The Real 9/11 Conspiracy, The Invention of Islamic Terrorism

Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by Copernicus

 

Your evidence does not help your argument about what Cheney's supposedly stand down order to help the hijackers succeed. YOU have yet to provide any evidence that Cheney order a stand down. What I have seen on these videos YOU provided is that the orders still stand. What does Mineta mean by orders still stand? WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

Even the quotation in the context says the "orders still stand?"

Norman Mineta made it clear to reporters-- who verified his quotes in written text alongside him-- that Mineta was indeed talking about a stand down order not to shoot down hijacked aircraft headed for the Pentagon.

After no shoot down took place, it became clear that Cheney intended to keep NORAD fighter jets from responding-- evidence that Cheney is guilty of treason, not negligence for allowing the Pentagon to be hit.

You can read that and the rest here.

Originally posted by Copernicus

Norman Mineta made it clear to reporters-- who verified his quotes in written text alongside him-- that Mineta was indeed talking about a stand down order not to shoot down hijacked aircraft headed for the Pentagon.

After no shoot down took place, it became clear that Cheney intended to keep NORAD fighter jets from responding-- evidence that Cheney is guilty of treason, not negligence for allowing the Pentagon to be hit.

You can read that and the rest here.

here's some more onfo on possible motives. I don't think it can be underestimated how much the administrations prior to Bush share in the accountability for creating so much resentment and animosity in the region to US policy.

external link wiki

Motive

The September 11 attacks were consistent with the overall mission statement of al-Qaeda, as set out in a 1998 fatwa issued by Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Abu-Yasir Rifa'i Ahmad Taha, Shaykh Mir Hamzah, and Fazlur Rahman.[100] In the fatwa, Bin Laden directed his followers "to kill Americans anywhere".[101] He also outlined his objections to American foreign policy towards Israel, as well as U.S. aggression against the Iraqi people, the ensuing sanctions against Iraq, as well as the continued presence of American troops in Saudi Arabia after the Persian Gulf War. The fatwa also specifically condemns the U.S. for "plundering" the resources of the region, oppressing the people by supporting abusive regimes in the region, and dictating policy to legitimate leaders. It also opposes the presence of U.S. military bases and installations in the region, especially on Muslim holy land, which are used to "threaten" Muslim countries, while fomenting disunity and strife. By a similar token, it decries the continued refusal to address the "occupation of Palestine".[102] The fatwa uses Islamic texts to exhort violent action against American military and citizenry until the alleged grievances are reversed, stating "ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries."

Statements of al-Qaeda recorded after 9/11 add weight to the U.S account of who was responsible for the attacks. In a 2004 video, apparently acknowledging responsibility for the attacks, bin Laden states that he was motivated by the 1982 Lebanon War, for which he held the U.S. partially responsible. In the video, bin Laden also claims that he wants to "restore freedom to our nation," to "punish the aggressor in kind," and to inflict economic damage on America. He declared that a continuing objective of his holy war was to "bleed America to the point of bankruptcy."[103] Bin Laden said, "We swore that America would not live in security until we live it truly in Palestine. This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America will not get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula, and until it stops its support of Israel."

snip

Whats so chilling about all of this is how long they are willing to wait to settle a score. After the '93 attempt to knock down the towers, they were able to wait 8 years to try to do it again. It makes you wonder if this will ever end

Thanks to the OP for such an intelligent and eloquent thread.
I have my own opinions of 9/11 and what you've illustrated shows(to me),but does not prove, that the USG is at least capable of a self inflicted wound.
I've come across these stories in the past and seeing them strung together is an eye opener.
Regardless of which war or conflict we talk about the common factor is this:the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.That need is greed and power and one day we'll all be back in a feudal system just like the middle ages.
That's my opinion of course.
Finally, a thread that doesn't make my eye twitch.Star and a flag.

reply to post by NGC2736


NGC2736

How refreshing it is to see someone attempting to set 9/11 and the wider war on terror in an historical context.

For a long time now, I've been frustrated by the repetitive and, frankly, rather futile nature of many of the debates we have about 9/11. I have tried several times, without much success, to persuade people to look at the historical background. You've managed to capture peoples' imaginations in a way I have been unable to thus far, which is really encouraging.

One of the key problems people have accepting the possibility that 9/11 might have been a self-inflicted wound is the perpetrator's motivation.

For that, I think it's possible to set your OP in an even broader historical context - one which stretches right back to the Great Game of the early 20th century.

I've written a number of articles that explore these themes. They're far too long to post in full here. But, if you have the time and the inclination, you can read them here, here and here.

A star and a flag. Great post.

As regards the issue between Copernicus and deltaboy, I am torn. It is one of those snatches of conversation that can so easily be taken in the light one is predisposed to think. The problem is that we will likely never know in our lifetimes what the original order was, nor who it came from.

Was there a standing order from someone else, such as the president, that American war planes would under no circumstances fire on American civilians? I am sure no politician would ever want to order such a thing, as it would be political suicide.

Had Mr. Cheney given the order himself, prior to the approach of the plane that struck the Pentagon? Does this prove collusion or a public figure that couldn't bring himself to change the orders despite the almost certainty of another crash? Again we are left with very little hard evidence either way.

In the balance, one must accept that at the very least, there was a laxness to our intelligence assessments as regards the intent and capability of Al Qeada. It will require deeper digging on the angle of motivation and opportunity of key figures to decide if there was a plan to allow this to attack to run it's course.

As alluded to by syrix high priest, these were the words uttered by those in leadership positions in the radical Islamic movement. Just how deep their own commitment to these goals and values were and are, we cannot know. Long before then, Islam had been corrupted to be a tool of these people, as a motivator for the foot soldiers. As I have said before, ambition is a heady drink, and it is not just western leaders that are prone to this intoxicant.

reply to post by coughymachine


Very good links to some very important data. I agree that the national poloicy towards interfering in the affairs of other nations is a long held one.

Most importantly, your data, which I have not yet personally looked into in depth, shows that these actions always tended to escalate. It is of special relevance that the use of "stay behind" groups were a way to act without regards to laws or even moral behavior.

Because the CIA has a long history of such, we cannot, we dare not, rule out any possibility as being beyond their willingness to do.

We could of course go even further back in history, but that does not solve the problem of deciding what was done, or allowed to be done, on 9/11. It is enough to say that there can be little doubt that the CIA, and our political leaders, have a very cold and calculated take on world events,and are willing to go to great lengths to accomplish their goals, whatever they may be.

And it cannot be stressed to highly that these goals are often centered around the needs and desires of those in the positions of economic power. Much of our past is a story of actions taken not for greater good, but for greater profit.

reply to post by NGC2736


Great piece NGC2736.

If you're interested in more on this subject (U.S. ties to radical Islam, and the Soviet-Afghan War), I'd recommend the book "Charlie Wilson's War", by George Crile. He interviewed many of the people that were directly involved.

Tom Hanks is also releasing a movie, based on the book, slated to be released in theaters this December.

[edit on 11/13/07 by redmage]

Originally posted by NGC2736
The problem is that we will likely never know in our lifetimes what the original order was, nor who it came from.

Was there a standing order from someone else, such as the president, that American war planes would under no circumstances fire on American civilians? I am sure no politician would ever want to order such a thing, as it would be political suicide.

Yes, a very difficult problem. especially when before July 2001, only the President and the Secretary of Defense has the power to "stand down" the military. After a resolution passed quietly in July 2001, one other person had the power to stand down the military, the Vice President. So it comes down to Bush, Rumsfeld or Cheney who held those respective positions on 9-11-2001.

Beyond a stand down order, we are left with a complete breakdown of the world's most sophisticated military force. Yes, its absolutely possible...but there would have to be a point of failure, human error, computer error, ect

Not a single person in the military received any punishment or reprimand or even was called to accountability.

Historically, this is unprecedented, after Pearl Harbor, described as a fore warned event on the History Channel, many military and civilian personnel were dismissed and or reprimanded.

The whole Islamic agenda is just the back story, It is not a matter of underestimating Islamic intent or competence to commit the acts of 911.

It is a quantum leap of faith to expect a group with no organization out side of CIA training camps could evolve from pipe bombs, floating explosive laden rafts and driving bomb filled trucks into marine barracks could systematically plan and execute an operation that would succeed in penetrating the worlds leading military power to damage the world most secure building...on the exact day the USA was least prepared to handle this type of crisis because the military was running a mock training attack similar to the actual attack !!!

The Islamic agenda just like the mock training operation drill are just the back story for the program that the real forces behind 911 are running.

Once you start running their program, which is the WHY it happened, the hardware of WHO and HOW becomes indistinguishable. While we are busy with WHO and HOW the WHY program continues to create our reality for us. Every change that has transpired since 911 is directly reference to it as a necessity (WHY?)

redmage, I have ordered the book and look forward to reading it. It should go nicely with my historical look at the CIA in the 1980s-1990s.

NWRHINO, it always comes back to the whys. And the why is always tied to who gained and who lost in any given exchange.

You people absolutely DISGUST me! Do I think you are unpatriotic to question actions that might have increased the risk now? No.

BUT, to insinuate they have the moral equivalency of America, or to even imply that we aren't a good and noble country IS unpatriotic.

HOW DARE YOU! I served 23+ years in the military and saw things and KNOW things that I can't mention. But I can tell you for a FACT that we are the most noble, caring, prosperous, and charitable country the world has ever known. When there is a disaster, who is the first and largest to respond? When an ally nation needs a friend, who's there immediately?

Do you see many press reports of the success my buddies are having in Iraq? Attacks in Baghdad alone are down 95%. But you don't hear that, do you?

You'd rather run around in your tin foil hats and cry conspiracy than to believe you live in a good and noble country.

SHAME ON YOU! I served those years for Americans who believed in their country. Not those of you who think we are as bad as or worse than the terrorists themselves!

Making them out to be the boogyman? Have you not noticed the additional bombings in other nations? How the Phillipines is having a crisis with the extremists? How France wants to be more like the US because they recognize how foolish they were?

You obviously haven't studied about the Koran and their other teachings. Such as "It is alright to make treaties with your enemy; until such time as you can annihilate them".

Boogyman? OK, but you explain to me how thinking that your own country is on par with the Boogyman is Patriotic.

SHAME ON YOU ALL!

reply to post by Nunny


Sir/madam, I have at no point said any such thing. I too served my country in a war. In a nasty down and dirty war that was unpopular at home, and not really worth, in the end, all the lives lost and ruined in the effort. I have earned my right to question my leaders. I have never equated America, a country I love, with the terrorist.

You are allowing your emotions to cloud the issue. If you have read my text, I have at worst, shown that American policy was short sighted in creating and arming thugs and killers in an effort to cause instability for the old USSR.

You, on the other hand, remind me of those in history who would have made George Washington a king. We have had enough of kings. We didn't need them then, and we don't need them now. This is our nation, and they are our stewards. We have every right to examine how they are doing the job.

America remains the greatest nation on Earth because we demand that our leaders remain true to the ideals of the people. When they fail, as humans often do, it is our right, nay, our duty, to see that those errors are corrected.

Would you hire a contractor to build your house, and never check to see that he did the job correctly? Would you hire a purchasing agent, and never audit the books? We are simply checking on the possibility of shoddy or illegal activity by those we have entrusted with being our employees. These are not gods, but mortal men, and we owe it to all those who have shed blood for our nation to be vigilant of our freedoms on all fronts. Including the home front.

You should be the one ashamed. ashamed that you allow blind patriotism to rob you and your nation of the chance to correct any wrongs that we MIGHT find. I have nowhere made assertions of guilt. I have nowhere said that our nation has failed. And by God, as long as I live, there will never be failure of these United States. For I shall watch those who hold the reigns of power, that they do not abuse my people.

Mineta (Shanksville plane) said, 'Do you think that we shot it down ourselves?'

Cheney said, 'I don't know.' , 'Let's find out.'

Deltaboy asks, "Why would Dick Cheney ask that question?"

1) if dick passed along orders to shoot planes down - then he is asking if a command has been executed

2) If he ordered a stand down, he's now asking if somebody disobeyed.

as EARLIER he is barking about ORDERS still standing

....(Pentagon plane)....10 miles out (of DC)!!!
...."orders still stand?" the staffer asks
Nothing's changed - Dick quips

SO, either Norad asked to down the Pentagon plane
....and missed, (see order #1 above)

OR, They are being called off. (order #2 still stands)

U think they missed

reply to post by Nunny


Yes, sir/madam. The first country to respond? Canada. Who is always there when a country needs an ally? Canada. /

The U.S. on the other hand, now has a 40 year history of starting wars for no reason (or, as Alan Greenspan enlightened us so recently, For OIL AND ECONOMY), alienating the grand majority of the world against it, Mindnumbing its populace through media, Raping the planet, and generally degenerating into the worlds whiny fat cousin that no one likes.

It is people like YOU sir/madam, that are to blame for America's issues. Perhaps if a few more people stood up and held it accountable for the gross, gross atrocities it commits against the human race on a daily basis (and i am not talking conspiracy here, i am talking about the corporations that run your government and YOU support with your patriotism) then the world would be a far better place.

As long as the "good patriot" hold the line that you do, the world is going to continue to go to hell in a handbasket, just so that whiny, obese, pampered america can feed of the starving corpse of places like the sudan and Iraq.

I do hope, Sir/Madam, that the obviously concise brainwashing those years in the military gave you has helped you in your life, as much as it has obviously blinded you.

Originally posted by NGC2736
Around 1988, Al Qaeda (The Base) was born

PenNeb,

You may want to try searching 'Q eidat ilmu'ti'aat' (i.e., the 'DATA' base)
or so as the internet attempts to (mis?)inform me.

-Best
scrap

reply to post by D.E.M.


I was wrong to let a troll try to take control of this discussion. Please don't fall, as I momentarily did, for that. It is only those with something to hide, or in the thrall of those type of people, that would seek to derail this thread in such a manner.

It is because these people fear a close and unbiased look into 9/11, that such attempts are made.

"We need to be reminded that the USG's response to the 9/11 attacks, after weeks of requests for the extradition of OBL, was the invasion of Afghanistan, which has no known oil reserves.

This is not true, Ever since the fall of the former Soviet Union ten years ago, Exxon, Mobil, Chevron and the other big oil monopolies have been scheming to get their hands on the vast oil and gas wealth around the Caspian Sea, just north of Afghanistan.

This region’s oil reserves may reach more than 60 billion barrels – enough to service Europe’s oil needs for 11 years. Some estimates are as high as 200 billion barrels. The Caspian Sea reserves are 10 percent of the world’s known supply – worth about $5 trillion at today’s prices.

In February 1998, Unocal Corporation testified to the House Committee on Internal Relations Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific that the “Taliban government in Afghanistan is an obstacle” to having an oil pipeline from the Caspian region to the Indian Ocean – that is, through Afghanistan. In 1997, Unocal even tried to woo the Taliban with billions of dollars to support the proposed pipeline through their country. The unrecognized Taliban government, however, was a set back to their plans.

Having a government in Afghanistan that is beholden to U.S. interests, along with stationing U.S. troops in the former Soviet Republics of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan, would secure the region and allow this project to proceed. And just in time, as far as the U.S. oil companies are concerned, because there is international competition for the Caspian Sea oil resources."





[edit on 14-11-2007 by GROWNER JIM]

reply to post by GROWNER JIM


Ah, now we see a bit of light that may help us see some of the whys. And heretofore it seemed that the US was just interested in driving the Russians out so a peaceful and freedom loving people could thrive.



[edit on 14-11-2007 by NGC2736]

al qaeda = Lee Harvey Oswald = fall guy

We need to be reminded that the USG's response to the 9/11 attacks, after weeks of requests for the extradition of OBL, was the invasion of Afghanistan, which has no known oil reserves.

you might want to call "enron" and ask them about the pipeline they had planned...

ahhh...didn't see growner jim'spost, but yes he has it... also i the mix is a loan from the IMF which enron conned india into signing to build the natural gas processing plant that was to be at the end of said pipeline... hmm what happened? here's a little insight... dicover
[edit on 14-11-2007 by never_tell]

[edit on 14-11-2007 by never_tell]

reply to post by GROWNER JIM






That is what I've believed since, oh, about November 1st, 2001. Amen, Brotha! It was the pipeline route that contributed to the invasion more than OBL. Bin Laden was the dupe.

This is exactly why I think the 9-11 event was orchestated by the USG. I normally don't participate in the 9/11 theories because I think most of the arguments point to fantastic theories. I'd applaud you if I could do so in this forum. Bravo. SOLID Theory here, IMO.

Cuhail