i believe george bush is not lying about 9/11

I think him having a hand in bringing down a few buildings and a plane hitting the pentagon, raised his importance. So yeah the US certainly did magnify him and create him into the 'force' he is today.. though ask some people he and his network are not as powerful as the 'mainstream' media make out... enough whack jobs hail him every time the commit some form of terrorism/retaliation/whatever you wish to call it.

Given the opportunity i doubt they would have wished this upon themselves..but with the shit hitting the fan, i suppose the middle east has a chance for change.

 

that still doesn't shed much light on y u believe all that. i've gotta admit i found ur first reply the most credible: that u loathe the conspiracy theorists. this seems consistent with ur policy of discredit at all costs. and if that's all u have left 2 say, matthew, there are plenty of other threads 4 pontificating.

 

Americans interpret the events of Sept. 11 in one of four ways, [David Day] Griffin said:

• A first group accepts the official interpretation that Sept. 11 was a surprise attack by Islamic terrorists. It is easy for these people "to think of America's so-called War on Terror as a just war," Griffin said.

• A second group accepts the official line but thinks Sept. 11 has been used opportunistically by the Bush administration to extend the American empire. People who hold this view often believe that America's response to Sept. 11, which has led to hundreds of thousands of deaths, is far worse than the attacks themselves, he said.

• A third group believes the Bush administration knew the attacks were coming and let them happen. It shows the government as "deliberate and cold-blooded," advancing its imperial designs while hypocritically portraying itself as promoting a "culture of life," Griffin said.

Although there has been no national survey, a Zogby poll taken last year indicated that almost half of the residents of New York City share this view, he said.

• A fourth group believes that the government orchestrated the attacks. While no poll shows how many Americans believe this, polls in Canada and Germany have found as many as 20 percent of those populations do, Griffin said.
http://www.wanttoknow.info/050504davidraygriffin

 

i'd say 90% of educated peopke who are willing ro examine the evedence & not just accept the party line would have to accept that we are dealling with one of the last 2 scenarios

 

u would have thought so soaring eagle, but 1 thing that surprises me is how easy it is 4 ppl who are highly educated 2 toe the party line however ridiculous it gets: think of all the engineers and scientists who must know that u can't demolish a sturdy skyscraper with just an aeroplane and a fire. and what about all the ppl in the media who have covered this who must surely suspect that the air force was deliberately stood down on the morning of 9/11 so by logical extension it must be an inside job.

i think there's another group that should go on griffin's list: the technocrats and the professional ppl in the media, army, and various government agencies and departments who must know the truth but who are 2 afraid of their government's recriminations to speak out. this, imho, is a small but v decisive group. without their passive cooperation the whole official conspiracy theory would fall apart tomorrow.

 

I was not was not trying to shed more light on what i believe. I was responding to a post. thats all. I don't loath 'conspiracy theorists' that is what you have in your head (about me).. From your further posts here it seems you are the one wishing to discredit at all cost... and you pontificate twice as much as i do by the way chill out james stop having a go.

 

of course i do, i'm allowed 2. i'm a pont

 

Matthew writes:

"you only have to read some of the posts within this forum and how contradictive they all are, to see that."

By making that comment, you're implying that you expect people in here, who are merely speaking a theory, to be experts. You don't have to be an expert to be able to connect certain dots to make a prima facie case for a crime. But even so, you can't look to random people on an online forum to lay out everything you want to hear, because the truth is, nobody here has ALL the answers. Those who agree with the official theory are also believers in conspiracy theories, and indeed, the theory that 19 hijackers out-tricked our trillion-dollar military defense system in a span of 2 hours is the MOTHER of all conspiracy theories.

But if you want to hear an "expert's" view on what you call the "conspiracy theory" of 9/11, read David Ray Griffin's "The New Pearl Harbor" as well as his follow-up book. He can do a much better job than any of us here can, I'm sure. They...are...extraordinarily convincing. And by the way, he never talks about directly who he personally feels is responsible, he simply lays out a case of evidence, and more evidence, and then more.

After reading those 2 books, I can say that yes, the U.S. government blueprinted and engineered the attacks of 9/11. More and more Americans are beginning to wake up to this hellish reality. We in the 9/11 Truth movement hope you do the same.

www.septembereleventh.org

 

Just read his books

 

I think i will..

 

We are not being told this now, it is quite old information to a certain degree . The people that did the madrid bombs were also takfiris I.e drug dealers criminals etc just people that blended into their societies

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3600421.stm 5 April, 2004
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/589969.cms MARCH 29, 2004

The term is probaly new but the methods are not.. i appreciate what you mean though.


I never mentioned they all were takfiris, i was just pointing out that (i think it was presed rat..) said that (in so many words) one of the hijackers was eating pig etc, so must be a stooge and not a radical islamist.. I was just pointing out he did not need to be praying 5 times a day and keping up all the strict codes muslims undertake. The link i posted was from a couple of interconnected documentarys that are being shown at the moment. A reporter who has spent a year collecting first hand information..about this. No i had never heard of such a thing before and like anyone (i hope) if i have some pertinent information, i use it. Had you heard of such a thing before ? (oh it seems not).

They were still devout muslims fired by jihad.. but like the twisted interpretation thay use(ed) to kill they (i would imagine) can find the rationale to do a multitude of things most proper muslims would never do. These people are not interpreting the koran like millions of others, as i am sure you are aware.

 

Q: How can you tell when Bush is lying?

A: His lips move...

 

rotflmao or should that be Yawn

 

u have quite missed the point, matthew. whether or not u can cite some earlier reference to these takfiris is not the point. here is the point: as recently as last year the keane commission told us in their report that the 19 alleged hijakers were all devout muslim men and so on and so forth. this was despite the fact plenty of ppl were around who could testify otherwise: they had seen these 19 men out carousing. presumably the commission thought this part of the official theory could stand up. but we see now that it hasnt stood up at all and is being contradicted all around the place, not least of all by several of the alleged 19 who ARE STILL ALIVE and living in the middle east. i believe this new explanation of the takfiris is yet another necessary lie made on the run. like hundreds of the other lies in that report and in the offical conspiracy theory. wake up please matthew.

 

I don't think the report was trying to come to a conclusion if they were devout or not devout.. but anyway ..
Can you highlight the passage it states this..just so i can see it in context.

IMHO it is a little pedantic because they were devout muslims.. and not devout muslims in a very paradoxical way. You would have to be prety devout to do this kind of thing.
I have not noticed it stating 'takfiris' or anything of this kind.. but really the term is a slightly lazy anyway.. technicaly they are 'takfiris' but it is just a term to be used or not used.. I call them nutters, does this mean the 9/11 and 7/7 nutters were nutters ? no. but there actions were nutty (but i digress ).... The main thing i was trying to say is that they did not have to follow the teachings of the muslim faith.. clearly the actions these individuals took and other 'attacks' around the world highlight this fact.

11

FORESIGHT-AND HINDSIGHT



In composing this narrative, we have tried to remember that we write with the benefit and the handicap of hindsight. Hindsight can sometimes see the past clearly-with 20/20 vision. But the path of what happened is so brightly lit that it places everything else more deeply into shadow. Commenting on Pearl Harbor, Roberta Wohlstetter found it "much easier after the event to sort the relevant from the irrelevant signals. After the event, of course, a signal is always crystal clear; we can now see what disaster it was signaling since the disaster has occurred. But before the event it is obscure and pregnant with conflicting meanings."1

As time passes, more documents become available, and the bare facts of what happened become still clearer. Yet the picture of how those things happened becomes harder to reimagine, as that past world, with its preoccupations and uncertainty, recedes and the remaining memories of it become colored by what happened and what was written about it later. With that caution in mind, we asked ourselves, before we judged others, whether the insights that seem apparent now would really have been meaningful at the time, given the limits of what people then could reasonably have known or done. We believe the 9/11 attacks revealed four kinds of failures: in imagination, policy, capabilities, and management.

 

i dont think this is the freest country in the world. out of the us population about 80% i think are registered voters. out of that we had less than a 30% voter turnout during the 2000 presidential election. of that 48 or 49% voted for bush, who lost the popular vote, and became the president. when you look at the whole population only 5 or 10% actually voted for bush. and now we live in a police state with the republicans controlling the presidency, the house, the senate, and the supreme court. there are some things that could greatly improve our democracy that many other countries have already done. one would be to have the government fund the campains so anyone can run for office, not just the super rich. another would be to have a three choise ballot system where you would put your first, second, and third choise presidents, that way if your first choise does not get a high enough percentage they will count your second choise, this would get rid of the two party system. you should read the patriot act. it violates a least three amendments in the bill of rights, we are not as free as you would like to think, we are not the worst though, but we are not the best.

and also the 911 conspiracy theories have quite a bit of information to back them up. try these websites
www.911truth.org
www.physics911.org
http://hawaii.indymedia.org/news/2003/07/3248_comment.php

 

waffle. can i get u 2 focus on my point again: why does the official conspiracy theory keep changing all the time? first we are told they're devout muslims (pp 20-21) and now they're not at all: they're takfiris. neither story has any real credence in my view. u know what i think? i think the 19 alleged hijackers were all cia assets. and that's why there is an official conspiracy theory. if it were to become widely understood that the hijackings were organised and financed by the cia, or its minions, then the truth about 9/11 will be out. i hope that day is soon.

 

www.911sharethetruth.com