Why the US hasn't had another terror attack

How critically have you looked at the first WTC attack, Skip? Because if you had looked at it critically, you would know the FBI trained the driver and helped cook the bomb that was used that day. How do we know this? Because it was all caught on tape by one of the informers / would-be patsies, who defected at the last minute by going to authorities with this taped conversation he covertly recorded between himself and government agents. The patsies / informers were told initially they were being used as part of a terrorist drill, then that they were to infiltrate a terrorist cell plotting to blow up the towers. The informer that defected was told that the "officials" wanted to switch the explosives with harmless power, but called this off at the last minute because they had other plans for how he would be used. So this is when the informer defected and went to the police. This made it to the front page of the New York Times, before it was quickly swept under the rug and we never heard about it again. Of course being an establishment mouthpiece, the NYT article does not blatantly come out and say the government was directly involved, but if you can read between the lines, as well as look at the rest of the evidence, it is more than clear.

Thursday October 28, 1993 Page A1

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

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

It also needs to be understood that ALL 4 accused "terrorists" who went to trial for these attacks were on the CIA payroll.

See also:

1993 World Trade Center bombing case (Oct 28 1993 CBS News w/ Dan Rather)

The truth regarding the 1993 WTC bombing

Sorry, but all this nonsense about al-Qaeda and Arab terrorists is bullshit that has been concocted to scare the people of the West into submission so they will accept whatever actions the government puts forward, including being monitored wherever they go like cattle. This is the oldest trick in the book, yet people are still falling for it, thinking the government really wants to protect them from the evil Muslim boogeymen THEY trained and funded.

I mean, c'mon, Skip... the US brought bin Laden to the states in the mid 80's under the alias 'Tim Osman' and trained him for the role he serves today. Why do you think they haven't found him? Maybe because they don't want to find him. He is an asset to them! He is one of their main guys!

Even the name "al-Qaeda" comes from a CIA database file on the Mujahadeen, which western intelligence funded in the late 70's and 80's to go against the Soviets. Al-Qaeda translates to "the base" (the database) and in the Middle East is slang for going to the bathroom. How convenient is it that a radical Islamist terrorist network would name itself in reference to a bodily function?

IT'S ALL A BIG SCAM!!!

 

9/11 was "allowed" to happen.

The best way to bring people together for a common cause is to scare the hell out of them. Then the neocons can come to our rescue and save us from those evildoers from the "outside".

This cements their power without much opposition, allowing subversion of our laws and our military for use in private agendas.

The dust has now settled enough where people are beginning to realize they've been had. The only option for the neocons at this point is to shake the Osama rattle again and make people fall back into line.

Some kind of national emergency. Sometime maybe before election day. Should someone like Hilary Clinton get the presidency, things will continue pretty much along the same path. She's a closet neocon and AIPAC darling.

And she'll have a fresh start at continuing the mess we're already in.



x

 

I suppose I could believe it was "allowed" to happen if I thought "al-Qaeda" (which is nothing more than a CIA-MI6-ISI-Mossad front) was able to pulverize two buildings in ten seconds, as well as launch that missile into the Pentagon. Of course Marvin Bush was running security on the towers until the 10th, but I suppose THAT's just a coincidence as well. So were the war game excercises that were taking place that day that involved planes crashing into buildings.

Yup, it's all just a coincidence. It's all just mere incompetence. Let's all just go back to sleep because the government loves us and wants to protect us from the "evil doers."

 

My opinion is other terrorist attacks have taken place, but they are not acknowledged as such for political reasons. Who sent the anthrax?

I have trouble seeing Iran as the big boogieman.

 

The anthrax came from a government lab, so that answers that question.

 

Not until the media says so with authority to back it up, until then it's just speculation and conspiracy theories. I find it strange that the American public and world public has not ask for some determinitive answer to this question, but then only a few low level employees were killed, so who really cares?

 

Are you kidding me?

The media, which is controlled by a total of SIX corporatons, whch are all tied in to the Military-Industrial Complex, whose heads are all members of the CFR? You expect THEM to deliver you the truth about anything?

I hope you were being sarcastic. If not, you are very gullible. If you believe the media is telling you the truth, then you might as well go straight to the Pentagon or White House for your news. (That's where it all comes from anyway -- "official sources.")

But the fact is, the media DID say that the anthrax came from a government lab (albeit in an indirect way).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A34707-2001Dec12&notFound=true

An Army biological and chemical warfare facility in Utah has been quietly developing a virulent, weapons-grade formulation of anthrax spores since at least 1992, and samples of the bacteria were shipped back and forth between that facility and Fort Detrick, Md. ... The Utah spores, grown and processed at the 800,000-acre Dugway Proving Ground about 80 miles from Salt Lake City, belong to the Ames strain -- the same strain used in the deadly letters sent to media outlets and two senators in September and October. No other nation is known to have made weapons-grade Ames -- The Washington Post

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/disc_anth.html

The anthrax attacks in the United States were probably the work of a member of a U.S. biological warfare program, the magazine of environment pressure group Greenpeace Germany reported Wednesday. .. "The U.S. delegation believe it is an inside job. ... Their members also have more information than has been made public," Kirsten Brodde, a reporter for the magazine, told Reuters. The magazine said: "It seems the attacker ... wanted to force through an increase in the budget for U.S. research on biological weapons." -- The Discovery Channel

 

Well obviously SOMEONE knew, because Condoleeza Rice called then San Francisco mayor Willie Brown the night before 9/11, warning him not to fly the next day. This was reported by numerous mainstream sources.

http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/02/05/Bush_knew2.html

I can provide you NUMEROUS instances of foreknowledge from people in the government that the attacks would happen THAT DAY, but I don't think you want to see them.

If this is true, then why would the CIA want to destroy their own documents?

We KNOW what was in the building, and a lot of it was incriminating documents pertaining to the Enron scandal.

It's also likely WTC-7 was where the 9/11 black-op was carried out. It was people like Giuliani who received warning from the OEM (Office of Emergency Management), which was located in building 7, that the buildings would collapse. Now HOW exactly did they know this when no building in the history of steel-frame buildings had collapsed from fire, and why didn't Giuliani pass this warning on to the firefighters and police who were in the towers?

 

Well it worked, and the dems didn't ask for an explanation or proof of what actually happened, did they. They appear as complicit in any cover up as the republicans.

 

So I gather, there was at least one other terrorist attack in the states, the delivery of the anthrax letters. Why don't the candidates for president ever bring it up?

I personally still wonder about the downing of the plane in Queens. Seemed to me that before the smoke ever cleared too many people were saying it had nothing to do with terrorists. How could they know? The wreckage hadn't even been picked up. But then the majority of the passengers on it were foreign nationals returning home. Who really cares about legal visitors to this country.

 

The demolition of WTC7 is one of the weakest aspects of the 911 conspiracy theories. If it was a controlled demolition and couldn't have collapsed on its own, why was there so much eyewitness evidence from firefighters saying that the building looked dangerous, like it could collapse? It was heavily damaged and had burned out of control for hours. Eyewitness accounts of this are clear and consistent.

The real question is why do people lie constantly to promote this conspiracy theory? What is their agenda?

 

Dodging the question there Skip?

Its simple - either you are saying the NYFD are in on 911 and lied when they said the building looked like it was going to collapse, or you accept their eyewitness testimony, in which case controlled demolition theories are junk.

Your basis for WTC7 seems to be whether it would be ideologically convenient for you, not whether the theory can actually be backed up.

 

How do buildings "look like they're going to collapse" when a building has never collapsed from fire prior to 9/11? Furthermore, how does a building collapse the way WTC-7 did, on its own footprint in a matter of 6 seconds?

Here is a clip from CNN, where you hear police saying "the building is about to blow up" coupled with the sound of explosions coming from the building? How did they know the building was going to fall, let alone "blow up"? I have never heard "blow up" used in reference to a building collapsing due to structural damage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9CXQY-bZn4

 

there is a whole proffession involved in determining things like the probabilities of structural failure. a litteral answer by anyone lacking in the neccessary scientific background would therefore likely be more then a little neive.

considering the probabilities in their broader outlines however, it seems unlikely in the extreme that intrests either in the american government, or the major economic players, (which is essentially saying the same thing, considering the degree to which they appear to have usurped the political proccess) or both, didn't have a major hand in both planing and facilitating the events which subsiquently occured.

if, as is claimed, these events were the work of individuals driven by having witnessed american attrocities in their homelands, why then, has there not been one single 'terrorist' attack, on an oil refinery, anywhere in the u.s.?

personally i see that little detail as speaking volumes more, then all the splitting of hairs over specifics, of how the attacks were carried out.

why weren't there other teams, positioned to strike while the iron was hot, so to speak, at oil industry infrastructure, in the immediate aftermath, when all commercial flights were being suspended, and wall street was essentially down for the week it took to get it back up?

=^^=
.../\...

 

I think there were, but for political reasons, we were always told they weren't "terrorist" connected. Something the Bush whitehouse is really proud of, why is that? Got him reelected though..the stance that we had never been attacked after 09/11.