EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'Beyond Orwellian': Outrage Follows Revelations of Vast Domestic Spying Program
- The Bill of Rights Exists: An Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein
- The World Economy Is a Ticking Time Bomb (and The Fuse is Burning)
- Major Loss to Organic Farmers as Court Rules in Favor of Monsanto
- Naomi Klein: 'Anti-Shock Doctrines' Show the Way to Resist
Popular content
Today's Top News
Nine Years, Two Wars, Hundreds of Thousands Dead – and Nothing Learnt
Did 9/11 make us all mad? Our memorial to the innocents who died nine years ago has been a holocaust of fire and blood . . .
Did 9/11 make us all go mad? How fitting, in a weird, crazed way, that the apotheosis of that firestorm nine years ago should turn out to be a crackpot preacher threatening another firestorm with a Nazi-style book burning of the Koran. Or a would-be mosque two blocks from "ground zero" - as if 9/11 was an onslaught on Jesus-worshiping Christians, rather than on the atheist West.
The World Trade Center site with memorial footprints of the twin towers visible
But why should we be surprised? Just look at all the other crackpots spawned
in the aftermath of those international crimes against humanity: the
half-crazed Ahmadinejad, the smarmy post-nuclear Gaddafi, Blair with his
crazed right eye and George W Bush with his black prisons and torture and
lunatic "war on terror". And that wretched man who lived - or
lives still - in an Afghan cave and the hundreds of al-Qa'idas whom he
created, and the one-eyed mullah - not to mention all the lunatic cops and
intelligence agencies and CIA thugs who failed us all - utterly - on 9/11
because they were too idle or too stupid to identify 19 men who were going
to attack the United States. And remember one thing: even if the Rev Terry
Jones sticks with his decision to back down, another of our cranks will be
ready to take his place.
Indeed, on this grim ninth anniversary - and heaven spare us next year from the 10th - 9/11 appears to have produced not peace or justice or democracy or human rights, but monsters. They have prowled Iraq - both the Western and the local variety - and slaughtered 100,000 souls, or 500,000, or a million; and who cares? They have killed tens of thousands in Afghanistan; and who cares? And as the sickness has spread across the Middle East and then the globe, they - the air force pilots and the insurgents, the Marines and the suicide bombers, the al-Qa'idas of the Maghreb and of the Khalij and of the Caliphate of Iraq and the special forces and the close air support boys and the throat-cutters - have torn the heads off women and children and the old and the sick and the young and healthy, from the Indus to the Mediterranean, from Bali to the London Tube; quite a memorial to the 2,966 innocents who were killed nine years ago. All in their name, it seems, has been our holocaust of fire and blood, enshrined now in the crazed pastor of Gainesville.
This is the loss, of course. But who's made the profit? Well, the arms dealers, naturally, and Boeing and Lockheed Martin and all the missile lads and the drone manufacturers and F-16 spare parts outfits and the ruthless mercenaries who stalk the Muslim lands on our behalf now that we have created 100,000 more enemies for each of the 19 murderers of 9/11. Torturers have had a good time, honing their sadism in America's black prisons - it was appropriate that the US torture center in Poland should be revealed on this ninth anniversary - as have the men (and women, I fear) who perfect the shackles and water-drowning techniques with which we now fight our wars. And - let us not forget - every religious raver in the world, be they of the Bin Laden variety, the bearded groupies in the Taliban, the suicide executioners, the hook-in the arm preachers, or our very own pastor of Gainesville.
And God? Where does he fit in? An archive of quotations suggests that just about every monster created in or after 9/11 is a follower of this quixotic redeemer. Bin Laden prays to God - "to turn America into a shadow of itself", as he told me in 1997 - and Bush prayed to God and Blair prayed - and prays - to God, and all the Muslim killers and an awful lot of Western soldiers and Dr (honorary) Pastor Terry Jones and his 30 (or it may be 50, since all statistics are hard to come by in the "war on terror") pray to God. And poor old God, of course, has had to listen to these prayers as he always sits through them during our mad wars. Recall the words attributed to him by a poet of another generation: "God this, God that, and God the other thing. 'Good God,' said God, 'I've got my work cut out'." And that was just the First World War...
Just five years ago - on the fourth anniversary of the twin towers/Pentagon/Pennsylvania attacks - a schoolgirl asked me at a lecture in a Belfast church whether the Middle East would benefit from more religion. No - less religion! - I howled back. God is good for contemplation, not for war. But - and here we are driven on to the reefs and hidden rocks which our leaders wish us to ignore, forget and cast aside - this whole bloody mess involves the Middle East; it is about a Muslim people who have kept their faith while those Westerners who dominate them - militarily, economically, culturally, socially - have lost theirs. How can this be, Muslims ask? Indeed, it is a superb irony that the Rev Jones is a believer while the rest of us - by and large - are not. Hence our books and our documentaries never refer to Muslims vs Christians, but Muslims versus "The West".
And of course, the one taboo subject of which we must not speak - Israel's relationship with America, and America's unconditional support for Israel's theft of land from Muslim Arabs - also lies at the heart of this terrible crisis in our lives. In yesterday's edition of The Independent, there was a photograph of Afghan demonstrators chanting "death to America". But in the background, these same demonstrators were carrying a black banner with a message in Dari written upon it in white paint. What it actually said was: "The bloodsucking Zionist government regime and the Western leaders who are indifferent [to suffering] and have no conscience are again celebrating the new year by spilling the red blood of the Palestinians."
The message is as extreme as it is vicious - but it proves, yet again, that the war in which we are engaged is also about Israel and "Palestine". We may prefer to ignore this in "the West" - where Muslims supposedly "hate us for what we are" or "hate our democracy" (see: Bush, Blair and a host of other mendacious politicians) - but this great conflict lies at the heart of the "war on terror". That is why the equally vicious Benjamin Netanyahu reacted to the atrocities of 9/11 by claiming that the event would be good for Israel. Israel would now be able to claim that it, too, was fighting the "war on terror", that Arafat - this was the now-comatose Ariel Sharon's claim - is "our Bin Laden". And thus Israelis had the gall to claim that Sderot, under its cascade of tin-pot missiles from Hamas, was "our ground zero".
It was not. Israel's battle with the Palestinians is a ghastly caricature of our "war on terror", in which we are supposed to support the last colonial project on earth - and accept its thousands of victims - because the twin towers and the Pentagon and United Flight 93 were attacked by 19 Arab murderers nine years ago. There is a supreme irony in the fact that one direct result of 9/11 has been the stream of Western policemen and spooks who have traveled to Israel to improve their "anti-terrorist expertise" with the help of Israeli officers who may - according to the United Nations - be war criminals. It was no surprise to find that the heroes who gunned down poor old Jean Charles de Menezes on the London Tube in 2005 had been receiving "anti-terrorist" advice from the Israelis.
And yes, I know the arguments. We cannot compare the actions of evil terrorists with the courage of our young men and women, defending our lives - and sacrificing theirs - on the front lines of the 'war on terror". There can be no "equivalence". "They" kill innocents because "they" are evil. "We" kill innocents by mistake. But we know we are going to kill innocents - we willingly accept that we are going to kill innocents, that our actions are going to create mass graves of families, of the poor and the weak and the dispossessed.
This is why we created the obscene definition of "collateral damage". For if "collateral" means that these victims are innocent, then "collateral" also means that we are innocent of killing them. It was not our wish to kill them - even if we knew it was inevitable that we would. "Collateral" is our exoneration. This one word is the difference between "them" and "us", between our God-given right to kill and Bin Laden's God-given right to murder. The victims, hidden away as "collateral" corpses, don't count any more because they were slaughtered by us. Maybe it wasn't so painful. Maybe death by drone is a more gentle departure from this earth, evisceration by an AGM-114C Boeing-Lockheed air-to-ground missile less painful, than death by shards from a roadside bomb or a cruel suicider with an explosive belt.
That's why we know how many died on 9/11 - 2,966, although the figure may be higher - and why we don't "do body counts" on those whom we kill. Because they - "our" victims - must have no identities, no innocence, no personality, no cause or belief or feelings; and because we have killed far, far more human beings than Bin Laden and the Taliban and al-Qa'ida.
Anniversaries are newspaper and television events. And they can have an eerie habit of coalescing together to create an unhappy memorial framework. Thus do we commemorate the Battle of Britain - a chivalric episode in our history - and the Blitz, a progenitor of mass murder, to be sure, but a symbol of innocent courage - as we remember the start of a war that has torn our morality apart, turned our politicians into war criminals, our soldiers into killers and our ruthless enemies into heroes of the anti-Western cause. And while on this gloomy anniversary the Rev Jones wanted to burn a book called the Koran, Tony Blair tried to sell a book called A Journey. Jones said the Koran was "evil"; Britons have asked whether the Blair book should be classified as "crime". Certainly, 9/11 has moved into fantasy when the Rev Jones can command the attention of the Obamas and the Clintons and the Holy Father and the even more Holy United Nations. Whom the gods would destroy...
11 Sept 2001
The World Trade Center and the Pentagon are hit by airplanes hijacked by al-Qa'ida terrorists. George Bush says that America will stand with "all those who want peace and security in the world".
7 Oct 2001
The US and Britain launch air strikes against Afghanistan.
13 Nov 2001
The Northern Alliance liberates Kabul from the rule of the Taliban.
11 Jan 2002
The first prisoners arrive at Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
9 Jan 2003
Top UN weapons inspector Hans Blix tells reporters that "we have now been in [Iraq] for some two months and? we haven't found any smoking guns".
15 Feb 2003
Protests are held across the world against impending war in Iraq.
20 Mar 2003
US-led coalition launches invasion of Iraq.
9 Oct 2003
Toppling of statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad is taken as symbol of coalition triumph.
11 Mar 2004
A series of bombs explode within minutes of each other on four commuter trains in Madrid, killing 191 people and wounding a further 1,841.
29 Apr 2004
Photographs emerge showing the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by US soldiers at Abu Ghraib, inflaming anti-US feeling.
2 Oct 2004
Video footage appears of British hostage Kenneth Bigley being beheaded by Iraqi militants.
2 Nov 2004
Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh is murdered after making a film about violence against women in Islamic societies.
7 Jul 2005
Four suicide bombers kill 52 passengers and injure almost 800 others in a series of attacks on London's transport network.
30 Sept 2005
A series of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohamed are published in a Danish newspaper. The pictures are reprinted elsewhere amid widespread outrage and violent protests in the Muslim world.
30 Dec 2006
Saddam Hussein is hanged in northern Baghdad for crimes against humanity.
21 Sept 2009
A leaked report by Gen Stanley McChrystal, commander of US forces, suggests that the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan could be lost within a year unless there are significant increases in troops.
29 Nov 2009
A ban on building minarets is voted in by the Swiss public, reflecting a hostile attitude to the country's rising Muslim minority.
21 Jan 2010
43 per cent of Americans say they feel some negative prejudice towards Muslims, according to a poll by Gallup.
1 Sept 2010
At the end of a month in which 295 civilians were killed by violence, Barack Obama declares that the US combat mission in Iraq is at an end.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


186 Comments so far
Show AllThis is generally a good article. I don't know every detail about the official version of the September 2001 attacks, but Robert Fisk of the London based Independent and so many others including aviation, engineering, military, and intelligence experts don't take it as the gospel. The time line is interesting. The official version is itself a conspiracy theory, as it insists that Osama bin Laden and his backers plotted it down to the last detail.
AD
VERY good comment, AD
It's as if you didn't even read my post.
Go away, I'll never again lay my pearls before your swine.
Your rather typical response does your cause and your repute no good at all.
That NORAD and others lied after the fact is rather a moot point. That those lies were other than self serving attempts to deflect responsibility seems obvious enough. What those lies indicate is not what you seem to believe, that something far more sinister occurred. Could that be the case? Perhaps it could, but every time this issue is raised you "Truther" guys step all over your own position and then, typically as I noted earlier, act so foolishly ,get angry and walk away.
Hey, dd, see my post below. What people like you do is deny physical reality. Try explaining the collapse of Building 7.
Why try to explain something to someone already deeply entrenched in a belief system denying reality, common sense and common logic?
What nonsense is this response. It says nothing whatever about the topic and shows rather plainly that you are, or just act like, a child.
It is difficult (read impossible) to discuss with any degree of rationality a "conspiracy theorists" view of an incident. Instead of rehashing ground that has already been extensively covered by engineers, architects and other experts you just refuse to read those articles or, if reading them, dismiss them as further evidence of said conspiracy.
All the nonsense you offer as "proof" is factually inaccurate or irrelevant to the discussion and shows that you have no degree in physics or engineering . If you have seen a building prepared for demolition, and I have, you would quickly notice that the numerous charges in place,as well as the cutting of supports necessary to said demolition, are all rather bulky and obvious, and cannot be hidden from view as would be necessary to said conspiracy theory. Nor does your "theory" deal with the unique architecture of said buildings or the way burning jet fuel falls down the building in question as it ignites to the temperature necessary to burn steel.
I urge you to go to trade journals as Architectural Digest and read in their archives the treatises that refute rather well your baseless convictions that the NSA, CIA, or whichever you believe did this ( Im glad you aren't one of the Venusian crowd) and then blamed the hijackers and bin Laden. But of course you will not, as nothing is allowed to enter your mind if it fails to support your conclusions
So be it and I leave the field to you as any further debate is useless and finds only a closed mind.
Where did the proof that NORAD lied come from?
Read John Farmer's book The Ground Truth. He was chief counsel for the 9/11 Commission.
He details, the many conflicting accounts given by NORAD, the FAA, and other agencies, to members of Congress, Commissioners, and their staffs.
The 9/11 Commission, itself, was not set up to get at the truth, not even having subpoena powers, but that's another ball of wax, so to speak.
So they relied on governments reports.
Ironic dontcha think.
I find your comment ironic, relative to the context of the thread.
Were there or were there not War Games being conducted on 9/11 that removed air defense away from the areas attacked and ALSO mimiced what in reality was simultaneously occuring in NYC and DC? Thereby creating the diabolic situation of causing confusion as to what was real and what wasn't.
Please read an indepth account of the Japanese attack on the USA Manila Airfleet.
"I read your post, Hue, but it is basically vague rambling nonsense. Par for the course with TRUTHERS I might add. Like the efforts to cast doubt on everything, the rambling nonsense routine defies any response. To get into it is to quickly descend into a quicksand of irrelevant babble about nothing, Hue. What you find to be essentially meaningful is to others whom are not TRUTHERS, just piles and piles of rubble."
Anyone who takes time to follow our thread, will determine whose posts comprise "just piles and piles of rubble", and who is writing "rambling nonsense".
The unanswered questions, regarding the events of 9/11, aren't to me, "abstract historical trivia".
The comparison to "extreme Zionist ideologues", is pathetic.
"There was none of the dubious circumstances as there was in the Kennedy murder or the MLK murder or the Malcolm X murder. "
This is laughable. The logistics of the entire "event" are like a cartoon caper.
Look my friend ALl you need to know is this :
BUSH CHENY LIED FOR 8 YEARS IN OFFICE
WHY THEN SHOULD ANYBODY IN THERE RIGHT MIND BELIEVE THEY TOLD US THE TRUTH ABOUT 911? anybody who does even believes even part of there official storie has their head up there bud
Understandeble the morning of 911 we were all in shock ,and because of our anger and lust for immediate revenge, alot of us believed the lies and the blame on Bin laden and his followers that were comming out of our TV set whitin mintes when this was all unfolding
Aks yourself honestly:
Anybody seen serious evedence that Bin laden and his followers were actualy involved ? or did the real perpetraitors need a scapegoat?
again why we should we belief the oficial version,we never seen bin laden on trial,
few fake trials mabe? Bush lied remember
Why did we attack Afganisthan then Iraq? GOING TO WAR KILLING PEOPLE, TAKE OVER THESE COUNTRIES AND SPENDING TRILJIONS OF OUR TAX $ WHITOUT PROOF OF THIS? HEHHH?
Bin ladin planned all this from a cave in Afganisthan?
who placed those explosives in those buildings did bin laden do this ??you got to be kidding me
the evedence is huge and overwelming that this was indeed and MUST HAVE BEEN a inside job .
who, what brought down building 7?
So many people have seen and heard EXPLOSIONS EVEN BEFORE THE PLANES HIT THE BUILDINGS
Bush cheney lied thats why I support a immediate whitdraw from Afganisthan and Iraq
nothing els will make this right
sommething els is at play here and this dragon may and will swipe its tail again
any way don't get me started
I believe Osama planned and executed the attack and Cheney greatly facilitated it to the point of massively increasing causalties.
This is an ad hominem attack. Really simple, just repeat your label in CAPS over and over and avoid the real arguments. It has never been proven in a court of law that OBL is guilty of 9/11. Indeed, many have argued that 'The Base' was created by the CIA to fight the Soviet Union's control of Afghanistan, that OBL and his family have deep connections with the Bush family and the CIA going back decades. You would have to be very ignorant of these connections to make your naive assertions. When we ask, "Who gained?" from the events of 9/11, it seems the big winner was the US military-industrial complex. I advise you to quit having fun, something you've spent you life doing apparently, start studying history and reading your opponents arguments more thoroughly. Stop using ad hominem attacks and address the issues many have raised about the assumptions of this article. Take the time to look at the work of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth--www.ae911truth.org.
The "voracity" of their own report? Another tribute to Western mis-education.
Okay, veracity you f'ng nincompoop.
I don't suppose you ever misspell a word.
The word conspire derives from Latin and means literally, to breath together. It doesn't imply in any way secrecy . Example - individual A works for individuals B, C, and D, all of who dislike A. B, C, and D get together to come up with what will appear to be a non-discriminatory and legal way to fire A. They conspire. A is called in to B's office and fires him. All fellow employees know why A got fired. Whether all other employees were present during BCD discussion or not, it was a conspiracy.
I didn't bother reading the rest of your argument.
That three planes were flown into buildings on 9/11 does not PROVE they were flown by Muslim terrorists anymore then the fact John F Kennedy was killed by bullets PROVE that the bullets fired by Lee Harvey Oswald.
Therefore it is a FACT that the Government version of 9/11 is a Conspiracy Theory.
Now in the killing of John F Kennedy , there are a number of theories of who in fact was behind it and who it was that committed the act. All of the theories can not be correct. That all of them can not be correct does not mean that any but the Governments official explanation must be wrong.
If you have any better explanations what happened
I be glad to listen
I can't figure out what it is that you are gaining
by defending these bastards.
tell me ; you realy think that a bunch of so called muslims took over these planes
when they did not even know how to fly these planes
that is to say
taken over at 30 000 alt. feet, kick the pilots out ,
sit down calmly in the cockpit seat and manualy fly the complex machines back to NY , by looking out the window and fly this crafts staigth into the Twin towers, TWICE right on target
if this is not convincing to you nothing els will
I wish I had a nickle for each of your ad hominem attacks.
Unable to debate the points made, you respond with a litany of insults. All the men were NOT taped on airport cameras.
One group was filmed boarding a flight in Portland Maine. This was the only video released of any of the Hijackers prior to 2004 when a second Video at allegedly taken at Dulles was released.
Another group was claimed to have boarded at Dulles Airport but the video provided by the Government had no date/time stamp which are standard on all Airport Video.
This is not "proof" of anything and would not stand up in any court of law in the World outside of Gitmo.
Neither of the Video showed all of the Hijackers as you claimed.
So to that "Pure unadultered baloney" I suggest YOU sir provide the evidence. You claim all hijackers were taped on airport cameras now prove it. There were 19 hijackers.
And if I DID have to rely on a Ouija board from my information...
I suggest even that a damned sight more reliable then relying on the Government of the United States of America.
I doubt I could ever get a Ouija board to claim Saddam was trying to buy Yellowcake from Niger and had a fleet of UAV's ready to bombard Eastern US cities with WMDS.
By the way and as an aside.
Several members of the European Parliament recently went public with a briefing they were given by US Intelligence. This briefing included video imagery of a Major European City after being subject to a Nuclear Attack staged by "al Qaeda" . It showed widespread devastation and then was followed by an Image of Osama Bin Laden detailing how the attack was planned, why the attack made and how more cities would be subject to the same types of attacks.
I guess this PROOF that Osama Bin Laden has already Nuked European Cities.
You write, "The TRUTHERS are just too silly for words."
A lot of "truthers" are engineers, architects, ex-military, ex-Intelligence, ex-government, pilots, physicists etc. Are they ALL stupid? And you believe Bush's commission? Hmmmmm.
Did you see an airplane hit the Pentagon? I didn't.
Did you see any videotapes of an airplane hitting the Pentagon? I didn't. Sorry to bore you with simple questions. For that matter did you see an airplane hit the first WTC tower? Many eye witnesses did but I didn't. Did you see any airplanes hit building 7? Why was a jet engine found eight miles from the crash site in PA? Just asking. Again, sorry to bore you. There were security camera tapes of the Pentagon but we have not been allowed to see them. Why? National security I suppose? Wow, sorry to bore you.
An outside camera would have shown us an airplane hitting the Pentagon, much like an outside camera showed us an airplane hitting the WTC tower. No? Sorry to bore you. Do you work for the CIA or the NSA? Which?
There were two airplanes.
Three buildings collapsed.
It is just too silly for words not to wonder how two planes brought down three buildings.
I've seen obfuscation, and then I've seen obfuscation, but that really takes the cake.
You know damn well, unless you are just dumber than dirt (which I'm starting to believe), that the post you replied to, was talking about the number of planes relative to the buildings that fell in the WTC. Two planes, three buildings. Duh.
Your absolute disregard for honest debate is stratospheric.
To wonder is the start of scientific investigations. :D
wtc 7 was weakened by the explosions from the two planes hitting wtc 1 & 2
wtc 7 was weakened by the approx level 7 local earthquake that resulted from the collapse of towers 1 & 2
wtc 7 collapsed of a result of multiple fires on many levels
Softening of the steel at temps lower than burning would have been enough, considering the already weakened state of the building, to cause it's collapse.
By the way, have you ever held a match to steel wool? :D
>>By the way, have you ever held a match to steel wool? :D
This is about as valid as asking..."You notice how those kerosene lamps just melt when I light the flame?"
Dude, have you ever used a wood stove? Try throwing some kerosene on one to "SOFTEN" it, then see if you can knock it apart with a sledge hammer. Should be no problem for a scientific fellow like you. Post your results to YouTube. I look forward to evidence that you could heat up a wood stove enough to "soften" it. Oh, and what the heck, throw on some asbestos slurry before you start. Or just coat the steel in a couple of inches of concrete. Should be no problem. If you need to, you could use a jackhammer to knock off patches of insulation and concrete. What the heck, try a torch, try a flamethrower. Post your evidence. Your chatter, we've heard it so many times--it's so cheap.
I've owned a wood stove for years and, no matter what I put in there, I cannot, being the fool I am, get it to SOFTEN. Imagine, years of trying to get that damn thing as hot as possible during the dead of winter. Presto logs, gasoline--I cannot even get the thing to glow much less soften!
--
Fisk WRITES: "CIA thugs who failed us all - utterly - on 9/11 because they were too idle or too stupid to identify 19 men who were going to attack the United States." Bah!
Assumptions sometimes is where we discover the weakness of any 'belief.' In this case, the obvious retort to Fisk: CIA thugs masterminded 9/11 and created a goofy set of pictures of patsies who were never charged with any crime, never proven to have done anything in a court of law, 'bad guys' who did the crime with nothing more than box cutters. Nevertheless, we were told by the authorities that shortly after 9/11, it was all figured out--never needing to take their "evidence" to a court, not any court anywhere. No, they simply repeated their story over and over until even astute journalists like Mr. Fisk cannot "risk their reputation" by questioning the absurd dogma of the official conspiracy theory.
The American Architectural Journal offered expert explanations of the fall of the towers and building seven as well. There have been at least three major articles, authored by engineers and architects giving perfectly valid and scientific reasons for the events of 9/11 in New York.
The design of the towers , which would have violated NY's own building codes had the construction not been exempt from them because the Port Authority owned that land, led to their destruction in that "pancaking" and heart wrenching fall. To argue with conspiracy theorists is to waste ones time. Their argument comes from a place impossible to reach with fact or logic.
Oh, so it must have been a ray of some sort, undoubtedly purchased from Venusians.....a little lack of scientific knowledge and methodology serves you not very well at all.
May I suggest this http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20958
from Global Research? And there are a few more there. If the media or the Demowhores wanted to "do the right thing" they could start by bringing such info as the above out into the open. Take a guess why they wont.
----------------------ALERT-------------------------
Offical 911 Narrative is bulls*** (I know most of you know that but we have to keep reminding ourselves.
And he said we were attacked because we were athiests. It was because of our country meddles in just about every country in the world. From our bases everywhere to our regime changes putting in brutal dictators that we sit back and watch them kill their people. We gave Saddam power then killed him. We put the Taliban in power now we fight them. After we pay them to protect our convoys. We say nothing when Isreal kills an American. Hell, we even put bin laden in power. We are not called the great satan for nothing. The world would be much safer if the US stayed home. We would not be seeing millions unemployed if the US stayed home. The only thing we export anymore are jobs and death. Sad
"We put the Taliban in power now we fight them. After we pay them to protect our convoys."
And after we pay the Pakistani ISI to train and support them.
If the US doesn't have a real enemy it will gladly purchase one.
Deleted by Poster
Generally a good article? How can you have a good time line without: September 2007 -- Hunt Oil signs agreement with Kurds; and January 25, 2010 -- Chemical Ali is executed, Exxon and Shell sign contracts with Iraq?
Plus, how has nothing been "learnt"? Doesn't the embedding of media and shooting at independant reporters show a definate learning curve? And crowd control: certainly there's been much learnt since 1968 about crowd control...with the code orange and the designated free speech zones.
Generally a good article, please, with such a spotty time line and no credit for the learning ability of the executive branch of this fine nation.
Great article, but Fisk forgot to enter this important event in his timeline:
December 27, 2008, Israel launched the campaign titled Operation Cast Lead against Palestinian civilians in Gaza. This 22-day-long Israeli bombardment and invasion of Gaza was eerily reminiscent of the Nazi massacre of the Jews trapped in the Warsaw Ghetto in 1943. More than 1400 Palestinians were killed; many more were wounded.
Most of the world watched the Israeli slaughter of the Palestinians on the Al Jazeera television network, and understood clearly that this horrific slaughter was carried out with the full support of the U.S. government.
I wrote an article several years ago called, "How Quickly We Forget." It was about the Warsaw ghetto's heroic defense by young Jews. They held off the Nazis for a long time, killed a lot of Nazi soldiers who were enjoying their "Jew hunting" in the ghetto.
Finally, the Wehrmacht and the SS launched an all out campaign with armor and massed troops and finally cleared the ghetto. The few survivors were either executed there, or sent to the camps.
In my article, I mentioned that the Israelis had perhaps learned the the wrong lesson from the ghetto. The lesson of the Warsaw ghetto was that oppressed peoples fight back, even against overwhelming odds. Same was true of the French Resistance and other countries.
What Israel apparently learned was that overwhelming firepower will get them what they want.
It took a long time to get the article published as it was considered "antisemitic."
I am sure Orwell would love that euphemistic term, collateral damage to cover up the murdering of innocent men,women and children. AD: " The official version itself is a conspiracy theory ". The History Channel just did another whitewash about 911 conspiracy nuts, where they demonized anyone who does not buy the official con of 911. Instead of calling people that do not believe they have been told the truth, people with alternative explanations, they call them conspiracy theories as this is a pejorative, in this context. And then when interviewing the people who believe the lies, they say " expert response " like these people are smart and the truthers are not experts but conspiracy nuts. Just think: in 1898 if you did not believe the "official" story about the sinking of the Maine you would have been called a conspiracy nut; in 1917 if you questioned the " official " story about the attack on the Lusitania you would have been called an unpatriotic nut case; during the Vietnam war people who did not fall for the Gulf of Tonkin BS were demonized again as communists; and there are many other cases that would make this post too long to cite.
Please see below, my response to your reply to Truth Ad's comment, which is pertinent to your reply here.
Don't let the door hit you on your way out. As mentioned above the "official account" regarding everything from the JFK assassination to the amount of oil still left in the Gulf reflects the interests of various factions of the ruling class. While I see no need to doubt that al Qaida highjackers may have flown planes into the twin towers; I seen no reason to believe that our government would provide us with anything more than partial truths and convenient lies regarding everything else that happened on that day and the days that followed. At the very least there was a conspiracy to cover a great number of asses- hell, that much is clear for all to see.
I personally don't bother with trying to figure out the truth of what happened that day. Too much disinformation has been purposefully comingled with whatever can be known about the events of 9/11. And knowing those answers would probably have little bearing on the course of my life or world events for that matter. Would I like more answers? Yes. Would I like to see people held responsible for their part in what was at minimum a conspiracy to hide even a part of the truth from the American people? The lie that we are a nation of laws does not dissuade me from hoping that from time to time some members of the ruling elite are exposed and punished for their crimes. Do I expect that we will ever definitively find many of these answers? No. Do I doubt that there are powerful men and women for whom the ends justify the means? Of course I do. Does this make me a "truther" or a "conspiracy theorist"? I don't care what people like you or Ardent think about me or anyone else. Where do any of you get off impuning the motives of people who doubt that the likes of the Bush Administration of all god-forsaken people would tell us anything resembling the truth about the events of that fateful day? How could you possibly begin to rule out at least the possibility that willful or at least gross negligence was involved in failing to prevent or halt a part of the carnage that day?
If you trust the official account of that day, your lack of credulity undermines any credibility that you might claim for your deliberative faculties. Your ad hominem attacks and your failure to address the arguments directly demonstrate pretty clearly your failure to grasp the principles involved in persuasive debate. And your desire to see that no thought, discussion or effort be brought to bear to reveal facts that have been criminally obscured (we do have laws regarding perjury) calls in to question the grasp you yourself have on reality.
So climb down off your high horse and get over yourself. You have little reason to believe that any of us know much of anything for sure, least of all you.
"And it's significant that those differences from reasonable, critical suspicion are continually blurred and conflated" -by those who would seek to hide the truth.
People like you need to shut your self-important traps if you have nothing of substance to ad to the discussion.
And in 1978, if you didn't believe Jim Jones' story about evil trying to kill everyone in the camp, you would have been called a terrorist by all the kool-aid drinking patriots around you.
Maybe you would have even had a sip yourself just to demonstrate your loyalty.
It could have been the Mexicans, who by their very being appear illegal.
I’ll admit that was a facetious quip.
But pointedly funny.