"traitorous"... now that's some stunningly poetic irony.
what a series of painfully awkward straw mans... you're horrible at this topic, i can tell.
i'll let you get on with the obligatory homophobic jabs and on to my ignore list. You're not my caliber, and I await a non-Super Trooper to take up the coincitard mantle. You most certainly aren't it.
Run away, truthtard. You've been exposed.

Piece of shit retard actually thinks he is worth something! Couldn't even respond, much less actually provide a piece of evidence he claims he has vast amounts of. Just more proof of their incredible dishonesty and complete lack of morals. If he actually had anything, he would have produced it, not just sit there whining that he has it.

Keep running truthtard. You can't handle the truth!
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.

Wow do you have your head up your ass! Lormel was head of the investigation into finances which is what we are talking about.
None of the rest of the FBI investigation relates to the finances, so thanks for trying to derail your own argument. Can't blame you for trying though. The wheels fell off your argument a long time ago.
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.
JiggsCasey said:
Regardless, the FBI confirmed the connection, as established by Indian intelligence.
Wrong yet again. All you're doing is referencing the India article. The FBI never confirmed any connection. Go ahead and provide a link from a credible source that isn't referencing the India article.
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.
But hey. Don't take my word for it.
Trust me, Ace. I won't be taking your word for it. Not at any time.
So get used to linking.
How about the NYT?
One of the first signs of a large infusion of cash coming into the United States for use by the hijackers appears in bank records dating from 2000, when $100,000 was deposited in bank accounts controlled by some of the leading hijackers, including Mr. Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi, Mr. Lormel said. The F.B.I. has traced that money back to the United Arab Emirates and believes that it was sent to the hijackers by Mustafa Ahmed al-Hisawi, who is accused of helping to manage Osama bin Laden's finances.
Mr. Shehhi is believed to have fled the United Arab Emirates for Pakistan at the time of the Sept. 11 attacks, but only after receiving cash from the hijackers.
How about Lormel's testimony before congress? Page 30 of the report (page 34 of the PDF)
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.
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.
Well, shit for brains, like always, you're wrong. You don't know me, nor do you know what upsets me. Just more empty bragging from a blow hard who knows nothing.
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."
And your source for this is?
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.
Why in the world would we take a known, proven liar like you, and believe his claims Cheney asked Musharraf to axe Ahmed?

Let's see.... I can believe you.... or I can believe credible sources. I think I will stick to the credible sources.
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.
So let's see.... you have a source that IN THE HEADLINE claims the role in funding is a possible explanation, not THE explanation.

Did you even bother to read 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.
JiggsCasey said:
The on-line Wall Street Journal article discussing the connections between Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed, Saeed Sheikh, and Mohamed Atta. [Source: Public domain]
You DO realize this is an opinion piece, right?

I am thinking you're just a cut and paste junkie like the rest.
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.
JiggsCasey said:
THIS is coincitard theory at work. Every time they make a linkless claim, simply lift the rock and watch the bugs scramble for cover of darkness.
Really? Then surely you won't have any problem at all replying to the links above, right?
LOL. You've been Fisked. And will continue to be.
And you have yet to present a source not tied to the India article. We know you can't because ALL the stories go back to the India article.
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:
July 31, 2003: FBI Claims 9/11 Money Came from Pakistan
John S. Pistole, deputy assistant director of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division, testifies before a Congressional committee. He states the 9/11 investigation “has traced the origin of the funding of 9/11 back to financial accounts in Pakistan, where high-ranking and well-known al-Qaeda operatives played a major role in moving the money forward, eventually into the hands of the hijackers located in the US.” [US CONGRESS, 7/31/2003] Pistole does not reveal any further details, but in India it is noted that this is consistent with previous reports that Saeed Sheikh and ISI Director Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed were behind the funding of 9/11. [TIMES OF INDIA, 8/1/2003; PIONEER, 8/7/2003] However, the FBI will tell the 9/11 Commission that when Pistole used the word “accounts”, he did not mean actual accounts with a bank, merely that 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was based in Pakistan, handled the money. [9/11 COMMISSION, 8/21/2004, PP. 144 ]
Riiiiiiight. Cover for Pistole's screw up with the obligatory punt to KSM!!! .... Good work on damage control for that one, feds.
I also noticed you could not address the complete lack of followup by the India media on this supposedly Earth shattering news! Surely they wouldn't have just given up on humiliating their sworn enemies before the entire world, right? I knew you would run away from addressing that little fact.
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.
One more flaw in your retarded theories. You claim it was the Cheney administration that "let" 9/11 happen. Guess what chuckles..... Cheney isn't in power anymore. Why hasn't your whole conspiratard theory been exposed?

Here's a clue. Paranoid delusions. Look it up. Free yourself from the tin foil!
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?