Strictly "Let it Happen on Purpose" discussion

Discussion in 'Conspiracy Theories' started by JiggsCasey, Apr 5, 2011.

  1. JiggsCasey
    Offline

    JiggsCasey VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Messages:
    991
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Ratings:
    +128
    This is a continuation off a different 9/11 thread, that was being hijacked... so out of respect to that OP, i'll redirect here.

    This thread should be about LIHOP only. I'd appreciate it if we could do this with no missile talk, no thermite, no pilot-less aircraft claims. It's not that I disregard your tireless work on those issues, it's just that I want to keep them separate. I prefer to focus on what would make the most compelling case, and being honest with myself about what would even be court-admissible in any hypothetical court of law. To me, that case is LIHOP. For which, if anyone is not familiar at this point, the basic bullet points are:

    • They knew the attacks were coming beforehand
    • They greased the skids for them to happen
    • They stonewalled and diverted the entire series of investigations that followed

    "They" being a few dozen individuals close to, and including, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, top CIA officials, the Joint Chiefs, at least 1 high-level FBI executive, and perhaps many other signatories of the PNAC, on at least some levels.

    We all know that coincidence theorists go to great lengths to group all 911 alternative theory together, and they do it willfully.

    Let it be known that two of the most obnoxious coincidence theorists here were offered to debate this topic with respect and classy decor, but both vehemently rejected such notion and brought it to the depths right away. They are welcomed to give it another try at any time, but they appear less than capable, as their homophobia and blind loyalist rage apparently can not be suppressed.

    So it's game on. They earned it.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2011
  2. JiggsCasey
    Offline

    JiggsCasey VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Messages:
    991
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Ratings:
    +128
    Mmmkay douchie...Couple things first:

    First, you may be the most insecure internet poster ever. Worse than your concubine, candy. Both of you were offered to debate civilly (him more formally than you, surely), and neither of you were even capable of taking the challenge. So, very well.

    Second, you just fucked yourself by not checking your work, and pretending two different wire transfers were one and the same.

    LOL. So you're on the record as claiming the FBI didn't bother to deal with any other aspect of financing? Thanks. This will come in handy later when you try and say "the FBI looked into that too!!!"

    Oops.

    You need to read that House report again, and check the dates, cool guy. Speaking of wheels falling off an argument.

    Anyhow, I especially love when coincitards -- learning as they go along, as always -- take one irrelevant statement from an official they find that appears to calm their nerves, and instantly rationalize "good enough for me!" Then fashion an entire smarmy response around one sentence. And it's not even the right wire transfer!!!

    Way to apply zero semblance of critical analysis to what you thought you were reading. Kinda lazy.

    LOL. You didn't read the history commons link at all, did you? It sourced Indian INTELLIGENCE, in corroboration with the FBI. It also sourced the NYT, the Wall St. Journal, Agence France Presse and the Times of India. ALL quoting an Indian INTELLIGENCE report dispatched to Washington. And the FBI confirmed. Chryst, even the Wall St. Journal and loyalist George Will vouched for the intel. ... Awwwww, oops.

    Trust me, Ace. I won't be taking your word for it. Not at any time.

    So get used to linking.

    But you're focused on a different wire transfer from a year earlier, which Lormel cleverly tried to pass off in his one and only statement on the matter, which was really just a deflection. Look at that oversight report again that you're boasting about. Closer. Search for the word "Ahmed" or "Ahmad." It doesn't appear, does it? "He who shall not be named," I guess. LOL.

    I have little doubt Lormel was pleased Mahmood's name never came up, and when it came close, the topic quickly changed. Sigh of relief there, no doubt.

    You are wise to not do with that quote what that disgusting 911myths.com site -- every coincitard's favorite source material -- did with it... conflating two very separate passages together to make it seem like Lormel was responding to the Ahmed to Atta wire transfer allegation, when he wasn't at all. ... But, that being said, you most certainly are still trying to make the correlation.

    Clever.

    Anyhow, here's what the 911myth liars did with it:

    Mr. LAFALCE: I have heard and read that much of al Qaeda’s funding has come from accounts belonging to charities and others and banks in the United Arab Emirates. And apparently Mohamed Atta received a wire transfer of $100,000 from a bank account in Pakistan under the control of one of bin Laden’s lieutenants. And so I am just curious about that...

    Mrs. KELLY: I would suggest that there be some thinking about how we combat this. I also want to know if any of you can give me any information about whether you think that the bin Laden network was actually run on a shoestring rather than having a great deal of money pumped into it?

    Mr. LORMEL: I think that is highly speculative. I believe that there were clearly monies—and significant amounts of monies—coming directly to the 19 terrorists from the support mechanisms. In some regard, they will be linked to Mr. bin Laden.... With regard to your concerns about the hawala accounts, we are in the front end of our investigation. What we are seeing is a pattern of cash activity which I believe——

    Mrs. KELLY: Flight school cost $20,000. They had to get that money somewhere.

    Mr. LORMEL: Yes. Right on the front end, ma’am, they wired over $100,000 in to Mr. Atta a year ago, and we are aware of that. And we tracked that back to accounts in the UAE...

    Tricky of them. Unfortunately, the Lafalce quote is from page 11, and an unrelated line of questioning to another commissioner. The Lormel "response" quote is from page 30, and refers to a wire transfer of a year earlier (Lormel's own words). ... Mind you, this hearing was less than a month after 9/11.

    The Ahmad to Atta transfer happened very shortly before 9/11. Not a "year earlier." This is confirmed by a number of sources, including Time Magazine via an ABC News report.

    Clever. Like all coincitards. ... They get even more loathsomely dishonest with their main page about ISI involvement. I'm sure you'll be trying to use it.

    Let's get a few things clear early on: ... I don't care a thing about you. Don't worry your little head about it for a moment.

    But your sentence about "bragging from a blow hard" is irony, personified. You entered this fray acting like an arrogant jackass, and you remain so. Even when an olive branch was offered beforehard.

    But worse, you're pretending you "talked with Lormel."


    You mean besides the historycommons link I presented already? You didn't read it, did you? It's a shame. Really well done. It provides a great timeline of 9/11 public domain. Just the facts too. I know how facts are like garlic to coincidence theorists.

    Covered. Again, read the HC thread, you chronic wanker. I read your crap. Are you too cool to read mine?

    You know Ace... The difference between you and me is that I don't need to say "Hey, don't take my word for it." ... I just link... and I read your links. Try it.

    Irony. Did YOU? LOL...

    You seem to keep asking for sources, and they're all right in that link. Meanwhile, I'm up to speed on every word of your goofy links so far. You're just not very good at this, I can tell.

    So, it's to the point that you're resorting to applying skepticism to the unabashedly right-wing Wall St. Journal now? Gotta say, I love it.

    LOL. You've been Fisked. And will continue to be.

    At this point, I can't tell whether you're dumb, lazy, or just being completely dishonest. The many different sources, they're all over this link, which I've provided three times now.

    Complete 911 Timeline: ISI Director Mahmood Ahmed

    I know that page is utterly devastating to your coincitard logic scheme. But you're not fooling anyone here. It's right there for anyone to enjoy. Really damaging stuff, huh CIA loyalist?

    Oh, by the way, here's another FBI agent besides your hero Lormel, telling a different story:

    Riiiiiiight. Cover for Pistole's screw up with the obligatory punt to KSM!!! .... Good work on damage control for that one, feds.

    What in God's name are you talking about? If Ahmad can't be interviewed, what kind of follow up is even possible? Do you understand how journalism actually works?

    But, here's a question for you. What do you think Daniel Pearl was working on before he lost his head? What story do you believe he was writing over there? Can't wait.

    This is such babble, I'm not even sure what you're trying to get across here. That somehow because they're not in power anymore, he's ripe for arrest and yet hasn't been?

    My God man, the only "independent" investigation into the greatest crime in U.S. history began it's process by proclaiming to the American people their goal has "not been to assign individual blame." How toothless does it need to start out of the gate?

    Anyhow Ace.... You're going to need to be a bit more on the ball with me, lazy poster. I'll call you on your bullshit. No matter how trivial.

    You're dancing, perpetually -- as always is the case when locking horns with a radical coincitard. Plugging holes, deflecting blame, conflating quotations, mixing and matching, leaping and backtracking. I can tell already. There's been so many before you, and it's the same crap every time.

    Spin an alternate reality all you like. But I know it eats at you that you can't de-emphasize this blatant red flag in your happy story. The cozy ISI, and it's blaring relationships with our State, IC and most esteemed lawmakers. This country's weightless justice department knew where its bread was buttered. Of course it was made to go away.

    Once again, for anyone still following: ... What we have here is acknowledgement of radical fundamentalists at the highest level of the (CIA-created) ISI, ... yet, despite their ties to known terror, were never questioned, never apprehended, never interviewed. Instead, allowed to quietly step down and fade away.

    And yet, Boy King actually said that very night, with a straight face to the America people:

    "We will make no distinction between these terrorist killers... and those who harbor them."

    Oh?
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2011
  3. Patriot911
    Offline

    Patriot911 BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,184
    Thanks Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Ratings:
    +91
    :lol: You think anyone gives a flying fuck what a lying little shit like you thinks? I know what I know. I know you're lying your ass off.

    Wrong yet again. Trust me. You will get tired of being wrong by the time this is over.

    Wrong yet again. I never said anything like that. I said our discussion was about the financial investigation. I said nothing about any other aspect of the FBI investigation. Once again YOU'VE exposed the fact you're a fucking liar and as dishonest as the rest of your truthtard buddies.

    I did. It was from October of that year. What of it? It still clearly states where the money is from. They know it was routed through Pakistan, but that doesn't mean Ahmed was involved.

    Wrong yet again. I've pointed out where the FBI ON THE RECORD has stated where the money came from. You have yet to post where the FBI stated Ahmed was involved. Why? Because you KNOW that the only source for that information was from the Times of India.

    :lol: I did. I exposed the fact you haven't since all your sources point back to the enemy of Pakistan publishing a hit piece.

    Oh for fucks sake you ignorant piece of shit! It's all from the Times of India article! Try to keep up! You're embarassing yourself! Why hasn't Indian intelligence come forward with a report then? They've had YEARS. Why haven't they arrested Ahmed and charged him with collusion in a terrorist attack? Use your head for God's sake!! Or are you going to pretend none of that matters and you should just blindly believe the Times of India and not think about it? I realize that is the truthtard way, but try to buck the trend for once.

    Wrong yet again. They all quote the Times of India article which claims Indian Intelligence was involved. And NONE of those papers followed up on it. Why? Because it wasn't true! If it was, you would have read about it all over the place! Or are you going to try and pretend Cheney has a chokehold over the entire international media? :lol:

    So post where the FBI confirmed Ahmed was involved that doesn't reference back to the Times of India article. Better yet, if the FBI confirmed it, it would be on record. So where is it? Come on. I have quoted the FBI showing where money came from. Not once is Ahmed mentioned. If the FBI had truly confirmed Ahmed's involvement, why wouldn't they have just announced it? It wouldn't have hurt our relationship with Pakistan as they could have painted it as Ahmed acting alone and it would have stuck.

    So the fact Ahmed is not mentioned is somehow proof he was behind the transfer? :lol: That's a stretch!

    Uh huh. So you're trying to pretend you knew exactly what Lormel was thinking. And you wonder why I think you're full of shit!

    You have yet to even prove the Atta Ahmed connection, much less prove Ahmed was ever brought up in the 9/11 investigation.

    Which is more than you can say, isn't it.

    Wow. Talk about being dishonest. You're trying to ascribe to me the work of a 9/11 debunking site when I did not post any of 9/11 myths nor did I link that site. Why is it you can't debate what I wrote and instead have to debate a completely different site? I posted the relevant portions from Lormel's testimony. You lose. Again.

    Uh huh. It is no wonder your link doesn't work. :lol: Try again SFB.

    Again with the dishonest tactic of trying to pretend I am using that site. Why is it you can't debate me and have to try and debate 9/11 myths? BTW, you're sucking at debating them as well. Just a bunch of unsubstantiated claims on your part so far.

    Really? You're going to try and pretend you offered me an olive branch? More blatant lies from you. How is anyone suppose to believe anything you say when you keep lying like this?

    So you have evidence I didn't? I didn't offer that as concrete proof. I showed that, unlike a piece of shit like you, I've done my research and talked to the people involved. I don't expect you or anyone else to believe me based on that claim. I wanted to make clear that I've done the legwork and I know the truth. I'm not some cut and paste junkie like you who doesn't have any actual research under his belt.

    :lol: Yes, I've read the HC link. It is an amalgamation of all different sources and many of its links don't work. It doesn't mean it is authoratative. Great research tool, nothing more.

    Well, at least you admit yours is crap! :lol:

    Where does it say Cheney asked Musharraf to axe Ahmed per your claim? It doesn't. There was speculation, that's all. Why is it you couldn't address the article I posted?

    Done that. Your links suck ass.

    Yup. I'm not the one dishonestly pretending an article listing the POSSIBILITY is actually stating it as fact. You are. Sucks to be you!

    More empty bragging from a blowhard.

    Which part of OPINION PIECE does your little pea brain not comprehend?

    AND THEY ALL REFERENCE BACK TO THE TIMES OF INDIA. Wow. No wonder why you can't tell anything. You're dumber than dirt!

    So where is the proof that Ahmed made the call to send the funds? You have an author making a claim and that's it.

    So where does Pistole say Ahmed is linked? Oh right. You still can't make that claim despite all your attempts. Nice try, but epic fail on your part.

    Yes I do. Apparently you pretend you don't. So India, a country with lots to gain by bringing down Pakistan in the eyes of the world, would just let this story drop without demanding answers and showing real proof instead of nameless, unverifiable sources. :lol: What kind of fucking morons ARE you truthtards to pretend the only thing stopping the Times of India or anyone else following through on the story is the fact they can't interview Ahmed! My GOD that is LAME of you!

    He was working on the link between Richard Reed and Al Qaeda. Do you have evidence that proves otherwise? BTW, before you try the Tariq Ali angle, the second hand claims of another journalist that he was working on a different story isn't exactly evidence, is it. Or is this what you call "court-admissible" evidence? :lol:

    Wow. OK, I guess I have to hold your hand through this since you lack the cognative abilities to make the links. When Cheney was in power, he could have forced certain agencies or people to do things or cover up things. He is no longer in power and holds no sway over said agencies and / or people. So why don't they step forward now and expose him? Anyone of above room temperature intelligence should have been able to figure that out from what I posted. I gave you too much credit. I'll try to dumb everything down so you can follow along.

    ROFLMAO!!!! Are you seriously so fucking ignorant that you believe the 9/11 commission was the FUCKING INVESTIGATION?!?!?! OMG you are a dumbass of EPIC PROPORTIONS!!!! The investigation was PENTTBOM by the FBI and cost us hundreds of millions of dollars! Read about it here. I can't believe you are seriously so ignorant you didn't know what the actual investigation was.

    This coming from the asshole who didn't even know about the real investigation is just too rich!!! :lol:

    More empty bullshit from a bullshit artist.

    More baseless bullshit you have yet to actually prove. Where is all this "court-admissible" evidence you claim to have? I haven't seen jack shit out of you yet that can actually be verified.

    So, again, where is your hard, court-admissible evidence Ahmed gave the order? So far all you've produced is opinions and an unverifiable article from the Times of India that was never followed up on; a sure indication the story was bullshit.

    Read above, dipshit.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2011
  4. JiggsCasey
    Offline

    JiggsCasey VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Messages:
    991
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Ratings:
    +128
    LOL. the world of the perpetual denialist. Look how adorable. What's that, 23 references to "shit?"

    Fun with poop!!... Replete with TOURETTE'S-addled rage.

    Take your Ritalin, crazy person. Read slower.

    Indian Intel is not Times of India.

    It's all right there in that link. You'd have to be the worst investigator in world history to not recognize serious conflict of interest for the CIA, and not bring those men in for questioning.

    Learn some nuance, and try and think for yourself. Good little Bushie.
     
  5. Patriot911
    Offline

    Patriot911 BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,184
    Thanks Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Ratings:
    +91
    Nice response. I knew you would run from the debunking like the good little **** that you are. Now off with you! You're not even a very good truthtard and that is really saying something! :lol:

    Oh, and just for grins....

    SHIT! SHIT! SHIT! SHIT! SHIT! SHIT! SHIT! SHIT! SHIT! SHIT! SHIT!

    :lol:

    BTW, Times of India was the only one claiming India Intelligence confirmed it. You lose. AGAIN! :lol: Piece of shit! :lol:
     
  6. JiggsCasey
    Offline

    JiggsCasey VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Messages:
    991
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Ratings:
    +128
    Not running from anything, glue sniffer. It just takes a while to decipher and address your latest round of pablum. Unlike you, I have a job and family, and I don't spend every waking hour on this Web site.

    I'll get to your crap when I have time. Just a brief perusal indicates there's plenty of fail in your rationale.

    Good little loyalist you are, aren't you? It is interesting you'd rest your entire defense on pretending that Times of India is in on the "conspiracy" angle.
     
  7. LA RAM FAN
    Offline

    LA RAM FAN Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    Messages:
    20,771
    Thanks Received:
    919
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,753
    yeah candyfag and Parrot have a farting problem,they cant post without shitting all over the floor and stinking up the place.:lol::lol::lol:
     
  8. KissMy
    Offline

    KissMy Free Breast Exam

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    12,063
    Thanks Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    In your head
    Ratings:
    +2,922
    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzBom1BGW3Y&feature=related"]9/11 Attacks Could Have Been Stopped! FBI Al Qaeda Double Agent[/ame]
     
  9. percysunshine
    Offline

    percysunshine Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    Messages:
    16,689
    Thanks Received:
    2,261
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Sty
    Ratings:
    +5,861
    "Americas Chickens Have Come Home To Roost!"

    Famous quote
     
  10. LA RAM FAN
    Offline

    LA RAM FAN Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    Messages:
    20,771
    Thanks Received:
    919
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,753

Share This Page