to people's grief.


How dare you?

Why not?


I dont think you would be so disrespectful in their company.

There is no respect in misleading them to believe in fantasies. Please spare us the demagoguery.

The US government is responsible for the death of their loved ones. Not because it killed them, and only marginally because it was not able to detect the network that did. But because it has, through its foreign policies, enraged people to the point they would do that.

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 10:24 pm
Uhm, didn't the nazis set fire to the Reichtag and blamed it on a mentally ill person?
I don't reckon so. Marinus van der Lubbe was a known pyromaniac; this was one of the symptoms of his mental disease.

Luís Henrique

[peaccenicked]

Well, I do believe that you are certain of things.

this

But because it has, through its foreign policies, enraged people to the point they would do that.

That informs everything else that smacks of arrogance that you say.


So lets go here. You are certain that Arabs did it! You are certain of the official story.

Well lets stop here. There is no point in going anywhere with this because nothing will change your position.

What fantasy do you think these women, known as the Jersey Girls have. Why do you assume a fantasy? What gives you the right to assume that another person is fantasising who merely questions inconsistencies in the official story.
This just inhuman bulldozing through of the official story.
Demagoguery? From me? That is the worst case of projection of ones own faults I have ever came accross.

It is really shame that a leftist would even dare try to crush the questions of the relatives of the victims of a great human tragedy.
Do you think I would not expose you in this manner?

What do you know about their questions? It seems to me absolutely nothing!

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 11:17 pm
So lets go here. You are certain that Arabs did it! You are certain of the official story.
So who else did it?


It is really shame that a leftist would even dare try to crush the questions of the relatives of the victims of a great human tragedy.

Don't be ridiculous. I am in no position to "crush" anything. If they want to go ahead with those questions, they will. I reckon it will lead them nowhere, but they are, in what I am concerned, absolutely free to question whatever they want. Exactly as I am absolutely free to say that this line of questioning is bound to give them no answers - or at least, no different answers than the ones they have already been given.

And whether they are right, or I am, has nothing to do with being respectful or disrespectful.

Luís Henrique

[peaccenicked]

Who else did it? Perhaps you might recognise this pattern of thinking.
http://www.kimsoft.com/2001/usgame.htm


This is another possibility.

http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=J...se%20Red%20Army (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Japanese%20Red%20Army)


There is suspicions that might arise from this.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=fTdAkhd6Dcw
that it might possibly be an inside job.
This is from a major British Tabloid
http://www.financialoutrage.org.uk/911_mainstream_media.htm

There are questions unanswered for the Jersey girls who should not be led into 'fantasies'.
http://www.muckrakerreport.com/id358.html

As the Jersey Girls say this question is not going away.

There is also perhaps a hundred different alternative versions of events, but an international commission would perhaps be able to sort out the wheat from the chaff after preliminary hearings.

Leftists who bury their heads in the sand for the fear of conspiracy theorist labelling are dropping like flies.

And back to another point about Castro, does he seem to be losing his marbles,
http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2007/julio/vier27/raul26.html

He's of old age now, this is known to affect the way people's brains work.
I really don't think so.


Is Cindy Sheehan losing her marbles too?
How can she give out a warning about a new 9/11, in order to attack Iran, if she did not believe that somehow the first one was part of the US game plan.
http://www.endofempire.org/news_eoe.php?page=739

[Karl Marx's Camel]

I was expecting him to comment on this sooner or later and I agree with Fidel here.

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 10:47 am
Who else did it? Perhaps you might recognise this pattern of thinking.
http://www.kimsoft.com/2001/usgame.htm

Do these great strategic benefits deserve destroying WTC towers?

Yes, I recognise this pattern of thinking. It's the paranoid pattern of thinking.


This is another possibility.

http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=J...se%20Red%20Army (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Japanese%20Red%20Army)


Oh, yes, the attacks would fit the JRA's modus operandi, and, in fact, in the immediate aftermath I thought they could possibly be involved. But as far as I know, this would be the first time ever that the JRA would decline credit for a successful attack. So it seems certain that they were not the perps.


There is suspicions that might arise from this.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=fTdAkhd6Dcw
that it might possibly be an inside job.

This has to do with an order to shoot one of the hijacked airplanes down. Now exactly does this has anything to do with an inside job?


This is from a major British Tabloid
http://www.financialoutrage.org.uk/911_mainstream_media.htm

Oh, yes. That kind of press...


There are questions unanswered for the Jersey girls who should not be led into 'fantasies'.
http://www.muckrakerreport.com/id358.html


For instance, as the widows point out, exactly what made WTC 7 collapse when it was never hit by a plane is still just as much of an enigma today as it was prior to the 9/11 Commission

And this would prove that WTC 7 was imploded? I would dare say that the impact and the heath of the main tower explosions could possibly be related to WTC 7's collapse. What do engineers have to say concerning it? Or are all American engineers part of the conspiracy?


, and they also wonder why NORAD’s protocols weren’t followed during the attacks.

In fact, good question. Because the government wanted the towers down, or because the authorities were completely unprepared for an attack of that nature?


Moreover, they find it strange that 9/11 isn’t listed on Osama bin Laden’s FBI most wanted poster, when the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Africa are.

Indeed. If I was conspiring to destroy the towers in order to justify a war of aggression, I would have bin Ladin in that page immediately. What's it, the FBI is not part of the conspiracy, or the conspirators are so incompetent they forgot this little detail?


Is Cindy Sheehan losing her marbles too?
How can she give out a warning about a new 9/11, in order to attack Iran, if she did not believe that somehow the first one was part of the US game plan.

If she believes that, I just think she is wrong. Is there a problem with thinking Cindy Sheehan might be wrong? Especially when she seems to be backing Ron Paul's candidacy?

Luís Henrique

[NorthStarRepublicML]

(Pearl Harbour being the exception)


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7736750907069936394

Advance knowledge debate on Pearl harbor Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_...nowledge_debate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_debate)


I have never seen the plot's authenticity, in itself, questioned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_plo...piracy_theories (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_plot#Conspiracy_theories)


use by some (but not by the US administration itself) to stir anti-Spanish feelings in the United States.

the Spanish-American war is frequently citied as the first imperialist war the US fought as a conquering nation, thus the war provided a pretext to seize new markets for the US and propelled it to the status of Empire. "ten thousand miles from tip to tip" Puerto Rico to the Philippines.



Probably an undercover act of war by the United States against Vietnam, busted, resulting in a North Vietnamese counter-attack. Minor damage, no casualties, and a huge hubbub about those evil North Vietnamese daring attack an American military vessel.

The Gulf of Tonkin Incident defined the beginning of large-scale involvement of U.S. armed forces in Vietnam. At its best interpretation, an overreaction of eager naval forces, or at its worst, a crafted pretext for making overt the American covert involvement in Vietnam.

basically it is not outside of the realm of possibility that 9-11 was either a false flag operation by covert US forces, an incident in which the US had advanced knowledge, or a failure of US intelligence that led to a favorable situation .... either way events such as this have happened in the past ... the events themselves are not particularly important only how rulers throughout history have taken advantage of these incidents ...

however given the history of certain events, pearl harbor i actually find the most convincing: (http://www.americanfreepress.net/12_24_02/America_Pearl_Harbored/america_pearl_harbored.html)

i would not put anything past the government, including false flag actions or advance knoweldge of pending attacks .... it is foolish in itself to dismiss conspiracies as crackpot theories as conspiracies are sometimes proven to be accurate (such as the Business Plot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot ) even though they seem to be unbelievable or too far outside of the realm of possibilities ....

but even if they are proved to be true at any point, it is of minimal importance (perhaps useful to anti-government propaganda) as we are already aware that state capitalist authorities are dishonest and extremely powerful ....

Edit: Business Plot video

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=62...earch&plindex=0 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=628728631767818729&q=the+business+plot&total=207&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0)

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Luís Henrique+July 29, 2007 11:07 pm--> (Luís Henrique @ July 29, 2007 11:07 pm)
[email protected] 29, 2007 10:24 pm
Uhm, didn't the nazis set fire to the Reichtag and blamed it on a mentally ill person?
I don't reckon so. Marinus van der Lubbe was a known pyromaniac; this was one of the symptoms of his mental disease.

Luís Henrique [/b]
That's indeed correct, comrade. He was an intinerant worker influenced by anarchism, which led him to set fire to the Reichstag according to reputable historians.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Luís [email protected] 30, 2007 07:22 pm

, and they also wonder why NORAD’s protocols weren’t followed during the attacks.

In fact, good question. Because the government wanted the towers down, or because the authorities were completely unprepared for an attack of that nature?

According to an emergency worker I talked to, there was no plan in place for this kind of attack. It was one of the few scenarios they hadn't worked out a plan of action for, according to this source...

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by PRC-UTE+July 30, 2007 08:36 pm--> (PRC-UTE @ July 30, 2007 08:36 pm)
Luís [email protected] 30, 2007 07:22 pm

, and they also wonder why NORAD’s protocols weren’t followed during the attacks.

In fact, good question. Because the government wanted the towers down, or because the authorities were completely unprepared for an attack of that nature?

According to an emergency worker I talked to, there was no plan in place for this kind of attack. It was one of the few scenarios they hadn't worked out a plan of action for, according to this source... [/b]
In fact, this may have some bearing on the sprout of conspiracy theories about 9/11. How could those backward, fanatical, overreligious Arabs have devised a plan that enlightened, rational, secular, white Americans were not able to imagine?

Definitely, some Aryan mind had to be behind such plot!

Luís Henrique

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Luís Henrique+July 30, 2007 08:42 pm--> (Luís Henrique @ July 30, 2007 08:42 pm)
Originally posted by PRC-[email protected] 30, 2007 08:36 pm

Luís [email protected] 30, 2007 07:22 pm

, and they also wonder why NORAD’s protocols weren’t followed during the attacks.

In fact, good question. Because the government wanted the towers down, or because the authorities were completely unprepared for an attack of that nature?

According to an emergency worker I talked to, there was no plan in place for this kind of attack. It was one of the few scenarios they hadn't worked out a plan of action for, according to this source...
In fact, this may have some bearing on the sprout of conspiracy theories about 9/11. How could those backward, fanatical, overreligious Arabs have devised a plan that enlightened, rational, secular, white Americans were not able to imagine?

Definitely, some Aryan mind had to be behind such plot!

Luís Henrique [/b]
hahaha, until now I thought I was the only one that picked up on that!

the same mentality is at work when the rightists spin conpiracies about Vietnam, refusing to credit the Vietnamese with a victory: there's no way those little yellow bastards could defeat us! we were betrayed!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Andy Bowden]

I don't think the US would have either fired a cruise missile at the Pentagon or blown up the Twin Towers, for one, all it takes is some random with a video camera in Washington to tape it, stick it on you tube and game over.

Regarding bombs in the buildings, how easy is that going to be to cover up? Someone would crack eventually.

What did happen though was a series of terror simulations across the country, involving simulated terror attacks, a dummy Russian air attack, and, a plane crash into a building, all of which occurred on or around September 11th 2001.

Also, the black boxes were not found in the wreckage...but passports were.

So while I dont think they let it happen, I think they had some foreknowledge which wasn't acted upon.

[peaccenicked]

What is there to know? When comes to MO's for instance I can only think of one example close.
Operation Northwood,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

I daresay, it is hard to believe but the whole aeroplane into the WTC was put before the US intelligence services before 9/11.

It does not matter a fig about who had the capability, because it can be stretched to the limits that any group with enough man power and expertise could have done it. If it was done the way the official story says it was done and thats still up for question.

Why are the left defending the official story from all attacks.

The main thing they defend which is totally out of order is the 9/11 commission.

Fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11:_Press_for_Truth
I quote:
Lorie Van Auken, one of the Jersey Girls, estimates that only 30% of their questions had been touched upon in the 9/11 Commission Report. The film mentions the following omissions from the Report:

The total collapse of Building 7 was not mentioned.
The World Trade Center steel, which may have proved beyond doubt how the total collapses occurred, was destroyed before it could be forensically examined. [3]
There was no mention of the money that was wired to lead hijacker Mohammad Atta on September 10th, allegedly by order of the Head of the Pakistani ISI (which is funded in part by the CIA). The Report stated that the issue of who funded the attacks is "of little practical significance." [4]


I believe very strongly that this proves that the 9/11 commission was inadequate to its purpose.

What would cause paranoia if the usual dirty mud throwing is taken seriously is that leftists, and I think yellow-bellied leftists afraid of being labelled conspiracy theorists, who stick to the official story like glue, who say the government lied about WMD, say they told the whole truth about 9/11 because they know for certain without any real evidence that Arabs did it, or perhaps Arabs not funded by the CIA.

This fundamentally racist assumption of Arab guilt brings disgrace to the left and discredits them to the Arab world and almost everyone outside the Anglo-American
media lie machine.
Including Brazil
"Most countries in South America are more or less under American influence. Chile because of economic treatises. Colombia and Peru because of the War on Drugs. Venezuela until recently because of oil. After the election of Hugo Chávez and the implementation of his nationalist - and therefore anti-american - policies, the US government supported a flawed coup d'êtat. Paraguay is controlled through bribery. And so on. Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay are the only important lands relatively independent of US policy. We do feel that Bush wants to use the War on Terror excuse to change that.

The result is brazilian public opinion turned from compassion to suspicion. The american strategy appears to be quite arrogant, always "demanding" instead of "asking". Brazilian unwillingness to step out and let the CIA run the investigations about possible terrorist links in the Triple Frontier is seen by american officials as non-collaboration, when we simply don't want foreign agents snooping around. Osama is not here. If Paraguay and Colombia want to be "Banana Republics", that's their business and we won't criticize decisions of sovereign nations. But Brazil and Argentina already danced to the US governments tunes in the 60s and 70s and now would like to play their own tunes. "
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2006/9/11/211750/803

No wonder the western left is not treated seriously by anyone other than itself,

if it is too scared to ask the hard questions?

[peaccenicked]

small item I forgot, Ron Pauls record against the war in Iraq.

http://antiwar.com/paul/