to the left/liberal readers of this forum

i think the rat narrative has hijacked the discussion about the events of september 11th at the expense of alot of reasonable evidence and healthy debate that might otherwise be happening. alot of members seem to want to engage each other through attack only methods, and i cheerfully admit, i have at times been one of them. so u are all free to reject what i say here and call me a effing leftwing nutter or whatever. jim will find this opportunity esp gratifying. since i last pointed out his rudimentary spelling error in answer to his admonishment to me to learn to use the english langauge properly he has gone rather mute, so now would be a good chance for him to renew old hostilities if he so wants. if he does that then, as they say over here, good luck and bugger him. i hope tho that some of the more open minded ppl will try 2 engage reasonably and without rancour. i know i will be trying to.

can i say from the outset that i am not a believer in any of these zionist conspiracy theories i have seen touted around here. i have looked into it, i spent the day at david icke's site and i didn't see it made any sense whatsoever to me. so at this point in time i unreservedly reject his ideas about the illuminati. i must also say that since my grandmother is jewish i hold great sensibility to anything that i call anti-semitic propaganda. i am however not a zionist and i am not one to accuse everybody and anybody of this sin (of anti-semitism) as many jewish ppl are wont to do, but i found the zionist plot thing appalling. the idea about reptilians alienates me even more i must say.

in fact, up until recently, u could have characterised my political position as being fairly left-libertarian, some would even say hard left, and that wouldn't be too far from the mark. i can feel i've just lost my right wing readers but that's too bad. i'm telling it like it is for me.

up until last march i held the view that september 11 was planned and executed by 19 hijackers at the behest of al quada and obl as 'blowback' for us foreign policy. i had no reason to doubt this but i had never looked into it very closely. i relied on the left wing internet press to keep me abreast of it: counterpunch and democracy now principally. i had heard some whispers about it being an inside job but i dismissed them out of hand in the same way many here have also. i found it impossible to think that even someone as fucked as george bush could possibly do such a wicked thing to his own country.

but then something changed.

earleir this year i spent 6 months or so as the guest in a buddhist monastry. i was learning and practising meditation and i had use of a computer. in this serene atmos i decided i would research an aspect of the american military that had intrigued me about this whole business.

why was it that in the country with the biggest and, as we are repeatedly reminded, the best defences in the world, their air force couldn't stop these attacks from happening?

my initial view was that their defences were probably not as good as we have been told they are. another suspicion i harboured was that perhaps alot of the money that is meant to go to the department of defence gets 'lost' on the way, and many of the things that are funded never really materialise. perhaps their air defences in fact are alot of hype.

another question i have found no answers for is this one: why has noone ever be blamed for the fuck-ups?

and there were many fuck ups that day: systemic disorders that caused essential communications between the faa and norad to break down repeatedly that morning. not once, not twice, but on four occasions.

how was it that the air force failed to react in time?

not once, not twice, but on four occasions.

many questions arise from the first one. none of them have been answered in any way that i would say brings closure to the controversy.

for a country that spends something like 49% of the world's defence budget i expected many heads to roll for the military's abject failure to prevent these acts of terrible terrorism. that is after all their prime mission in life, isn't it? but so far there have been none. not one soldier has yet to be punished for his failure to protect his country in its hour of darkest need. not even one sacrificial head.

why?

i would be happy to be persauded.

 

pull my finger

 

oh btw, the free astrological advice u wanted me to do for u is waiting in the forum.

 

k. thanks

 

James q

Why are you directing this thread to the “left/liberal readers of this forum”?

You thought 9/11 was undertaken by terrorist but now your not sure?

So why exactly are you only asking the “left/liberal readers of this forum”?

“in fact, up until recently, u could have characterised my political position as being fairly left-libertarian”

What do you mean by “left-libertarian”?

Are you saying that thinking that terrorists where not involved has somehow changed your political ideas away from whatever this left/libertarian viewpoint was? If so why?

**

 

We agree.

Quite. It's always seemed to be a rather thin disguise for racism to me.

A strange setting for such a decision... But kudos to you for doing the retreat; what tradition was the monastery? Hard work?

Nothing's perfect - even the best defences are weak against an unexpected threat.

Also, the US defences are run by highly-paid professionals; the attackers were commited nuts. An analogy: the Titanic was designed by hundereds of well-qualified experts in cosy offices; the Wright Brothers' plane was built in a shed by two drunk hillbillies. An amateur with a love of his field can often beat the pros.

Oh, and of course the US has pathetic defence. Think about it. When did USA last - sorry, ever - have to defend herself? The military is bound to be biased towards offensive thinking.

The air defences are a well-established way to allow gov't money to fund R&D in private industry. The 'real' benefit is in the spin-off technologies that help US industry be the most productive in the world. Google "military -industrial complex".

Because it would be hugely unfair?

For all the reasons given above, and more.

Simple. The US military doesn't live to defend; it lives to project US political power. Defending against air attack is a good way to get the gov't to spend oodles of money on defence, which ultimately benefits the whole US economy, but it wasn't seen as an important plank of the military - after all, who'd be crazy enough to attack the USA? When it actually happened, those systems were shown - not unexpectedly - to be inadequate and essentially asleep.

 

I had suspicions that 9/11 was an inside job since, well, 9/11. Yes, the actual day of. Well, that's a lie, sort of. Although I had the suspicion, I forced it out of my head that day because like most everybody, it was too terrible to bear in mind. But UNlike most everybody, that dissipated very fast. Within a couple of days I was considering the notion and actually found it very convincing, at least on an intuitive level. It just seemed to make perfect sense. The radical left was gaining tremendous ground (during the rise of the "anti-globalization" movement), and so it just made sense.

Then a few years later, a book written by a theologian named David Ray Griffin surfaced titled "The New Pearl Harbor" which provided the best thesis about the day of 9/11/01 I had ever heard. Even "left gate-keeper" Amy Goodman interviewed him...although in an unfair setting. Then his follow-up book "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions" came out, and that was, well, the definitive, most authoritative book on the subject I've read yet. I strongly suggest it to anyone who's concerned about this topic.

When people ask me about my feelings concerning 9/11, my automated response is "David Ray Griffin". Sounds like a cheesy thing to say, however it happens to be true. Read the guy's books.

www.septembereleventh.org

 

Dude you're gonna want to look at places other than David Icke.

 

Yeah, like David Ray Griffin...

 

i think a key to politics is to try to mask your stance until you can get a discussion going, prefereably in the direction you want it

 

Wait a minute.... what do I have to do with this? I can't understand why my name was brought up.

Also, where does anti-Semitism play into all of this talk? What makes you say David Icke is anti-Semitic? This is an attack that's long been leveled against him by the mainstream media and groups like the ADL, though, frankly, I don't believe exposing the truth is anti-Semitic, even if some people might not want to hear it. The fact is, the forces that be don't want to truth to be known, which is why David Icke has been such a target of these Mossad-controlled mind police organizations like the fascist ADL.

Icke has several times expressed his compassion for the Jews and their persecution. He simply works to expose the forces working behind this persecution, which, to me, if anything, is more pro-Jew than anything else. Then again, most people prefer lies to the truth if it means feeling comfortable.

Besides, this idea of a Jewish-Illuminati conspiracy goes back decades, long before Icke was writing books. Several books have been written about this by NON conspiracy writers.

 

The only place in this thread that I've seen your name brought up was in connexion with loony conspiracy theories, which is hardly inappropriate!

I was wondering how long it would take you to get around to the <queue scary music> Mainstream Media!

Yes, quite. Arguably the first conspiracy theory was in the Protocols. Read that? I guess you'd agree that the Protocols at least are anti-semitic, right?

You talk about a *Jewish cabal that seeks to rule the world* - exactly what hitler talked about. Ooops. Godwin!

 

James, ask yourself was the odds were that at the height of the cold war a teenage pilot in a single engine Cessna could take off from Helsinki and fly hundreds of miles across Russia before landing in Red Square, all completely undetected?

Wouldn't it be impossible?

 

"Dude you're gonna want to look at places other than David Icke."

I actually thought david's book on 911 is great, it presents a lot of good evidence and he doesn't talk much about any theories that he has, just 9/11...

 

hahahahahahha

 

LOL! I am being attacked by somebody who can't even properly spell a word that most 3rd graders can.

It's connection, Einstein.

 

good god.
can we stay on topic?
i bet nobody bothered to look up david ray griffin.

 

you'd think so. but then it happened. incredible really. that's my problem tho. how could it happen four times?

 

ok fair enough, point noted.

 

np