It's Been Almost 9 Years

[BeFree]

And there are still thousands of unanswered questions.

You would think that in that time all the questions could be honestly answered.

But since there are so many answers being obstructed by our government, can it be any wonder there is such distrust of the Official Conspiracy Theory?

And two more questions: Since it has been 9 years, why can't those who support the OCT answer the many questions? Is it because they don't know enough?

[zappaman]

1. how much longer before you figure it out?

any day now?

[Make7]

2. ROTFLMAO! Don't ever change, BeFree. ( n/t )

[BeFree]

3. One question

Why did the CIA allow the terrorists to roam free around the US, even though they knew they were here for an attack?

[zappaman]

4. who says

they "let them"?

[deconstruct911]

5. It's called the Saudi connection. nt

[rschop]

44. re: who says who says

I DO!

The CIA knew a al Qaeda terrorist Nawaf al-Hazmi had entered the US on January 15, 2000 and that another al Qaeda terrorist, Khalid al-Mihdhar, had a multi-entry visa for the US, in order to join Hazmi and take part in this attack. These al Qaeda terrorists had been photographed for the CIA at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting that took place between January 5-8, 2000. On January 4, 2001 the photograph of Walid bin Attash, Khallad, taken at Kuala Lumpur was identified as a high level al Qaeda terrorists by the CIA/FBI joint source. Since Khallad was known to be the mastermind of the USS Cole bombing, this directly connected both Mihdhar and Hazmi to the planning of this attack that took place at this meeting.

But all of this information was withheld from the FBI Cole bombing investigators in a massive criminal conspiracy, to hide the CIA’s culpability in this attack for having photographed these terrorists but then letting them walk away to carry out the attack on the Cole.

The CIA and FBI HQ was told on August 22, 2001 that both Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US. By this time both agencies knew that these al Qaeda terrorists had taken part in the East Africa bombing that had killed over 200 people and the planning of the Cole bombing that had killed 17 US sailors.

The CIA and FBI HQ even knew when these al Qaeda terrorists were found inside of the US that they were here to take part in a massive al Qaeda attack that the CIA and FBI HQ had been warned about, and knew this attack would kill thousands of Americans.

So what did the CIA and FBI HQ do with this horrific information. They kept this information secret from the FBI Cole bombing investigators. When these investigators found out on August 28, 2001 that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US, and wanted to immediately start an investigation for these terrorist to find them before they had time to carry out yet another horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack, FBI HQ shut down their investigation, claiming the information in a EC to start an investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi, had NSA information that was prohibited from being given to them. But the very FBI HQ agent who was shutting down this FBI criminal investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi, had already been given written permission by the NSA to give the NSA information in this EC to these investigators the day before, on August 27, 2001. When FBI HQ and the CIA shut down this investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi, they knew that the result would be to allow the al Qaeda terrorists to murder thousands of Americans in the al Qaeda attack that they had been warned about since April 2001.

The 9/11 Commission investigation and report and the DOJ IG investigation and report were designed to hide this horrific information, even hiding the obvious out and out criminal actions by CIA officers and low level FBI agents to prevent any further criminal investigations from ultimately exposing the nefarious actions by high level managers at the FBI and CIA including, the Directors of the FBI and CIA, and the nefarious actions by officials in the Bush administration.

[zappaman]

45. well then

you should take your evidence somewhere more important than a little website dedicated to democratic issues.
Maybe write a book?

[rschop]

46. re: well then you should take your evidence somewhere more important . Maybe write a book?

From prior post:

"well then you should take your evidence somewhere more important than a little website dedicated to democratic issues.
Maybe write a book?"

Couldn't have said it better myself!

[LARED]

6. BeFree --- master of irony. nt

[BeFree]

7. Why the secret testimonies?

Why did Bush have to be off the record and not under oath, and only with cheney by his side when confronted by the 9/11 commission?

And why are they keeping the testimony from the public?

[greyl]

8. Because Bush was one of the most competent US presidents ever, duh. nt

[Make7]

9. What is so difficult to understand?

 

... the Commission shall have the right not to publicly disclose activities of a secret or confidential nature...

http://nyccan.org/petition.php   http://nyccan.org/PetitionForm1Signature.pdf#page=2

[BeFree]

10. Thanks make

You have shown the differences in thought processes.

One side is willing to accept the government keeping lots of secrets.

The other wants everything on the table.




The commission stance is a symbol of tyranny.

It is in no way, shape, or form, representative of democracy.




There appears, between us, a deep divide. I want pure democracy. I want the truth.

What the fuck is it you want? What are you doing here?

[Make7]

11. RE: "The commission stance is a symbol of tyranny."

Unfortunately for you, the excerpt in my previous post was from the NYCCAN petition. If you are not familiar with it:

The Petition is our legal gateway to an independent, impartial investigation with the power to subpoena documents and testimony relevant to the events of September 11.


http://nyccan.org/petition.php

Petition to Create a NYC Independent Commission with Subpoena Power to Conduct a Comprehensive and Fact-Driven Investigation of All Relevant Aspects of the Tragic Events of September 11, 2001 And Issue a Report.

WHEREAS, many New York City voters believe that there remain many unanswered questions critical to establishing the truth about all relevant events leading up to, during and subsequent to the tragic attacks occurring on September 11, 2001 ("9/11"), and

WHEREAS, no prior investigation by any New York City agency or any other governmental entity has resulted in the citizens being provided with those critical answers or information necessary to establish the truth about those tragic events...


http://nyccan.org/PetitionForm1Signature.pdf

And just who is this organization? And who do they represent?

NYC CAN is non-partisan, non-profit organization representing over one-hundred 9/11 family members, dozens of first responders and survivors, and thousands of proud citizens committed to bringing about a new and independent investigation into the events of September 11, 2001.


http://nyccan.org/about.php

So an organization that represents a number of the 9/11 family members, first responders, etc. is "in no way, shape, or form, representative of democracy" when trying to get an initiative on the ballot in New York City to form a commission to conduct an "independent, impartial investigation with the power to subpoena documents and testimony relevant to the events of September 11"?

If that is what you believe, I am not sure that I entirely agree with you.
 

[BeFree]

12. Yep

Why, after 9 years, do we need another commission?

[Make7]

14. So you believe the 9/11 family members and 1st responders supporting NYCCAN want to hide the truth..

.. and help the government keep lots of secrets? Would it not be easier for them to achieve their goals by simply not supporting an initiative to start a new investigation of 9/11?

---

Could you not find the answer to your question in my previous post?
 

[BeFree]

15. No

What I am asking is: Why do they think there needs to be another investigation?

Why, if as some here like to pretend, that it's goofy Thruthers who want answers, are these people goofy, too?

And no, I don't expect an honest answer from you.

[Make7]

19. Could you please clarify your position?

You stated that people supporting a commission formed with the "right not to publicly disclose activities of a secret or confidential nature" are "willing to accept the government keeping lots of secrets."

So how can you believe that the 9/11 family members and first responders that support/supported the NYCCAN initiative are somehow not willing to accept withholding government secrets from the public and thereby not putting "everything on the table" (i.e. the truth)?

From the answers after your initial response, it appears that your position changed based not on the actual language of the document to establish the commisssion but rather on the people that wrote and supported the forming of the commission. (Unless I am not understanding what your one word answers are referring to.)

---

As I said, the answer to your question was in my previous post:

... many New York City voters believe that there remain many unanswered questions critical to establishing the truth about all relevant events leading up to, during and subsequent to the tragic attacks occurring on September 11, 2001...

no prior investigation by any New York City agency or any other governmental entity has resulted in the citizens being provided with those critical answers or information necessary to establish the truth about those tragic events...

For you to frame the question as you did in this last instance seems to indicate that you either do not take this matter seriously, do not know enough about it to ask informed questions, or you are simply playing games regardless of the subject. Based on your prior posts, it could be a combination of all three.
 

[BeFree]

20. I know

How dare I not go along?

Thank the stars you are here to keep me in line, eh?

Your personal obsession with me is quite flattering. XOXOXO :hugs:

[OnTheOtherHand]

21. ROFL

There appears, between us, a deep divide. I want pure democracy. I want the truth.

What the fuck is it you want? What are you doing here?

Your personal obsession with me is quite flattering.

A Carly Simon lyric comes to mind.

[BeFree]

22. Heh

I counted 12 'you' or 'your' words in make's last post to me.

I mean, gosh. Who wouldn't feel flattered? Am I that important to this person?

Bush the criminal goes free, the government f'n lies, and I am the center of their attention? What the fuck is it make wants? You have a clue?

[greyl]

23. About 9% of your post is "I" or "me".

Who do you feel was the most competent US president ever?
Who do you feel was the least?

[BeFree]

24. You? Again?

Bugger off the personal attacks people. It makes7 of yall look like whiners.

Go after something that matters.

Why, after 9 years do we need another investigation? Why can't that simple question be answered?

[greyl]

25. Who do you feel was the most competent US president ever? nt

[zappaman]

26. I wonder who you think was the most competent president ever?

n/t

[BeFree]

32. Carter.

Or Kennedy. Maybe FDR. I dunno. Does this entail me winning a prize?

[OnTheOtherHand]

27. ROFLMAO

Imagine how different this board would be if you took your own advice.

[BeFree]

30. U'know

I just am not feeling the love here.

[Make7]

29. Thank you for the clarification, BeFree.

You believe not disclosing confidential information to the public is unacceptable when those you oppose do it, but have no problem whatsoever when people you support intend to do the very same thing.
 

[BeFree]

31. heh

I was going to respond to you, Make7, but the recent court ruling about no justice for you if it might hurt state secrets over rules me. And you, being out of the loop, are just going to have to suck it up.

[Make7]

33. That's disappointing.

I have been waiting for an actual response from you ever since we first crossed paths a few years back. Perhaps someday you'll attempt to discuss a topic without your usual games - I haven't given up hope yet.
 

[BeFree]

34. Disappointing??

WTF?

According to yall I am just a goofy, full of bullshit, tin-foiler, CTer, who "SHAME ON ME" doesn't t-bag the 'respected' Democrats that went along with bushco and the OCT.

And here you are, disappointed that I don't play your silly fucking game the way you want me too?


Well, tough fucking shit.



Oh, btw, there is a thread of mine on the front page of this forum. It has 100+/- replies.

Have you read that thread? It doesn't seem you have.

[Make7]

35. I just meant that you seem to pass up every opportunity to actually discuss a topic.

For instance, this sub-thread could have turned into a dialogue concerning the subject of secret and confidential information obtained by investigations and whether that should be revealed to the public. And if so, how it could hamper cooperation from organizations subject to the scope of that investigation. But instead you chose to repeatedly ask a question that had already been answered while entirely avoiding my attempts to simply get you to clarify your position.

Why don't you try actually responding to what people write for a change? It might lead to more productive discussions (if that is what you want). Case in point - I don't believe I have ever called you goofy, a tin-foiler, or complained that you are not sufficiently teabagging any particular group. What I have stated on more than one occasion is that you seem to be chronically uninformed about a subject on which you spend a considerable amount of time posting. Perhaps you are not as lacking in knowledge as you appear to be - it may just be part of your game. Either way, it does tend to be quite amusing from time to time - otherwise I would likely not continue to respond to and/or read your posts.

I guess we could start again. What are your thoughts on the ability of an investigative body to get cooperation from an organization when that organization has no expectations that their confidential information will be withheld from the public?
 

[BeFree]

37. heh

Gotta love those blind kicks!! Is it just me? Bwahahahah

Anyway... the questions is:
"What are your thoughts on the ability of an investigative body to get cooperation from an organization when that organization has no expectations that their confidential information will be withheld from the public?"

My thoughts are as follows.....

This is a crime and should be treated as any crime is treated by our judicial system.

[greyl]

38. Go file a police report tonight.

Let us know how it goes tomorrow.

[Make7]

39. Could you please elaborate?

I am not sure how exactly you believe your response answers my question.

I wrote:

What are your thoughts on the ability of an investigative body to get cooperation from an organization when that organization has no expectations that their confidential information will be withheld from the public?

BeFree wrote:

This is a crime and should be treated as any crime is treated by our judicial system.

Which law enforcement agency should conduct the investigation? The NYPD? The New York JTTF? The FBI? Some partnership between those and other agencies?
 

[Make7]

41. ?

[Make7]

42. If it was considered a crime, how do you believe it would be treated?

Who would be in charge of the investigation? How would cooperation be guaranteed?
 

[BeFree]

43. You decide.

Might even go along with it.

Really, haven't given it much thought. Good question.

Who, what , when, and where? Any ideas?

[greyl]

13. Epic burn. nt

[deconstruct911]

16. Does this mean

we will finally know the brokerage firms used to place the put options?

[BeFree]

17. Good Question:

Why did bushco destroy the good will the world had for America on 9/12?

In my mind they did so because they had zero respect for the LIHOPed operation.

How else can it be explained?

[zappaman]

18. easy answer

cuz they wanted to invade Iraq and the rest of the world wasn't as happy about it as the administration hoped.
Here's a good question for you-
It's cloudy today...why has Bush hidden the sun?

[BeFree]

28. And recently

Alleged torture victims' lawsuit dismissed on secrecy grounds: LBN

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4532742&mesg_id=4532742

[zappaman]

36. kick

:rofl:

[defendandprotect]

40. We've had 50+ years of right wing political violence still unacknowledged by MSM .....

and stolen elections which go back to mid-late-1960's ....

just about the time America was passing The Voting Rights Act -- !!

Been 47 years since the coup on JFK and our "people's" government --

Pretty much the whole coup has been unmasked --

Bright Shining Lie of Vietnam -- still our "free press" refuses to make it clear to Americans --

"The myth of a free press died with the assassination of Pres. John F. Kennedy."