Wikileaks Bombshell Points To 9/11 Stand Down

reply to post by Shadow Herder


Can you/will you try to find us the actual statements/docs from wikileaks?

This info was leaked to me 5 years ago from a manager at trader joes.

Does wikileaks have anything of value to add, to the obvious?

Originally posted by starless and bible black
This info was leaked to me 5 years ago from a manager at trader joes.

Does wikileaks have anything of value to add, to the obvious?

Yeah, because your manager mate didn't tell the rest of the world.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


Flag and star... but can you give the original Wikileak report link... PPlanet only linked to the Telegraph... Would like the actual report...

You posted a bit too fast and your header was 'Wikileak' not PP... should include original...

TY

reply to post by ShogunAssassins


A Republican congressman who went against the OS of his party and tried to expose the truth. We really need to stop looking at labels like R and D. Truth is truth.

Originally posted by roboe
reply to post by Shadow Herder

 

Useless comment deleted....

edit on 6-2-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow



That was easy....

The Document In Question

or for those of you scared of wikileaks being CIA or NWO or whatever here's the link to the documents on The Telegraph.

DEMARCHE IN SUPPORT OF US CANDIDACY FOR IMO
DEMARCHE IN SUPPORT OF U.S.CANDIDACY FOR IMO

reply to post by SkurkNilsen


Thank you. I looked on the infowars link, but there were so many links I didn't see the cable link.
That was what I was looking for.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


There was no direct link on alex Jones' disinfo site of course, to him WL is just competition robbing him of his $$$

But The Telegrap had the document and the reference, then it was easy to find it on WL.

Why were there so many hours of media airtime spent on the non-event that was assanges recent court hearing. The media doesn't report the real truth, as we all know. So in their eyes, is he a good guy or bad guy? If he is a good guy, with truth and justice at heart, then they must view him as being a brave soldier, framed and persecuted for reporting issues of an extremely sensitive nature. If he is a bad guy, then he is a pervert rapist and nothing he comes up with can be trusted. Yet there has been no meat in any of his relevations.... They are pushing the story that he is acting out of honour and at great personnal cost and therefore must be revealing truths; hense subtly validating the 9/11 official story by subtly trying to persuade the undecided and uninformed that the official story must be true, as there is this now this extra 9/11 narrative regarding extra terrorists. This is so lame. We all should be honing in on the fact that there were no terrorists, no planes, media complicit cgi images broadcast and no victims and this is just another (desperate) aspect of their psy-ops gameplay . If this is a shock, Then you haven't cared to look too hard...

This is the reason why we NEED Wikileaks!!

I just hope those pathetic armchair wanna-be patriots quit whining about uncomfortable news and realize this is a great step towards freedom and liberties

We also had forewarning of the Pearl Harbor attack too.

It stands to reason the next attack on some US coastline or border somewhere will be known ahead of time too.

The attack is not the important part of these guys' defense but rather who they can attack after the fact to their advantage to establish a new base. They've already found book(s) in the Arizona desert detailing Muslim suicide bombers.

www.abc15.com...

Iraq was stating WMD in order to deter Iran. We arm and then attack Iraq but could have used their WMD claim as a help to leverage against Iran. It just doesn't make sense to me as not a whole lot is coming out of all these bases and embassies we go out there and create. I guess we deter wholesale civil wars in such countries and are ready to defend places of interest like S. Korea or S. Arabia. Do we really need to be in Germany? Pacific islands like Okinawa?

So where is the bombshell in all this? Pilot-type uniforms - did they actually have airline insignia or logos on them?
Were they actually going to try bluffing their way onto the flight deck of an airliner? how was that supposed to work?

Point 12 - their tickets were paid for by a convicted terrorist - but who, since al Mansoori is only a suspect?
They had laptops, so what, the 19 alleged hijackers didn't.
It might be suspicious that they boarded the plane that became Flight 77, if that plane had been conclusively identified as the plane that flew into the Pentagon - however the flight data recorder data does nothing of the sort.
They visited a lot of locations in California : this is the first I have heard of any prospective targets there.
The Telegraph article tries to make more out of this than there is grounds for, speculating that the FBI mighthave found the laptops and theremighthave been incriminating evidence on them . Had the FBI found the laptops, surely it would have said so, especially if there actually was anything incriminating on them.

Bombshell? Damp squib more like.

cia black ops. it looks like. if you watch the good shepherd with robert deniro, it pretty much sums up the cia is a government upon itself.

This thread needs some sources with proof to be critically analyzed objectively.
Proof is in the pudding.
Got Pudding?

reply to post by Screwed


Its too bad 1 word posts are not allowed because yours only needs one "BRILLIANT"!! You Sir could not be more correct! Sinister phase 3 is a commin! Are you prepared?

There is no truth to any of these allegations and I don’t see any documents from WikiLeaks, this is another reason why the truth movement does not support Alex Jones.

Originally posted by impressme
There is no truth to any of these allegations and I don’t see any documents from WikiLeaks, this is another reason why the truth movement does not support Alex Jones.

You're not looking hard enough

Originally posted by SkurkNilsen

That was easy....

The Document In Question

or for those of you scared of wikileaks being CIA or NWO or whatever

here's the link to the documents on The Telegraph.

reply to post by impressme


There is a link to the wiki doc on an above post.
Now the question is do we take everything wiki puts out as truth?

Originally posted by mike dangerously
We have had numerous revelations about the true nature of the plot of 9/11 this recent information shows us just how extensive the mole network for the attacks were.The power to squash investigations,To change interception protocols,To have NORAD and the entire US eastern air defense stand down does not lay with a man in a cave in Afghanistan and most certainly not with a figurehead like George W.Bush

This "NEW" information was covered in the first 3 minutes of Loose Change and how long ago did that come out? Don't get me wrong its incredible information and irrefutable but hardly new. The fact that this did not sink them proves to me they cannot be sunk on this issue.