MSNBC Reports US to Attack Taliban Days Before 9/11

This is clearly foreknowledge and pre-planned ops. The buildings were rigged, key personnel were in place
to allow defense systems to fail. Couple that with the obvious delays of Cheney and Bush to respond.

New Report and Video

Did not have a chance to sign it?

More like, let them attack, stand down and give the public a reason to support your false flag war!

President Bush was expected to sign detailed plans for a worldwide war against al-Qaida two days before Sept. 11 but did not have the chance before the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, U.S. and foreign sources told NBC News.

So the "war on terror" was not triggered by 9/11 after all? Not too surprising. But definately Veeery convenient for it to happen at just the right time to allow for something like this to be done. I feel that the American people would never have signed onto a global war on terror before 9/11.

reply to post by turbofan


Funny that this is exactly what we did, immediately after 9/11. The plan comes at the same time the New World Coming document was also placed in Bush's hands which would have established the Department of Homeland Security. This is not a new video but still worth another look.

Hay after it has passed through the digestive tract of a male cow.

Is this really surprising to anyone? I always knew they planned it in advance, all anyone had to do was see how quickly we got there and started raining bombs down and sending troops in to know it was pre-planned. In less than 1 month we had an army over there and a subsequent invasion.

reply to post by turbofan

Al Qaeda had been behind two massive terror attacks against US targets prior to 9/11, and everyone knew that Afghanistan was where Al Qaeda had its base. You think the military planners sit around on their posterior all day, waiting for something to happen?

reply to post by roboe


When were those prior attacks, and what were they again?

reply to post by turbofan


Who attacked the USS Cole?
What was the date?

Who killed over 200 people in the US Embassy attacks in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya?
What were the dates?

USS Cole - Oct 12, 2000

Embassy - Aug 7th, 1998

I guess they really do sit on their butts.

reply to post by ExPostFacto


Do you mean Project For the New American Century? The "neo conservatives" who composed that scheme are the counterparts to the "neo liberals" behind the Obama administration now. Except that neo is a misnomer. They are new, just re-packaged.

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by roboe

 

When were those prior attacks, and what were they again?

The 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. al-Queada has been active for a while...

Originally posted by turbofan
USS Cole - Oct 12, 2000

Embassy - Aug 7th, 1998

I guess they really do sit on their butts.

WHO claimed responsibility?

Thank you

So they waited a 11 months to submit war documents after the USS Cole Incident knowing the 1993 Bombing, and the 1998 Embassy bombing were clainmed by Al Queda?

Is that not 'sitting on their butts'?

Originally posted by turbofan
So they waited a 11 months to submit war documents after the USS Cole Incident knowing the 1993 Bombing, and the 1998 Embassy bombing were clainmed by Al Queda?

Is that not 'sitting on their butts'?

No, Tino according to you, they were busy planning the 9/11 black op.

Just sayin.

First you complain that the Government didnt take any action based on the information in their hands prior to 9/11/01...then when you discover that they HAD planned to take action...you use it to back up your crazy conspiracies. Make up your minds people.

Viper,

Don't confuse the facts.

They didn't plan to take action; they planned the event.

The terror attack was the cover/plan for going into war.

My mind has not changed, it has simply been drilled with overwhelming evidence of a government cover-up.

reply to post by turbofan


I would repeat my last post, but you did such a good job of illustrating my point......

Yes, the Administration had plans to deal with the Taliban.....they just waited too long to put them into motion.

Originally posted by Ignorance_Defier

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by roboe

 

When were those prior attacks, and what were they again?

The 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. al-Queada has been active for a while...

Ohh you mean this same attack here?

en.wikipedia.org...
FBI involvement

In the course of the trial it was revealed that the FBI had an informant, a former Egyptian army officer named Emad Salem. Salem claims to have informed the FBI of the plot to bomb the towers as early as February 6, 1992. Salem's role as informant allowed the FBI to quickly pinpoint the conspirators out of hundreds of possible suspects.

Salem, initially believing that this was to be a sting operation, claimed that the FBI's original plan was for Salem to supply the conspirators with a harmless powder instead of actual explosive to build their bomb, but that the FBI chose to use him for other purposes instead. He secretly recorded hundreds of hours of telephone conversations with his FBI handlers

Also about Afghanistan, The US, Bin Laden, and the Taliban..

rupeenews.com...
According to the BBC, the Taliban later even warned the U.S. that bin Laden was going to launch an attack on American soil. Former Taliban foreign minister Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil said his warnings, issued because of concerns that the U.S. would react by waging war against Afghanistan, had been ignored. A U.S. official did not deny that such warnings were issued, but told BBC rather that it was dismissed because “We were hearing a lot of that kind of stuff”.[4] Kate Clark, “Taleban ‘warned US of huge attack’”, BBC News, September 7, 2002 .

rupeenews.com...
The BBC reported on the Pakistani talks with the Taliban, noting that the Taliban were “demanding proof of his involvement in the terror attacks on the US” before they would consider handing over Osama bin Laden, who issued a statement saying, “The US is pointing the finger at me but I categorically state that I have not done this”.[14] CNN similarly reported that the Taliban was “refusing to hand over bin Laden without proof or evidence that he was involved” in the 9/11 attacks. Ambassador Abdul Salam Zaeef said “that deporting him without proof would amount to an ‘insult to Islam.’” But, he added, “We are ready to cooperate if we are shown evidence.” U.S. officials said evidence gathered linking bin Laden to other terrorist attacks were all the proof that was needed, but declined to provide evidence of his involvement in the 9/11 attacks.[15]

Interesting how things work out in the favor of people who want things your standing on dont it..

Quote to remember..
"When you are sitting on things they want, they make you thier enemy and take whatever they want.." - Avatar

Quite indeed, quite indeed...