The Official Iraq is supposed to be a mess thread

[FunkMasterFlame]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Wow, that is quite the endorsement from someone who was/is in the intelligence community. I wonder what jolinar will think of this endorsement? I'll be curious to see what his opinion is, if he sacks up to comment on it. I must say, I may have to give that book a read. I've been hesitant to pick it up strickly on Tarpley's less than glowing character, and his less than credible video presentations.

I'm in the process of reading Tarpley's "9/11 - Synthetic Terrororism Made in USA" and it makes quite an impact. Tarpley not only goes further than most conspiricy theorists by naming specific names assosicated with covert US involvement in 9/11, but he also researches the sordid history of government sponsered terror, or as he deems it, "synthetic terrorism".

I uploaded the pdf version to filefront, and I suggest everybody interested give it a read, even those of you married to the official version of 9/11. It may just open your eyes.

9/11 - Synthetic Terrorism Made in USA by Webster Griffen Tarpley

[White Doors]

Link doesn't work.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Link doesn't work.

works fine.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by FunkMasterFlame

9/11 - Synthetic Terrorism Made in USA by Webster Griffen Tarpley

Cool. Thanks for the e-text! Interesting first chapter.

[FunkMasterFlame]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Link doesn't work.

I don't suppose you actually tried clicking on the link did you?

Because it works fine.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Wow, that is quite the endorsement from someone who was/is in the intelligence community. I wonder what jolinar will think of this endorsement? I'll be curious to see what his opinion is, if he sacks up to comment on it. I must say, I may have to give that book a read. I've been hesitant to pick it up strickly on Tarpley's less than glowing character, and his less than credible video presentations.

Well...the guy just reviewed the book. Does that mean he just read it and decided if he agreed with it or not? Or did he actual research all the data the author used to make his book. I am assuming a lot of what is in the book, is speculation. Exactly what conspiracies are made of. Is this the case?

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Well...the guy just reviewed the book. Does that mean he just read it and decided if he agreed with it or not? Or did he actual research all the data the author used to make his book. I am assuming a lot of what is in the book, is speculation. Exactly what conspiracies are made of. Is this the case?

Bin Laden orchestrating the destruction of the WTC would be a conspiracy... is that speculation?. Just because something is a conspiracy doesn't make it false.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Bin Laden orchestrating the destruction of the WTC would be a conspiracy... is that speculation?. Just because something is a conspiracy doesn't make it false.

Yes it would be speculation. I didn't say that any conspiracy is false....did I? Nope.

[Agamemnon]

Ok, fair enough, I guess I assumed you believed that Bin Laden was behind 9/11, and not just mere speculation.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Ok, fair enough, I guess I assumed you believed that Bin Laden was behind 9/11, and not just mere speculation.

Well....I do believe that BL was behind the attacks. Is it speculation? Ya...short of him coming out and saying he did it we will never really know. Even if we find documents showing he signed off on it....well anyone can argue that it wasn't him or it was planted.

Just as others on this site believe in something else, namely, that the USA was behind the attacks. I for one do not get pulled into conspiracy theories. I have my beliefs and others have theirs.

I follow the theory of Ockham's razor in most cases. Conspiracies depend on to much speculation and unkown's or assumptions as far as I am concerned. Are some conspiracy theories correct...ya...but most aren't.

I don't believe that the USA government was involved and I probably never will....unless....REAL TANGIBLE evidence is available.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Well...the guy just reviewed the book. Does that mean he just read it and decided if he agreed with it or not? Or did he actual research all the data the author used to make his book. I am assuming a lot of what is in the book, is speculation. Exactly what conspiracies are made of. Is this the case?

You might do your self a favor and read the review. It was pretty supportive and the guy stated what his background was (intelligence community) and that he thought it was well researched and supported. Ironically, this guy isn't the only member of the intelligence community that thinks its an inside job and that there is enough evidence hanging out there to support an independent study. But hey, you would know better on the feeling there, wouldn't you?

I follow the theory of Ockham's razor in most cases...

And yet you believe the "official" story? Wow, what a contradiction. I seriously doubt you have read the official story and only believe what has been passed into the echo chamber as "fact". There are so many holes in the official story that Ockham's Razor would slice it to ribbons.

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I don't believe that the USA government was involved and I probably never will....unless....REAL TANGIBLE evidence is available.

Yet you believe that bin Laden and al Qaeda were involved and there is NO REAL TANGIBLE evidence available to link them to the events other than the intelligence turned over by other nations. Interesting double standard.

[Flash Walken]

'Conspiracy Theories' aside, I think you'd have to be pretty daft to think the american military is going to build 14 permanent bases just so that they can abandon them in a year or two when they are completed.

It should've been painfully obvious from the very start that the war in Iraq was less about wmd's, a dictator, freedom, oil, whatever, than about a military show of force in the middle east and a re-affirmation of America's ability to project force within a small time period anywhere on the planet.

There is tangible evidence here, whether you believe the war was just or not, that western intelligence agencies are stirring up the hornets nest in Iraq, actively sabotaging the work of the average american and british soldier on the ground, and no doubt resulting in deaths.

However you classify yourself, whatever you choose to believe, that's disgusting and is reason enough not to believe a single thing that comes from the mouths of those who campaigned for the war, and their allies.

Also, I don't understand why posters here still continue to feed the trolls, and for that matter, why nothing has been done to curb their activity.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

You might do your self a favor and read the review. It was pretty supportive and the guy stated what his background was (intelligence community) and that he thought it was well researched and supported. Ironically, this guy isn't the only member of the intelligence community that thinks its an inside job and that there is enough evidence hanging out there to support an independent study. But hey, you would know better on the feeling there, wouldn't you?



And yet you believe the "official" story? Wow, what a contradiction. I seriously doubt you have read the official story and only believe what has been passed into the echo chamber as "fact". There are so many holes in the official story that Ockham's Razor would slice it to ribbons.



Yet you believe that bin Laden and al Qaeda were involved and there is NO REAL TANGIBLE evidence available to link them to the events other than the intelligence turned over by other nations. Interesting double standard.

Lanny there is no point in arguing with you. We will never see eye to eye. It is more likely that a group of terrorists (who have attacked the USA and its interests in the past) where the masterminds behind 9/11....rather than....a highly organized conspiracy involving presidents, vice presidents, the CIA..FBI..foreign governments and the like. The simplest answer is usually the right answer.

Your definition of proof is much different than mine.

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by FunkMasterFlame

I don't suppose you actually tried clicking on the link did you?

Because it works fine.

yes, which is how I figured out it didn't work.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Lanny there is no point in arguing with you. We will never see eye to eye. It is more likely that a group of terrorists (who have attacked the USA and its interests in the past) where the masterminds behind 9/11....rather than....a highly organized conspiracy involving presidents, vice presidents, the CIA..FBI..foreign governments and the like. The simplest answer is usually the right answer.

Your definition of proof is much different than mine.

you know, it's really really funny.

so many single terrorist actions seem to be gigantic FBI blunders, it seems to come out later a lot of times that the FBI was watching them, infiltrating them, leading them...

just like the 1993 WTC bombing.

it was broken in the New York Times, was a small scandal, then it went away again.

here's an archive from New York Times:

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b3c830e34de.htm


Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast By RALPH BLUMENTHAL The New York TimesSection A; Page 1; Column 4; Metropolitan Desk October 28, 1993, Thursday, Late Edition

Supervisor 'Messed It Up'
After the bombing, he resumed his undercover work. In an undated transcript of a conversation from that period, Mr. Salem recounts a talk he had had earlier with an agent about an unnamed F.B.I. supervisor who, he said, "came and messed it up." "He requested to meet me in the hotel," Mr. Salem says of the supervisor. "He requested to make me to testify and if he didn't push for that, we'll be going building the bomb with a phony powder and grabbing the people who was involved in it. But since you, we didn't do that."

...
The transcripts, which are stamped "draft" and compiled from 70 tapes recorded secretly during the last two years by Mr. Salem, were turned over to defense lawyers in the second bombing case by the Government on Tuesday under a judge's order barring lawyers from disseminating them. A large portion of the material was made available to The New York Times.
...
The transcripts do not make clear the extent to which Federal authorities knew that there was a plan to bomb the World Trade Center, merely that they knew that a bombing of some sort was being discussed. But Mr. Salem's evident anguish at not being able to thwart the trade center blast is a recurrent theme in the transcripts. In one of the first numbered tapes, Mr. Salem is quoted as telling agent Floyd: "Since the bomb went off I feel terrible. I feel bad. I feel here is people who don't listen."

i'm not here to exonerate salem, looks like he was trying to make a few bucks on the side here...



Tapes in Bombing Plot Show Informer and F.B.I. at Odds By RALPH BLUMENTHAL The New York Times Section A; Page 1; Column 4; Metropolitan DeskOctober 27, 1993, Wednesday, Late Edition
...

The tapes offer a rare glimpse into the sensitive relationship between the confidential informer and the law-enforcement officals with whom he worked. They also reveal for the first time how Federal and police agents instructed him to "pump up" a suspect for information and negotiate a $1 million fee from the Government for his services.

so... the informant wanted to use phony powder (as he started the bomb making and the suspects continued it) and the FBI didn't agree.

he's lucky he recorded so much to use against his handlers!

what's most ridiculous is that when bombings like this happen in the phillipines, or indonesia, or other areas of the world that have had long recent histories of government-sponsored terror, people suspect the government, or elements of it, right away, because they have so often been responsible in the past.

only here in the 'free world' can it come out in papers weeks / months / years later that elements of our governments are running these operations, and we just don't care, or remember the last time.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Wow, that is quite the endorsement from someone who was/is in the intelligence community. I wonder what jolinar will think of this endorsement? I'll be curious to see what his opinion is, if he sacks up to comment on it. I must say, I may have to give that book a read. I've been hesitant to pick it up strickly on Tarpley's less than glowing character, and his less than credible video presentations.

oct 26 on the alex jones show, hours 2 and 3, robert steele interview, also tarpley joins in in hour 3.

http://www.realradioarchives.com/sounds/1026062.mp3

http://www.realradioarchives.com/sounds/1026063.mp3

he's a real interesting guy, there's a lot in this interview on google and the future of the internet.

wow, this interview covers so much ground, it's kinda tough to recommend it to people without a 9/11 primer but it's too good to pass up on.