Ex FBI/CIA Agents Ready To Blow the cover on Bush 9/11 Story...

Well, you flat out refuse to look at the evidence. You operate on the conditioned principle that our government would never do such a thing to their own people.

There is no such thing as Operation Northwoods, right?

Hell, you probably believe that Lee Harvey Oswald shot Kennedy, too.

Well, you're the one NOT doubting the government in the face of evidence that would cause any rational person to at least ask questions. Because you're a shill for Bush, you aren't open to what you don't want to hear about your idol, his demonic handlers, and their murderous actions upon their own people.

That was in '93, actually. Get your information straight before you try and debate me.

The intention actually was to topple the towers (well, one of them) back in '93, but the Egyptian CIA operative didn't park up against the tower's main support collumn, as he was ordered to do by his CIA handlers.

This was in the NEW YORK TIMES, btw, only to be quickly swept under the rug and never mentioned again.

It's kind of like how the initial news reports following the Oklahoma City attack of '95 reported multiple bombs in the building, that bomb experts were in the process of defusing, following the initial blast that killed 168 people and tore the face off the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. Of course it was later reported that it was a single truck bomb, and this is what became the "official" story, dictated to the media by the government.

Yet, I am sure you will weasel your way around this one, too.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/wtcbomb.html

THE NEW YORK TIMES​

​

* * * * *

Thursday October 28, 1993 Page A1​

"Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart
Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast"​

By Ralph Blumenthal​

Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building
a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center,
and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting
harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after
the blast.

The informer was to have helped the plotters build the bomb
and supply the fake powder, but the plan was called off by
an F.B.I. supervisor who had other ideas about how the informer,
Emad Salem, should be used, the informer said.

The account, which is given in the transcript of hundreds of
hours of tape recordings that Mr. Salem secretly made of his
talks with law-enforcement agents, portrays the authorities as
being in a far better position than previously known to foil
the February 26th bombing of New York City's tallest towers.

The explosion left six people dead, more than a thousand people
injured, and damages in excess of half-a-billion dollars.
Four men are now on trial in Manhattan Federal Court
[on charges of involvement] in that attack.

Mr. Salem, a 43-year-old former Egyptian Army officer, was used
by the Government [of the United States] to penetrate a circle
of Muslim extremists who are now charged in two bombing cases:
the World Trade Center attack, and a foiled plot to destroy
the United Nations, the Hudson River tunnels, and other
New York City landmarks. He is the crucial witness in the
second bombing case, but his work for the Government was
erratic, and for months before the World Trade Center blast,
he was feuding with the F.B.I.

Supervisor `Messed It Up'

After the bombing, he resumed his undercover work. In an
undated transcript of a conversation from that period,
Mr. Salem recounts a talk he had had earlier with an agent
about an unnamed F.B.I. supervisor who, he said,

"came and messed it up."
"He requested to meet me in the hotel,"

Mr. Salem says of the supervisor.

"He requested to make me to testify, and if he didn't
push for that, we'll be going building the bomb with
a phony powder, and grabbing the people who was
involved in it. But since you, we didn't do that."

The transcript quotes Mr. Salem as saying that he wanted to
complain to F.B.I. Headquarters in Washington about the
Bureau's failure to stop the bombing, but was dissuaded by
an agent identified as John Anticev.

Mr. Salem said Mr. Anticev had told him,

"He said, I don't think that the New York people would
like the things out of the New York Office to go to
Washington, D.C."

Another agent, identified as Nancy Floyd, does not dispute
Mr. Salem's account, but rather, appears to agree with it,
saying of the `New York people':

"Well, of course not, because they don't want to
get their butts chewed."​

 

Man, all you need to do is purchase Alex Jones' 911:Road to Tyranny. It says it all, in a video format, which should be easy enough for the average person to watch.

 

Not really, I just got bored as the theories constantly change as people pointed out how idiotic the old versions are. Always a new improved version. You on the other hand flat out refuse to consider any criticism of your beloved conspiracy theories.

Actually, no there wasn't any operation northwoods. It is a propsed plan which was rejected. Also, it didn't involve killing any Americans.

He did. On the other hand I don't believe in UFOs, Area 51, a flat earth, the illuminati, freemasons, skull and bones, or chemtrails, and I don't wear tinfoil hats.

Rational people ask questions, but they don't fall for the sort of third rate mush you do.

Do you have to make yourself look so pathetic, grasping at straws like that?

What I find really hilarious is when the frothing at the mouth crazies put in links to the New York Times and say "See! The New York Times says it was a conspiracy" The idea is that conspiracy theorists use their link barns and conspiracy clearinghouses as evidence, AND corporate media when it suits them. But if you dare reply with a a "mainstream media" link, YOU ARE A CORPORATE MEDIA SHEEPLE TOOL BRAINWASHED DUPE! Basically, we're allowed to refute conspiracy theories except we aren't allowed to use "the media" (which is part of the conspiracy except when its not). So why bother?

 

Well, I do. So FUCK YOU!

 

That's pretty bad logic...

 

Inogodadavita....if you think that Bad Intelligence is to blame for Iraq, than you don't know how our system really works....they all knew Iraq was no threat and that they didn't posess WMD, they lied to us on purpose.

Peace and Love,
Dan

 

Yeah, the so-called "intelligence" used to justify the invasion of Iraq was nothing more than unadulterated lies.

James Bamford does a good job of highlighting the abuse of America's intelligence agencies in his book A Pretext for War.

 

Its funny to me that people like Pressed Rat have never considered maybe James Bamford and these conspiracy websites ARE THE ILLUMINATI!

That Bush and Cheney ARE THE ONES TRYING TO EXPOSE THE TRUTH and the only ones being decieved are the ones LED TO BELIEVE they are 'questioning' it.

(and if you think about it - THAT is more cunning than anything yet!)

In fact...

LET ME SUGGEST YOU ARE ONE OF THEM PRESSED RAT!?

Hmmm interesting.. How is it that PRessed Rat always seems to have an 'Answer' to anyone who tries to agree with CNN and The White House view?

WHY Is Pressed Rat so interested in countering them??

Who stands to make MILLIONS in Book deals and gain enormous FAME if the public can be convinced The CIA created the 9/11 attacks?
... PRESSED RAT!

 

That's a reasonable question, actually. It's one I have even considered myself.

But, then of course you must ask yourself who stands to gain more, a handful of authors and investigative journalists with little influence on public mindset, or a government that deceives an entire country in order to push an agenda whose justification is built around lies?

And what are these "conspiracy websites" you keep referring to?

Look, all one has to do is know what these people are all about (the elities within our government) and look at the evidence (and I am not just talking about 9/11), and it's quite obvious who really stands to gain.

How can Bush and Cheney be harbingers of truth when it turns out that the mess we are in now is because of their lies and overall lack of integrity?

I doubt James Bamford is a millionaire, nor is anyone else who isn't part of the government or the maintream media, who is asking the REAL questions.

Why am I so interested in countering the government's rhetoric? Because most of it is false information that needs to be countered! It's coming from the same people who are saying the war in Iraq is going well, Saddam had WMD's, and that we need to invade even more countries in order to be "safe" from the evil terrorists.

 

LOL! That made me laugh. Not that Pressed_Rat couldn't write many books regarding a plethora of subjects, but your post was funny.
The only reason I spread info regarding 9/11 or WHATEVER, is because I care about my family and friends. I want people to know the truth, whatever it may be. I don't want more terrorist attacks from our government, who knows who could be the next victim? I want my rights preserved too. I personally have no ulterior motive, so I don't assume anyone else does either, including those who support this murderous regime of ours.

 

Quote:
Hell, you probably believe that Lee Harvey Oswald shot Kennedy, too.
He did. On the other hand I don't believe in UFOs, Area 51, a flat earth, the illuminati, freemasons, skull and bones, or chemtrails, and I don't wear tinfoil hats.
Pointbreak

You say on the other hand, yet both views are on the same side.....so it is not really on the other hand. All are pro the skeptics accepted line views.
I have much to say about these views PB. First of all, LHO most certainly did not kill Kennedy. The mountains of evidence is too huge to ignore. LHO was behind, and JFK was hit from in front. That is one of hundreds of bits of evidence of it.
UFO's, just some object in the sky one cannot ID...whats not to believe?
Area 51, Groom Lake, NV, why not drive there and see if it is there? hint: it is.
freemasons, tons of em everywhere, Geo. Washington and Ben Franklin are pretty famous ones. skull n bones, a fraternity for the US nobility's youth.,
chemtrails have also got a lot of videotape and eyewitness testimony, which I am not as clear on the details, so I cannot say I totally am convinced. Though I am nearly so. Tinfoil hats, only on Xmas.

 

I'm glad to know you believe in UFOs.

Personally, I don't wear tinfoil hats, even at Christmas when the chemtrails are at their peak.

 

I have never seen a UFO, just jets, satellites, etc., but it just means something you cannot ID, which could be anything from a new military fighter jet, a weatherballoon, a satellite, meteor, etc. So, yeah, I guess I do believe, though it does not seem all that amazing or unusual that I do.
I worked for a guy who researched the chemtrail thing for a while, but I havent.

 

Back in the 80's there were numerous reports of an UFO appearing in this one area of the USA.
A very popular show at the time called 'Unsolved Mysteries' had the public in an uproar since they had:

Almost 100 eye-witnesses who described a nearly silent black 'Triangle' with only three lights on each corner.
At least one eye-witness was a retired Fighter Pilot who testified it was NOTHING like any plane he had ever seen.

(Could ALL these witnesses being wrong??)

Next thing was TWO air controllers who testified they picked up this UFO on their radar screens for about 1 second.. then it simple VANISHED.
(This they said was evidence it had gone from a moderate speed to near super-sonic in times not humanly possible!)

These were PROFESSIONAL eyewitness Air Traffic controllers.

So U.M. and Robert Stack inquire into 'What the Government knows' and recieved no co-operation (or at least 'admission' from the gov)

Annyyyyyyway..... A few years later it was made public that it was a little something called The STEALTH BOMBER.

Turns out they had been testing it for years out there.
They did not turn on any lights of course and the new paint technology was why it couldnt be picked up (very well) on RADAR.

Nothing to do with Aliens after all.

Now does everyone feel a little silly - yes.

Should we assume that Space Monsters are driving any unknown aircraft we see - NO.

Is the government covering it up for a reason - actually yes, they may be. and that reason may be to protect YOU.

 

sooo... UFO=alien-driven aircraft?? Right.
How the heck did people get on this topic anyways? Are you somehow insinuating that the people who believe 9/11 was a government scam are the same people who believe aliens have visited Earth? You mean those redneck freaks who claim to have been abducted? Funny how those idiots all seem to come from the South...

Give it up. NORMAL people know 9/11 and the Kennedy assassination, among other events, were scams! Trying to imply that people who believe this are loony only shows how weak and pathetic your argument is. Not to mention what it suggests of your mental fitness.

The things you said you "don't believe in" are clearly in existence! It is beyond dispute, so it sounds to me like you are the nutcase...

Right, because we all know that is their main concern...protecting us.

 

The point is - just because you dont know exactly 'why' something is happening - it does not necessarily follow the most extreme explanation is likely.

 

Yep, except you forgot to add that they also believe in chemtrails.

I'm only trying to prove what 9/11 conspiracy theorists think is "normal". After all it is Mike Ruppert, your conspiracy guru, who had psychiatric treatment and pays compliments to Lyndon LaRouche, not me.

Of course. Everyone who doesn't believe in the conspiracy is either part of it or crazy, because it is "beyond dispute".

 

I've read almost all of the articles and interviews Ruppert has done, and I've never heard him once say a thing about Lyndon LaRouche. Ruppert does all he can to distance himself from people like that. Then again, of course this was published in the Weekly Standard; William Kristol and the neocons' own personal rag for dispensing disinformation.

" I have never once, inside or outside my office said that I wanted to be connected to illuminati jerks, UFO advocates or David Icke's Lizard people. Anyone who knows me at all knows that this is ironclad policy with me," Ruppert said.

If Ruppert is such a "conspiracy nut," which he is far from, why would the Weekly Standard and the Nation -- two propaganda rags at opposite ends of the phony left/right paradigm -- even take the time to mention his name? Why would they even be giving his work the time of day?

It's the way people like you discredit anyone that poses threat to what you want to believe.

Here is Ruppert disputing some of the accuations he's received since he published Crossing the Rubicon:

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/10questions.shtml

 

No, only if evidence points to it -- obviously.

 

Of course. I wouldn't support the 9/11 scam theory if I hadn't read enough evidence to highly suspect that it is. Sure, the plot makes sense, lots of people had a lot to gain, but THAT is not proof enough. I know that. However, I've done enough research into the facts and they all suggest SCAM.