Bush's reaction on 9/11

[Jara sang]

This is what I saw in his facial expressions and mannerisms. It was as if he knew about the plan all along but didn't think the perpetrators(Cheney, Rumsfeld, PNACers et al) were going to go through with it. The realization that they had gone through with it had Bush both elated and scared shitless at the same time. That is what I saw in his eyes, his actions, he kept reading "My Pet Goat", he has trying convey a sense that all was normal while knowing that his comrades had pulled this thing off. Only thing is that it is not normal to continue to read to children when the country is "under attack" from "unknown assailants", that is unless you have foreknowledge. A President who knew nothing of this plot would have stood up immediately and split for Air Force One. Another thing about his and the administrations reaction which speaks volumes but has not been addressed. Bush could have made a huge statement if he had returned to the Whitehouse, his approval ratings would have been even higher than they were. Instead he hide out at Ouffutt AFB in Nebraska. Why? I seriously think they had no idea what impact this attack might have on the public and the stock market. I think they were predicting a full on economic meltdown. I think they predicted rioting and looting in the streets of New York as a result of this, which would then spread to the rest of the country. They wanted martial law. Did JEB actually declare martial law in Florida 4 days before 9/11. Why? I think they were predicting full on collapse of society. When people in New York didn't flip out and actually helped one another and were humane and civil, this thwarted their plan.

[ALago1]

1. Or...

...he could just be an incompetent fool with no real leadership ability.

[NYCGirl]

10. Bingo! We have a winner! What I saw in his face was sheer, unvarnished

terror. He was scared shitless.

[SammyWinstonJack]

11. He did look scared shitless. What a great leader.

:sarcasm: But then we were all treated to his "bullhorn" moment, guess that is when he became a "great" leader. :eyes:

[NYCGirl]

13. Yep, three days later and he's a big man. I can't stand Rudy Giuliani, but

even I have to admit he showed leadership on 9/11.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

14. Personally, I believe Rudi was in on it. He was in the command

center of the "terror attack" games which included FEMA at WTC7 prior to the attack. That's how he got to the site so quickly. But I am a true believer in the MIHOP theory.

[CJCRANE]

16. It's possible -

just like the way he conveniently popped up in London on 7/7 near one of the attacks.

[helderheid]

20. He was also in London when they were bombed.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

26. Yes, he was, and they were holding "terror attack" games in London

on that day too....

[Jara sang]

28. My what a coinky-dink...

Wasn't Shruby in Scotland? Or did they happen before he arrived?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

30. Yeppers! Shrub was in Scotland for the G8 The summit started on

7/6/05.

BTW... tired after having to trudge down to the 9/11 forum dungeon..... ;)

[Chomp]

40. If you think

that 7/7 was an inside job then you are beyond hope.

You CLEARLY know nothing about Brtish politics or society. NOTHING.

I despise the way you assume EVERYTHING that happens in the world is about America. THINGS CAN'T HAPPEN ANTWHERE IN THE WORLD UNLESS AMERICA IS INVOLVED? REALLY??? FUCK OFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ISN'T IT POSSIBLE THAT THINGS HAPPEN IN THE WORLD THAT ARE NOT AMERICAN-CENTRIC????? CAN YOU CONCEIVE OF THAT????????

DID YOU SEE THE CONFESSION VIDEO OF THE 7/7 BOMBERS? THE INTERVIEWS WITH THEIR FAMILIES??? THEIR BACK-STORIES??? NO.

I AM ABSOLUTELY FUCKING DISGUSTED THAT YOU PARADE YOUR IGNORANCE HERE AS FACT OR AT LEAST REASONABLE OPINION.

IT IS NOT: IT IS FUCKING BULLSHIT AND YOU KNOW NOTHING.

I WAS IN LONDON ON 7/7. I WAS BORN THERE AND SPENT HALF MY LIFE THERE. I AM A KEEN STUDENT OF BRITISH SOCIETY AND POLITICS AND LET ME TELL YOU YOU KNOW NOTHING IF YOU THINK AN IDIOT LIKE GIULLIANI WAS "BEHIND IT".

I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO OUTRAGED AND DISGUSTED AT DU. YOUR IGNORANCE OF WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT JUST SICKENS ME.

FINALLY, YOU PEOPLE MOAN ALL THE TIME ABOUT AMERICAN IMPERIALSIM, AND THEN IN THE NEXT BREATH ARE STUPID ENOUGH TO PRESUME THAT EVERY WORLD EVENT IS ONLY ABOUT AMERICA.

FUCK ME I AM ANGRY AT YOU PEOPLE.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dailykoff]

43. LOL

Denial comes in all flavors.

[Chomp]

44. I'm Irish, not British.

But you are so ignorant you proabably don't understand the difference between British and Irish.

But ho-hum, it's all the same isn't it? Who cares about the facts, just throw out some glib, half-assed, patronising joke and get back to Groupthinking. You make me sick.

And it is ironic indeed that in attempting to be clever, you instead betray your utter ignorance for all to see. Making dumb, blind assumptions without any serious attempt to engage your brain. You can't even get the facts right on a bloody joke!

And this intellectual atavism is exactly the lazy, naive thought-process that I was railing against in the first place. Opinions based on half-truths, ideology and groupthink.

And once again we see no attempt whatsoever to engage with the substantive issue. Merely petty insults and idiotic theories...Rudy Giulliani in London on 7/7 orchestrating the terrorist outrages? If that is your belief then I repeat: you know NOTHING about 7/7. To throw these allegations around is profoundly illiberal and, frankly, a little fascistic.

You are an embarrassment.

[HamdenRice]

46. You wrote:

"You CLEARLY know nothing about Brtish politics or society. NOTHING."

So your Irish and closely follow British politics? Then get insulted because no one can hear your Irish accent through your all caps screaming?

Still a bit techy aren't we?

So I take it back. You're not British. Don't have a cup of tea. Have a pint of Guinness Stout, and you'll feel much better!

BTW Chump, why are you trying to hijack a thread about shrub's reaction on 9/11 anyway? Why would you expect anyone to take you seriously when you do that?

[Chomp]

47. Ok, I'm Irish

so you stoop to insulting me with a bit of 19th-century stereotyping by suggesting I should go drinking?

Are you proud of that remark? Seriously, are you proud as a liberal to suggest that because I'm Irish I need to drink to make myself "feel much better"?

Maybe you should ask Muslim DUers where they keep their suicide belts, or Jewish DUers how much money they have or Black DUers how much they like fried chicken?

You are a coward to hide behind slurs like this.

I'd expect an apology from any person of good faith.
.........


Despite the fact I have no respect for you, I will nonetheless answer your question: "why are you trying to hijack a thread about shrub's reaction on 9/11 anyway?"

Firstly, you're calling me out here, which is against DU rules but fuck it, I don't care. I'm not intimidated by your jackboot tactics.

Secondly, I didn't hijack it. I simply reacted strongly to the LAUGHABLE suggestion that Rudy Guilliani was in London on 7/7 orchestrating the attacks there. That is a deeply, deeply offenseive position for anyone to take and I couldn't let it stand.

(BTW If anyone can come up with some evidence that I am wrong, I'll eat every last fucking word I've said. Until that time, enjoy your groupthink, I hope it makes up for the lack of emotional belonging you have in your real life).

[dailykoff]

48. And you can't believe the government would plant a bomb?

What part of Ireland are you from?

[Chomp]

49. Seriously dude,

I have no idea what you mean by your first question. Please explain what you mean by it. You seem to be suggesting that because I am from Ireland I should have some understanding of governments planting bombs. Is that right? If so, I need more explanation because I don't know what you mean.

.....

I am from Dublin, and have spent a large amount of time in Belfast too.

And if you are going to go down this route, you really better have a coherent argument ready or I will take you to pieces. But by all means, bring it on.

[dailykoff]

51. Stop listening to the BBC

or stop believing everything you hear on it. A fancy accent doesn't mean they're telling the truth.

[dailykoff]

54. p.s. the point is that many London/Belfast bombings

in the 1980s were not the work of the IRA. They were false-flag operations carried out by British intel agents.

[Chomp]

56. As for your

allegation that IRA bombs in the 1980s were actually the work of British agents, could you provide some evidence for this allegation?

Actually, I’ll tell you what, I'll make it easy for you. I don’t want evidence to back up your substantive claim, rather, please find me someone else on the planet other than you that makes the claim that “many London/Belfast bomings" were perped by British security forces.

Got that? Just find 1 other person that makes that claim.

Because frankly, not even the IRA says this. I have never seen any suggestion from any quarter that "many London/Belfast bomings" were perped by British security forces. Never. Go to the Sinn Fein website and try to find someone saying this. Find the most hardened, bitter, Brit-hating Irish republican and see if they make that allegation. It will be a long a fruitless task, because no one claims this.

You are once again parading your ignorance and embarrassing yourself.

Honestly, I'd spend 2 hours writing a post trying to educate you, but you wouldn't listen. You have no interest in acquiring knowledge. You simply want to sit in your little internet bubble, believe what your blind ideology tells you. You live in an echo-chamber.

Have you ever been to Belfast, Dublin or London? If not, why are you showing so little humility when confronted by someone who has spent many years in each? How can you do that? What do you think makes you qualified to spout your ignorant garbage even when someone with experiece of what you are talking about contradicts you?

It genuinely makes me sad that you can be this ignorant and still show so little humility.

Anyway, I'll leave it now because your ignornace is genuinely making me upset.



Peace.

[dailykoff]

59. I suspect

my bona fides are better than yours, but I see no reason to announce them. Sorry.

[dailykoff]

60. p.s. the IRA and Sinn Fein

are two different organizations.

But you knew that. :)

[Chomp]

62. Really??

lol.

Do tell, because I fucking doubt it. I really doubt it mate. Honestly, tell us about your "bona fides" for commenting on this issue.

Have you ever been to Northern Ireland? Ever met someone who grew up in the Troubles? Ever been to Derry or the Falls or the Shankill Road? Do you have family in Belfast? Have you worked there, living among the people?

Almost certainly not. But somehow you are uniquely qualified to lecture me about it, despite the fact I have lived in these places. LMFAO. Somehow, from the comfort of Washington DC, you can lecture and patronise me about Northen Irland?

You, my friend, are beyond parody.

And BTW, you say you have no reason to announce your bone fides. Well I'm sorry, if you tout yourself as being a person with "bona fides" on this issue then you are obliged to tell us about them. If not, the your credibility is ZERO.

I look forwrd to your response. If you can back up your claims, I will take every word I have said back and apologise unequivocally.

[HamdenRice]

64. STAKEKNIFE -- But you knew that, right?

Stakeknife <the British agent within the IRA> is also said to have facilitated Operation Santa, just before Christmas 1978, when he and another IRA man known as “Bald Eagle” were sent to England to activate a team of IRA sleepers and launch a bombing campaign in Britain. All police leave was cancelled and tanks and armoured cars were deployed at Heathrow airport.<74>


http://www.birw.org/Stakeknife.html

STAKEKNIFE

Freddie “Scap”<1> Scappaticci has been named as the FRU agent Stakeknife<2>.

His name was published on 11th May 2003 in the Sunday Tribune, the Sunday Herald, the Sunday World and the Sunday People<3>. The Scottish Sunday Herald approached the D Notice Committee in the days prior to publication on 11th May 2003 and were told that they would not be injuncted if they named Stakeknife so long as a newspaper in another jurisdiction had named him already. When they asked the committee whether they would put Scappaticci’s life at risk if they named him, he was told that Stakeknife was out of the country<4>, which was apparently untrue. Andrew Jaspan, editor of the Sunday Herald, waited for the first editions of the three Irish Sunday papers that named Stakeknife before going to press himself<5>. Some newspapers claimed that Stakeknife was named as Scappaticci on the Cryptome website, but this was not in fact the case<6>.

Scappaticci is in his late fifties<7>. He comes from a large, staunchly republican family in west Belfast. He has had homes in both Dublin and Belfast<8>, where he lives at Riverdale Park North in Andersonstown<9>.

He joined the IRA in 1970 and was interned with Gerry Adams in 1971<10>. He was interned again in 1974<11>. He is reported as having approached British military intelligence in 1978 and volunteered to act as an informer after he was severely beaten up by a Belfast IRA man<12>. He became the Force Research Unit’s most highly placed agent within the IRA<13>. A dedicated team, known as “the rat hole” was set up within FRU solely to handle Stakeknife<14>.

Over time, Stakeknife rose through the ranks of the IRA to become a key figure in the “security department” known as the “nutting squad”, which sought out and eliminated informers and security force agents. He is alleged to have been second in command under John Joe Magee<15>. The IRA is said to have executed over 50 people: 16 IRA members, 7 ex-members, and 24 others.<16>

Stakeknife is alleged to have been trained in interrogation techniques in Libya in the 1980s<17>. It has been alleged that four men who supplied information to the security forces about the IRA have been interrogated by or have escaped interrogation by Stakeknife: Martin McGartland, Raymond Gilmore, Sandy Lynch<18>, and the man calling himself Kevin Fulton<19>. The latter, a former British army agent, has lodged a complaint with the police in London that Scappaticci threatened to kill him in 1994 because he suspected Fulton had thwarted the attempted murder of a senior RUC officer, Derek Martindale<20>. Another informer, Eamon Collins, who was subsequently murdered by the IRA, has written about Scappaticci’s role in the nutting squad, of which Collins was also a member, in his book Killing Rage<21>.

Stakeknife was allegedly paid £80,000 a year for the information he provided<22>, although one report said he received only £200 a week<23>. He spent very little of the money, which he regarded as being for his family<24>. It was paid into a secret bank account in Gibraltar<25>.

His career spanned the terms of office of three prime ministers: Margaret Thatcher, John Major, and Tony Blair<26>.

He is alleged to have been involved in the following deaths:

· Paul Valente, murdered by the IRA in 1980, allegedly for revealing to Special Branch the identity of an IRA mole within the RUC<27>

· Maurice Gilvarry, an alleged informer, murdered by the IRA in January 1981<28>

· Patrick Trainor, murdered in February 1981; his family denied that he was an informer<29>

· Vincent Robinson, found shot in the head in June 1981; again it was disputed that he was an informer<30>

· Anthony Braniff, a senior member of the IRA killed in September 1981; the IRA have issued an apology for his death and confirmed that he was not an informer<31>

· John Torbett, shot by the IRA in January 1982 after defying an IRA exclusion order<32>

· Seamus Morgan, an IRA member and election worker for Bobby Sands, abducted in February 1982; his body was found on 6th March 1982; his family denied he was an informer<33>

· Patrick Scott, a former member of the IRA whose body was found on 3rd April 1982; he had given himself up to the IRA in order to convince them he was not an informer<34>

· James Young, an IRA man who was also allegedly an informer, murdered in February 1984<35>

· Brian McNally, another IRA member whose status as an informer is disputed, found tortured and killed in July 1984<36>

· Kevin Coyle, murdered in February 1985 after providing a taped confession to the IRA that he was an informer<37>

· John Corcoran, an IRA man allegedly sacrificed to save another informer, Séan O’Callaghan, murdered in March 1985<38>

· Catherine and Gerard Mahon, a couple who confessed to being RUC informers, murdered in 1985<39>

· Damien McCrory, found dead in October 1985; the IRA said he had confessed to being an RUC informer, but he was of low inteligence and any such confession must have been questionable<40>

· an RUC Special Branch informer known by the codename Campaign, also known as DJ, murdered by the IRA in 1985 ]<42>

· Frank Hegarty, an IRA quartermaster in Derry who was an informer. He revealed the whereabouts of the large Eksund consignment of weapons from Libya. Margaret Thatcher allowed the Irish government to seize the dump. Hegarty’s cover was blown and he was removed from Northern Ireland, but he returned after receiving assurances from the IRA that he would not be killed. However, he was murdered by the IRA in 1986.<43>

· David McVeigh, an IRA member murdered in September 1986; his family deny he was an informer<44>

· Charles McIlmurry, an IRA man who confessed to being an informer during a supposed amnesty; the IRA murdered him in April 1987<45>

· Thomas Wilson, a member of the Official IRA whose family denied he was an informer, murdered in June 1987<46>

· Eamonn Maguire, a former IRA member whose family deny that he had worked as an informer for An Garda Síochána<47>

· Francisco Notorantonio, killed to divert loyalists from targeting Stakeknife, October 1987<48>

· 8 IRA men - Patrick Kelly, Patrick McKearney, Declan Arthurs, Seamus Donnelly, Eugene Kelly, Michael Gormley, Gerard O’Callaghan, James Lynagh – and passer-by Antony Hughes, killed in a security force ambush at Loughgall, November 1987<49>

· an unnamed IRA man ] who questioned Stakeknife’s trustworthiness, 1988

· IRA members Sean Savage, Daniel McCann and Mairead Farrell, killed by the SAS on Gibraltar, 1988<52>

· Joseph Fenton, an estate agent who was allegedly an informer, 1989<53>; he is alleged to have allowed empty properties to be used as safe houses by the IRA but informed the police, who bugged the houses<54>; it has been alleged that FRU could have rescued him but let him die in order to preserve Stakeknife’s cover<55>

· John McAnulty, whose body was found in July 1989; his friends deny that he had been an RUC informer for 17 years<56>

· Paddy Flood, killed by the IRA as an informer in 1990<57>

· Co Louth farmer Tom Oliver, tortured and killed by the IRA in 1991<58>; he allegedly passed information to An Garda Síochána about IRA activity on the border, endangering a safe house used by Stakeknife for interrogations<59>

· Rory Finnis, murdered by the IRA as an alleged informer in June 1991<60>

· IRA men Aidan Starrs, Gregory Burns and John Dignam, tortured and executed in 1992 after they murdered Burns’ former girlfriend, Margaret Perry, who had threatened to expose them as informers<61>; the three men were allegedly FRU agents<62>

· Robin Hill, another IRA member whose family dispute he was an informer, murdered in August 1992<63>

· Gerald Holmes, murdered in August 1992, after the IRA extracted a taped confession that he had been an informer, which his family do not accept<64>

· Christopher Harte, whose body was fund in February 1993; it is alleged that the security forces may have framed him to look like an informer<65>

· James Kelly, whose family dispute IRA claims that he was an informer, murdered in March 1993<66>

· John Mulhern, an alleged informer murdered in June 1993<67>

· Michael Brown, whom the IRA alleged had been an IRA informer, murdered in April 1994<68>

· Caroline Moreland, allegedly falsely accused of being a Special branch informer, 17th July 1994<69>

· Joseph O’Connor, RIRA man shot in 2000, allegedly because he threatened to expose Stakeknife<70>.

[HamdenRice]

68. Where is Chomp's apology to dailykoff?

He asked for one source linking the British government to an IRA bombing. It is provided in the above post and link. Suddenly there is silence.

[Grateful for Hope]

69. Hit and run? n/t

[Chomp]

77. Firstly, HamdenRice,

you have implied 2 things about me in your above posts:

1. That I don't understand the distinction between the IRA and Sinn Fein
2. I've never heard of Stakeknife

With the greatest of respect (and I am going to try and be polite in this post) both of these insinuations are ludicrous.

On the first point, it is impossible to live in Ireland and not understand the distinction. Let me repeat: IMPOSSIBLE. Kids learn about it in school. The difference between the 2 has been the single biggest issue in Northern Irish politics over the last 15 years. Gerry Adams has been grilled on that very subject in the media every day for decades. The issue has been the perennial blockage to political progress in the current peace process.

But somehow you think I am unable to grasp the subtlety of the distinction? I hope you'll appreciate that your assertion is so self-evidently implausible as to stand no serious scrutiny.

On the second issue, the Stakenife affair was front page news here for about 2 months when the story first broke. It was also all over the Irish, Northern Irish, British, and indeed world, media. I was living in Belfast at the time and had many journalist friends who were working on TV shows about the very subject

You seem to think you have stumbled across a killer piece of insider info with Stakeknife, but you haven't. Look, it was perhaps the biggest news story on Northern Ireland that year:

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/northernirelandassembly/story/0,9061,955589,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeknife
http://www.tenerifenews.com/cms/front_content.php?client=1&lang=1&idcat=8&idart=3882
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0862788439/202-3040041-7667844
http://www.sundayherald.com/33921
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/ulster/article356668.ece
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=685647
http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/0624/stakeknife.html

The story even made it into the Tenerife Times!! (And by the way that last link is to RTE, the Irish national broadcaster – the BBC's Irish counterpart. You seem a bit muddled on this point.)

But you seem to think that maybe I missed all this Stakeknife business? LMFAO. Come on man. So when you ask the rhetorical question "but you knew that, right?", the answer is yes, I knew that.

So let’s stop being silly. Ok, let's move onto the substantive issue.

...................


Here is the dailykoff’s statement (post 54): “p.s. the point is that many London/Belfast bombings. in the 1980s were not the work of the IRA. They were false-flag operations carried out by British intel agents.” HamdenRice then cites the Stakeknife affair in order to stand-up this assertion (post 64).


So, to break these points down into bite-size pieces:

1. Many bombings were not carried out the IRA
2. Rather, they were carried out by British intel agents as false-flag ops
3. Stakenife is an example of one of these agents.

I’ll explain why each of these assertions is incorrect.



1. All of the deaths listed in the BIRW link were the result of IRA operations, not British ones. IRA operations, not British ones. One more time: IRA operations, not British ones.

Nobody, including BIRW by the looks of things, is disputing that these were IRA operations, planned and executed by IRA members (including Stakeknife himself). Planned. Agreed upon. Carried out. By the IRA.

If they had not been IRA missions approved by the IRA Army Council, then these deaths would not have occurred. You’ll notice that many of the dead on the list are British informers (“touts”) and other people who aided the British or otherwise betrayed the IRA. Now surely you’ll admit that it wouldn’t make much sense for the British – in the shape of Stakeknife - to be murdering their own informants, would it?

The fact that the British had an agent in the IRA who potentially could have tipped them off about these murders does not change the fact that they were IRA operations, not British ones.

The IRA were responsible for the bombings and killings in Belfast and London that you are talking about. They have admitted to most if not all of them in recent years. But I have never heard them say that the Brits were responsible for any of the operations that the IRA had been blamed for. Never.



2. First things first, so we are all singing from the same hymn sheet:

“False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to appear as if they are being carried out by other entities.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

Whatever the myriad motives behind British political murder in Northern Ireland over the years (and there were many), blaming the IRA was NEVER one. Never. I cannot think of one instance in 30 years of conflict where this was the case.

Why would the British bother with “false flag” ops anyway? The IRA were causing quite enough mayhem all by themselves in the 70s and 80s, so the British would have had no motive whatsoever to fix anything up. In your language, they didn’t need a new Pearl Harbour (or even a first one for that matter).

More importantly: if the Brits wanted to set off black flag ops, why would they need an agent (Stakeknife) INSIDE the IRA to carry them out? Why not just go around planting bombs and blaming the IRA?

No, your conspiracy is running away from the facts here. British efforts at the time were 100% dedicated to defeating the IRA and NOT any other MIHOP-style fucking around. That was just not the way things worked. It is fantasy land, and having been to Derry’s Bogside and Belfast’s Falls Road, I can tell you they are not fantasy land.

Saying that the British were out faking IRA operations is absolutely, totally wrong.



3. So, to the final assertion: Stakeknife was a British intel agent within the IRA carrying out these false flag ops on behalf of the Brits.

Is that what you think the British used their agents within the IRA to do? To go around setting off bombs to blame the IRA?

LMFAO. Too much James Bond boys.

Here is a snip from Hamden’s own BIRW link, which is actually very good:

“Scappaticci is in his late fifties. He comes from a large, staunchly republican family in west Belfast. He has had homes in both Dublin and Belfast, where he lives at Riverdale Park North in Andersonstown. He joined the IRA in 1970 and was interned with Gerry Adams in 1971. He was interned again in 1974. He is reported as having approached British military intelligence in 1978 and volunteered to act as an informer after he was severely beaten up by a Belfast IRA man. He became the Force Research Unit’s most highly placed agent within the IRA. A dedicated team, known as “the rat hole” was set up within FRU solely to handle Stakeknife. Over time, Stakeknife rose through the ranks of the IRA to become a key figure in the “security department” known as the “nutting squad”, which sought out and eliminated informers and security force agents. He is alleged to have been second in command under John Joe Magee. The IRA is said to have executed over 50 people: 16 IRA members, 7 ex-members, and 24 others.”


Well that pretty well explains it. He was an IRA man turned informer. Very simple. No black flag ops. No MIHOPs. He was an informer. That’s not very hard to understand is it?

Stakeknife was not there to murder people on behalf of the British nor to perp any black flag bombings or any bullshit like that. That was emphatically not his function.

No, the British were much, much craftier than that. Stakeknife’s function was primarily intelligence-related. Indeed, the Stakeknife affair was such a big scandal in Britain when the story broke not because the British were implicated in murder, but rather because in protecting their informant they left the people on the BIRW list to the tender mercies of the IRA. The scandal was about information and inaction, not action and cover-up.

And ask yourself this: if you were the British and had control of this guy, would you tell him to start bumping off your own informers as documented in the BIRW link? Would that make sense?

Surely you don’t think that Stakeknife perped "IRA missions" on behalf of the British underneath the noses of the IRA leadership without being noticed by them? Jesus, of course not.

Characterising Stakeknife in the way you are shows precious little understanding of the long and complex tradition of British informants, agents and spies infiltrating Irish republican organisations. This has been happening for centuries, long before the IRA even existed. Stakeknife was simply the latest in a very, very long line of such British agents.

Indeed, you will no doubt be aware that one of these long-time informants, Denis Donaldson, was assassinated in Donegal a few weeks ago when his past caught up with him. Here's the story:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/ulster/article356032.ece


......

Now, I can hear the reposnses already: "Oh, so the British never killed anyone in Northern Ireland?" and "What about collusion with loyalists"? Etc.

To which I reply: of course there were deaths as the result of British activity in NI over the years. But none of them come even close in nature to your characterisation of them. Stating that the British were responasible for deaths in Northen Ireland is like saying Santa is has a big white beard. That is to say, bloody obvious.

If one were to classify British political "murder" in Northern Ireland, it might break down into 3 catagoireis (off the top of my head):

a. Murders that were self-evidently such. British agents clearly and self-avowedly assassinating IRA members/republicans. An example would be the Gibraltar 3. That was a clear SAS hit.

b. Deaths as the result of collusion with Loyalist paramilitaries. This is still very murky and under-documented area but certainly happened.

c. As the result of individual, group or institutional army error, incompetence or malevolence. Bloody Sunday and the Lee Clegg case would fall into this category. Google either for more information.

(One could perhaps add a d., which would be the grey area in between these three).


But do any of these have anything to do with Stakeknife? With black flags? With the British intel agents setting off bombs in London and Belfsast? No, no, no, no (informed readers will get the joke here BTW.)

Is it news that the British were engaged in collusion? No. Were they reckless as to the deaths of IRA touts and others? Undoubtedly. Is there a government in the world fighting terrorists/freedom fighters (whatever) who doesn’t use these tactics? No. Was Stakeknife an agent of murder on behalf of the British? No. On behalf of the IRA? Yes. Did the British let people die to protect him? Probably. Did the British agents plant bombs to look like it was the IRA? No. Did the British murder their “enemies”? Yes. Has there ever been an instance of the British killing civilians with a bomb planted by the SAS or MI5? Almost certainly never. Did they whack members of the IRA when necessary? Yes.

Is that all too confusing a picture for you? Well it fucking SHOULD be because it WAS confusing. All of this was happening in the context of the wider war: IRA atrocities, punishment killings, Bloody Sunday, agents and double agents, the Shankill Buthcers, collusion with Loyalist death squads, police brutality, rioting on the streets, the Cival Rights movement etc. etc. A complex, ugly, dirt war indeed.

But instead of adressing these complexities, we get offensive, glib talking points with the SOLE PURPOSE of bolstering a MIHOP theory. No effort to engage with the actual Northern Irland issue. No. Just one huge exercise in self-justification and second-hand, second-rate, second generation hackery.


..............



I am not interested in arguing about this any more. You should read a terrific book called “The Dirty War” to better understand what was going on.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/041592281X/103-7216814-2099060?v=glance&n=283155

It was never, ever as simple as the nasty Brits planting bombs and blaming it on the IRA. That, with the greatest respect, is a disservice to the cunning and ruthlessness of both sides during the dirty war.


Peace.

[Chomp]

78. I should

correct myself and say that the 2 allegations I address at the start of my post were made my dailykoff and HampdenRice, and not HR alone. One each IOW.


Ed to add words "and say that".

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Chomp]

81. Dailykoff

your post is totally incomprehensible. What does this mean:

"So which is it, no could have imagined such a thing, or you were on it like a ton of bricks?"

What the hell are you on about? No one could have imagined what? lol. What. Are. You. Talking. About.?

Seriously dude, incomprehensible. Please clarify.

....

Where is your response to my post? Do you stand by the allegations that Rudy Guilliani was directing 7/7 and that the British faked IRA bombings in the 70's and 80's?

Please get back to debating the issues.

...

Why have you posted that silly popcorn smilie? Is it meant to indicate that you're going to sit back while other people deabte the issues? I was under the impression that you were part of the debate. You were certainly dishing out the wisdom earlier on, so why not now? Have you nothing to add yourself?

...

"Methinks the laddie doth protest too much." lol.

Firstly, I presume "laddie" is supposed to sound kind of Irishy, but in fact "laddie" is an almost exclusively Scottish salutation. Again, you can't even get your facts right when you are trying to insult people! I know it's a small thing, but it's depressingly telling.

And do you think my post was too long? That there were too many issues discussed? Too much open debate for you?

And of course, if you knew your Shakespeare (which is unlikely) you'll know that the phrase "methinks the (lady) doth protest too much" indicates an effort to cover up one's culpability or mistake.

Do you think that my post was long because I was trying to obscure the fact I was wrong in the first place? Because if that is what you are implying, let me put it straight for you: I am not trying to obscure anything. I am trying to debate facts and issues. End of story.

Where are your facts? What are your opinions? What are you hiding? Why won't you deabte?

What are you scared of?

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Chomp]

83. You are a bloody disgrace with that post

An absolute sickening bloody disgrace.

For those not sure what he's talking about, dialykoff is CALLING ME OUT as a Ulster Unionist/Loyalist/Protestant by suggesting I am "Orange" (the traditional colour of Northern Irish Protestantism).

He is further saying I am "revealing (my) true colour". The implication is clear: my arguments are invalid or less valid or open to disdain and mockery simply because they are tinted "Orange".

So...


1. Firstly, and least importantly, you are factually WRONG - I am from Dublin and come from what would be termed a "nationalist"/Catholic background. I even said in post #47 of this thread that I was Irish, not British. So once again your post is just plain wrong on the facts and you appear incapable of even reading the thread you are posting in.

And did you not notice that in my post I mentioed Bloody Sunday, Lee Clegg, police brutality, loyalist death squads...but you detected an "Orange" tinge? LMFAO. I, unlike you, can see the brutality and shame on both sides.

Please address this in your reply.



2. This is the important bit. "Revealing my true colors"? What the fuck are you insinuating? That someone's opinions would be less valid if they were an Ulster Protestant? If I were an Ulster Protestant then I would be incapable of reasoned, objective argument? Is that what you are saying? That is a BIGOTTED position. You outrageous, disgraceful coward and charlatan.

I have many Unionist/Protestant friends from Northern Ireland and they are decent, honest, hard working, great people. Some of the finest I've ever met. You however would obviously would prefer to assume a biggoted/racist assumption that they are evil drones. You fucking stupid, ignorant bigotted PIG.

Please address this in your reply.



3. You are a coward for running away from the substantive debate. Your absolutely ridiculous contention that "many London/Belfast bombings. in the 1980s were not the work of the IRA. They were false-flag operations carried out by British intel agents" has been shown to be absolute bullshit, but you continue with your patronising, bigotted comments. Where is your defence of what you said? Please stand up your position. Why are you hiding?

And do you further agree with Hamden's assertions about Stakenife? You have been silent on this too.

Please address this in your reply.



4. And where are HamdenRice and MirandaPriestly? Look at them gllefully mocking me on this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x85656#85707

Hamden says (#19): "Hey Chomp! What happened to you last time you had your facts wrong?"

Answer: I'm right here my friend. Where are you? Will you address my long post please? After mocking me you will simply look a greater fool if you don't respond.

Miranda says(#22): "bwahahahahah.nt"

Enjoying mocking me Miranda? Have you read this thread? Do you have any opinions or are you just going to mock and laugh?




And let me tell you something: anyone from Northern Ireland, Ireland or Great Britain who reads this thread will know who's talking shit and who's trying to engage in honest debate. I'm not necessarily saying they'll agree with me, but they'll see straight away who's being constructive and who's being destructive. I'd hope that any honest reader from any country will come to the same conclusion. You are hiding like cowards, and I am standing up. Shame, shame, shame on you.

Finally, why is dailykoff being allowed to get away with this thinly-veiled bigotry on DU?



Mods: if you consider my criticsm of this poster to be too harsh, I'd simply say that if this guy insulted a whole group of people - say Jews or black people - in the way he is "calling out" someone he thinks is an Ulster Protestant, I'm sure he'd be banned from DU.

Imagine this were a discussion about the LA Riots and I decryed police brutality, and this dude came on and said "You've revealed your true colours: black, brown, and chocolate", how would that go down on DU?

Bigotry in my country has cost thousands of lives and I won't put up with this kind of hatred being bandied about by an ignorant moron like this. I find it gravely, gravely upsetting and insulting.

In light of the seriousness of what I ahve said in this post, and given I am still trying to debate the issues, I hope my strong langauage will be tolerated.

Thanks.

[dailykoff]

89. Sometimes actions speak louder than words. (n/t)

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Chomp]

55. Because you

are clearly such a well-informed person, you will no doubt realise that the BBC is British (as in, British Broadcasting Corporation).

I have told you I am Irish. I live in Ireland. Which is not part of Britain (stop me if this is going too fast for you).

So what in the name of Jesus does "Stop listening to the BBC" mean? Why would I "believe everything (I) hear on it".

Are you aware that there are such things as Irish news organisations, newspapers, opinion formers? Or do you think that after a long day picking potatoes I go home and solely listen to foreign news? Do you get your news from Canada and Mexico?

Are you trying to be obtuse or are you really this dim? I cannot believe the way you flaunt your ignorance for all to see. Again, I am embarrassed for you.

[Jara sang]

52. I think the gist of it is:

YOU are in the IRA.
YOU mix a mean molotov cocktail.
YOU had something to do with 7/7.
YOU are bitching about Rudy getting credit for your actions.

Is that what you are suggesting is being suggested here?

Just kidding, but if you come in here telling people to "FUCK OFF!" then what do you expect?

[dailykoff]

53. Not exactly. (n/t)

[Chomp]

57. You are right,

I shouldn't have told anyone to fuck off. Apologies. Your point is well taken.

I was just deeply upset at the way that the deaths of dozens of people is turned into a squalid form of internet pornography - titillating and arousing the ignornant, having no value other than entertaining people in a discussion forum. That I find absolutely disgusting. Death as porn.

It is shocking and, personally, I find it very upsetting.

[HamdenRice]

50. No soap. Radio!

So now it is racist to suggest that stout is the leading drink of Ireland and something that might calm down someone who is bugging out?

http://www.foodanddrinkeurope.com/news/ng.asp?id=17180-irish-eyes-are

Irish eyes are smiling - but stout consumption set to fall

Guinness to invest in Irish plants

News Archives

All news for April 2006
All news for March 2006

17/03/2003 - Today is St Patrick's Day, and Irish people all over the world – as well as many others who simply like to enjoy themselves – will be celebrating with a few pints of the black stuff. But a new report from Datamonitor shows that the Irish love for Guinness and other stout brands is waning, with South Africa set to take over as the biggest market for the dark heavy beer.

Datamonitor's report shows that while the Irish are far ahead of any other country in annual stout consumption per head, volume consumption is set to decline over the next five years.
The global market for stout was worth $6.3 billion (€5.8bn) in 2002, the report claims, with Ireland proving to be the biggest market with $1.6 billion in stout sales. The UK was next, with a market worth over $1.2 billion.

In volume terms, 1.25 billion litres were sold in 2002, some 269 million of them in Ireland and 248 million in the UK. In third place is South Africa, with 177 million litres, ahead of the US, which is only in fourth place.

When it comes to per capita consumption, the Irish are far ahead of any other country. They drink 76 litres of stout a year per head, well ahead of South Africa and the UK which both consume 4-5 litres a year. "For all that Americans celebrate their Irish roots on St Patrick's Day, this isn't matched by their stout consumption. The average American drinks 0.38 litres of stout a year - not even one pint on March 17," said Datamonitor analyst John Band.

[Chomp]

58. I emphatically didn't accuse you of racism.

Please re-read the thread.

I accused you of engaging in "a bit of 19th-century stereotyping". That is not an accusation of racism.

I think you are a bonehead but I don't think you are a racist, so please don't put words in my mouth.

[dailykoff]

42. Um, Iraq is about America.

Ask Senator Blair.

[Chomp]

45. Where to start?

We are talking about the London bombings of 7/7 perpetrated by a group of radical BRITISH Islamic extermeists.

Now, your laziness of thought has made you conflate the issues of Iraq and Islamic extrmeism - just like the Neo-Cons wanted all along. They're all just ragheads, right? Bloody Iraqis, Muslims, British Asians, al-Quaeda...it's all the same thing, right?

7/7 = Iraq. Domestic radical islamists = enemy = Iraq = America.

Yeah, * and his rabble have certainly done a job on you my friend. You can no longer think clearly enough to see the complexities of the situation. Nope, you'd rather make comments like "Iraq is about America".

Well done. Back to your echo-chamber now.


Peace.

[simonm]

85. London Underground Bombing 'Exercises' Took Place at Same Time as Real Att

London Underground Bombing 'Exercises' Took Place at Same Time as Real Attack

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/090705bombingexercises.htm

[Grateful for Hope]

32. I agree with this

IMHO, absolutely, Guiliani was in on it.

Funny thing...I suspect that he thought that his complicity would win him something big like a VP nomination...too bad that his baggage (personal and professional) will prevent this.

[uppityperson]

2. Or the guy is a friggin'idiot and he thought they actually whispered...

"you are sitting on a tack in your known ass splint"

[Ezlivin]

3. For someone *supposedly* trained as a fighter pilot, his reflexes suck

I'm a veteran and we were all trained to act immediately in time of an attack.

If Bush had any military training at all he would have leapt from his chair upon hearing the legendary words "America is under attack."

Ask anyone what they would do if someone came in and whispered "Your family is under attack." They damn sure wouldn't just sit there placidly.

As our President and leader, Bush should have reacted as if his own family was under attack.

[DoYouEverWonder]

80. Interesting point about the fighter pilot training

Rummie was a fighter pilot too, and he didn't react or respond to the attack either.

[Kikosexy2]

4. Very interesting...

and I agree--infact go back and view Fahrenheit 9/11 and replay that scene in the classroom--Chimpie's expressions really speak volumes of foreknowledge of the attacks...when one's country is under attack, no leader is just gonna sit in a classroom and continue reading a storybook....he knew and let it happened all for political gain...disgusting murderous a**h*le needs to be reigned in for his crimes!!

[0007]

8. I have. I saw greed

in those eyes, like I hit the jackpot and the Carlyle group will make me King for sure. It was hard for junior to conceal how ecstatic he was.

All that bullshit about Air Force One being a target and flying around in circles was just fluff.

[Kikosexy2]

12. Gotta watch..

F9/11 again..very telling yet sickening (to think our very own leader will sell out his own people for power). Come judgment day God should not be very kind to King George and his murderous court..

[sabbat hunter]

70. i watched fahrenheit 911 manyt tiems

own the DVD too.

what i saw in *'S eyes on 9/11 was fear, and terror and panic. no idea what to do.

[BlueEyedSon]

5. I think the plan was to let al q hijack the planes and create the

terrorism hype, but Osama double crossed W (after our defenses stood down, etc) and used the planes as missiles, which was not the original plan.

[Steve55]

9. this was my impression also that he had been doublecrossed nt

[mirandapriestly]

73. Ooh, that's interesting, I always thought the double crossing

was the other way around.. Never thought of that scenario before.

[enigma000]

6. of course, if he just got up and took charge

wouldn't that confirm he was aware this moment was coming. If he knew what to expect, why did he just sit there for minute after minute? This was his moment to show leadership - the fact he didn't suggests he was taken unawares.

[johnnie]

7. I just posted elsewhere about this

In my opinion george had nothing to say about it if it was LIHOP or MIHOP. He is told what to do and say and doesn't have much control over anything. If you don't believe me, listen to him speak "off the cuff" for 10 minutes. Do you *really* believe that the world leaders would let that man be in charge of ANYTHING?

I know we like to think that America runs the world, but trust me... we don't.

[Jara sang]

21. Yes, per haps his handlers have him on a very short leash.

He was told just enough so that he wouldn't interfere with the over all plan. Cheney was in charge that day. He was in the Whitehouse Ops Center bunker. Now, weigh those two things. Cheney in a secured bunker in the chief executives offices, being briefed by command personnel and monitoring the situation or Chimpy McPrairie-monkey reading a book to kids and flying around the country like a chicken with it's head cut off.

[glitch]

15. I read somewhere that one of the flights was 20 minutes late taking off

Which threw a wrench into the script. Could be why he sat there with egg on his face and then dawdled afterwards. Certain pieces had to be in place before the next act.
It's not like these guys are quick thinking on their feet. Everything they do has to come from a think-tank.

[CJCRANE]

17. Even worse was flight 93

which was 41 minutes late. If it had been on time the US Capitol Building would probably look similar to that big gold mosque that was blown up.

[TahitiNut]

18. Yep. I think he was waiting for the other two shoes to drop.

There's no question in my feeble mind that it was no surprise to these people. Whether LIHOP (to which I subscribe) or MIHOP, they damned well knew four planes would be hijacked and crashed into buildings. With the exception of Barbara Olson, who changed her plans at the last minute, all neocon "assets" were out of harm's way. All of them.

[CJCRANE]

19. I agree with you 100%.

Also notice when he's just sitting there he's chewing the inside of his cheek. It seems as though he's trying to look innocuous.

[subterranean]

22. My interpretation:

He was stalling for time to allow the other two planes to reach their targets.

Seriously, I don't know what his inaction meant in terms of his prior knowledge or lack thereof, but this has always baffled me: When he heard that the country was under attack by terrorists, didn't he think maybe, just maybe, that was something that might require the attention of the president??

Apparently Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz didn't think it was a big deal, either. Remember that unbelievable quote from Wolfowitz? He and Rumsfeld were in some meeting, and even after the second plane hit, he said, incredibly, "There didn't seem to be much to do about it immediately and we went on with whatever the meeting was." These were the top two officials in charge of the country's defense!!

And after the third plane hit the Pentagon, Wolfowitz said he thought it was an earthquake -- in Washington D.C.!!

Oh, and by the way, contrary to popular belief, Bush was NOT reading "The Pet Goat" when he got the message; he was listening to one of the children read it.

[glitch]

31. And Rumsfeld had been previously made the bottleneck between FAA and Norad

a bottleneck that had not existed before. If it's LIHOP, it's a provoked and enabled LIHOP.

[Peter Frank]

23. This thread won't be on GD very long...

It'll go straight to the "September 11 forum" -- http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=125

[elehhhhna]

24. The election/Florida results were still in the news untli 911. Convenient

[Jara sang]

27. And Rudy was in the dumps.

[DoYouEverWonder]

25. Bush already knew that the first tower had been hit

when he arrived at Booker Elementary.

He could have easily gotten out of his limo, made a brief statement and left for AF1.

Instead he wasted over 45 minutes of valuable time.

All planes were scheduled to take off before 8:01 AM. The attack should have been over by 9:00 AM. Instead the top leadership got caught with their pants down and had to stall until at least the Pentagon got hit. Otherwise their new Pearl Harbor wouldn't have gone so well.

[KansDem]

29. I agree with your observations. Here's a few more...

No communication whatsoever between Bush and Andy Card. None when Card told him "we are under attack." So how did Bush know anything was being done?

No Secret Service operation to remove Bush from a public forum. Who knows if terrorists might be ready to strike the school?

Bush permits OBL's family to fly out of US before being questioned by US authorities.

Bush was spying on Americans before 9/11. With Clinton's assessment that OBL was America's no. 1 concern (during the traditional out-going/in-coming presidents' meeting) and the USS Cole bombing blamed on OBL, why didn't Bush pick up on this attack? Wasn't he spying on OBL? Coordinating 20 terrorists to hijack 4 airliners would have required monumental planning, yet Bush comes up with nothing (makes me wonder who he was really spying on...)

These are only a few more observations...

[Grateful for Hope]

33. We don't know what was really whispered to him

Maybe the whisper was to "stay put" until further notice?

Seems to me that this might cause fear if he knew what was going down that day.

[Old and In the Way]

35. He looked like a guy who was scared shitless.

Scared that something would go wrong and their complicity exposed. Why he didn't jump and start barking orders, I'll never understand. Fleisher was holding up signs telling him to hang tight...what was up with that? A little ad lib scripting going on?

[Grateful for Hope]

36. Maybe things did not go as planned

an interesting third "hypothesis".

You could be correct.

[mirandapriestly]

38. yes, like flight 93? hmm..nt

[Old and In the Way]

34. "I saw the 1st plane hit on TV and I thought that was one bad pilot"

(1) No TV broadcast of 1st hit. He didn't see the 2nd hit, since Card told him of that and said that we were under attack. So he is either a liar or he watched it on CCTV. Probably the only line he needed to say that morning and he screwed it up.

(2) He had all kinds of warnings that AQ was planning an attack. The 8/6/01 PDB told him that they were planning to use planes and that hi-value targets in NYC were targeted. So that comment is pure deceit. If he "thought" that, he is criminally stupid. Of course, we were unaware of all those warnings when he uttered that line of BS.


And why would the Secret Service allow him to stay in this public place until after 9:30? His schedule was public record. Why wouldn't they be considering other planes attacking Booker? If there were 4, why not 10? Why not an AQ suicidal pilot from nearby Venice putting a Cessna 172, loaded to the max with RDX, into Booker? Why not take out the President if you want to attack the Great Satan? If this was really a surprise attack, he'd have been out the door as soon as Card whispered in his ear...instead, they stuck to script and he had his photo-op just as the itinerary planned.

[Jara sang]

37. The insensitivity of that line were drowned out by the events of that day

[mirandapriestly]

39. He picks the worst times to try to be "charming"

Gawd, that was right up there with the Katrina photo ops.. "The Nightmare Presidency"

[driver8]

66. There are a lot of strange things about that day, but the fact

that the Secret Service stood around and did nothing, to me, is the most bizarre. If these guys hear a car backfire, they surround the president. Are they expecting us to believe that our country was under attack and the Secret Service took it upon themselves to not react? Not only that, but every agent guarding the president decided not to react at the same time!?

These fuckers let the attack happen on purpose...there is too much evidence pointing that way to ignore it.

[bobbieinok]

96. everything about W's reaction on 9-11 was the 1st sign for me that

something was very wrong about what we were being told

People who believe the govt spin on 9-11 after learning how hard W and Cheney worked to stop any investigation of the events of 9-11.....well, they're not using their brains.

[medienanalyse]

61. Some Stills and Some Proof. About Byting the Lower Lip

here

http://www.medienanalyse-international.de/3seconds.html

and additionally Rumsfeld:

http://www.medienanalyse-international.de/rumsfeld.html

[mirandapriestly]

63. Brilliant Page Medienanalyse

how can anyone have any doubt? We have all seen that look before on the faces of guilty, scared children.

[Old and In the Way]

65. Why did Bush go hiding for most of the day?

Once all the planes landed, there wasn't must of a threat, right? Very strange for a President to go AWOL on the most important event to hit American soil since Pearl Harbor. If I'm President, I want to make hi-profile appearances, be a leader, maybe get the day videotaped for the records. But....nothing.

Here's my idea. They were hiding out until they were completely sure of their story. I think 77 and 93 were off script and they had to make sure all details were known and accounted for.

[mirandapriestly]

72. ah, that's a likely scenario

Bushler was trying to stay out of the limelight or away from anyone who might question him or expect a statement until they had the "story" down. Just like any criminal would do.

[petgoat]

74. "hiding out until they were completely sure of their story"

That makes sense. Mineta saw Cheney discussing a shoot-down order on 77 before it
could have been authorized. And then 93 maybe was shot down, presumably on Cheney's
orders. And how do they explain the fact that the jets scrambled to protect DC went
out to sea?

But there's another explanation for Bush's behavior. Maybe what Card whispered in his
ear was not "the nation was under attack" but "77 and 93 are delayed. Stall half an hour."

So for half an hour Bush was in the hot seat, wondering if he was being double crossed, and
if he was going to take the fall. So after the press conference, he's paranoid, he decides
he's going to call the shots, he won't trust anybody, and the plane goes where he wants.
So he heads for Crawford. Then realizes that's exactly where "they" would expect him to go.
So he decides to go somewhere else. Somewhere with a lot of people around.

Another possibility in all this is that just as bin Laden's brother may have been a hostage
at the Carlyle Group meeting, W may have been a hostage in the school room. If you look at
aerial photos of Sarasota, you see that the location of that school is very clear from the
air. It's lined up with the runways five miles away and it's VERY easy to pick out.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=sarasota+booker...

The school is on the next major thoroughfare from the airport, near RR tracks, marked by parks.
You can't miss it. Besides, somebody could have placed a radio beacon.

Being a hostage could explain Bush's stasis.

[Old and In the Way]

75. Given Bush's character, entirely possible.

What better front man for the shadow government? A guy who is smart enough to know that his achievements in life have been the result of someone else's ambitions. And his problems in life having been 'fixed' by others which made him beholden to their interests. An intellectually lazy, spoiled aristocrat who has prospered in life on someone else's dime. A perfect front man to be used to subvert our national interests.

Not sure I agree with the hostage aspect, but I do wonder why Al Qaeda didn't take advantage of Bush's publicized itinerary to do a spectacular attack on Booker. And why weren't Bush's SS and security people assuming this, given the events that had just occurred?

[petgoat]

76. "why weren't Bush's SS and security people assuming {an attack]?"

Especially given that there had been an incident that morning, with a phony TV
crew seeking access to the President. And W had SAMS at his Longboat Keys hotel.

Not sure I agree with the hostage aspect

Not sure I agree myself. I've never investigated the claim that bin Laden was
a hostage at the Carlye Group on 9/11, but when somebody was claiming that the school
was invisible from the air I took a look at some aerial photos and was shocked to
see that it's practically on crosshairs.

I haven't puzzled out what the deal was that had to be completed, but if the hostage
thing is for real I'd guess maybe it has to do with ensuring that the missiles
defending the Pentagon were turned off--because after the Pentagon strike was a done
deal W was free to go.

[medienanalyse]

87. No "hiding out until they were ..."

Yes and no.

There were things to do. Meet the important leaders of the nation at a hidden place and clear the situation.

Bush was not only in in Barksdale but in Offutt too to meet Buffett and some more.
See:
http://www.medienanalyse-international.de/kean.html

[cpousnret]

67. that was the first thing to come to my

mind,this fucker knew this was going to happen,i believe it was intentional,will always believe that,these thugs are not above doing this,means justifies the end,they wanted to go to war and by god this was going make us go to war,i would love to see what would happen if they found bush to be complicit,just like his daddy was complicit on the grassy knoll.fucking nazis

[Old and In the Way]

71. Is acting skills are no better than his presidentin' skills.

Unless he was potraying a guilty person, in which case he should have won an Oscar for best supporting role.



“It was an interesting day.”—President Bush, recalling 9/11
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/essay.jsp?article=essayaninterestingday

[moodforaday]

86. Why Bush flew to Offutt

Offutt AFB is host to the US Strategic Command. As I understand it, it is one of (two?) places in the US where you can launch a nuclear attack from. (Someone please correct me on this, if I'm wrong.) Certainly 'Strategic Command' is the place to be for one of two reasons: either you want to do some commanding youself, or you want to prevent someone else from hijacking that post. Either case could apply.

Personally, I believe 9-11 was directed agsint Bush in a way. Could be a blackmail: see what we can do if you refuse to cooperate. Maybe Bush knew something was coming or maybe he didn't, but I don't think he was one of the conspirators. It does look like someone there knew Bush was not a target. It was a play for Bush to watch. Someone wanted US forces in the Middle East, and that was the way they got it.

Offutt was a safe place for him to be, perhaps the only place he would feel safe at on that day; or maybe he did want to make sure _he_ was physically present/in charge at this particular base.

[Chomp]

88. 7/7 an inside job?

For those people still attached to the idea that 7/7 was a (US-led) inside job, here's a link from yesterday's "Observer" newspaper.

The Observer is the weekend sister paper of the Guardian, which many of you will know is Britain's leading liberal/leftist broadsheet newspaper. The Observer is (I think) Britain's oldest national Sunday newpaper and is a by-word for hard-hitting investigatove reporting of an absolutely world-class standard.


7/7 ringleader 'had direct link with terror cell'
Antony Barnett, Jamie Doward and Mark Townsend
Sunday May 7, 2006

Britain's intelligence services will face a fresh barrage of criticism on Thursday when a parliamentary committee publishes a report into the London terror attacks that shows a direct link between the bombers' ringleader and a terrorist cell.

The Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) has been studying the lessons of the 7 July bombings and will make wide-ranging recommendations on how the security services should adapt to the changing face of terrorism.

Its report will be published alongside the government's official account into the bombings, which confirms that the four bombers - all from the north of England - carried out a cheap and simple plot to bomb London using techniques they had found on the internet.

The ISC has found there was a direct link between the bombers' ringleader, Sidique Khan, who killed six people when he blew himself up on a tube train at Edgware Road, and a terrorist cell that had been under surveillance by the security services.

...more...

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1769381,00.html





The story of the 7/7 bombers is very well known at this point and there is a huge amount of reliable information about them out there.

So if you think 7/7 was an inside job, directed by Rudy Giulliani, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE explore the issue some more and see that you are wrong.

There is no agenda here other than trying to respect the dead by letting the truth be known.


Peace

[dailykoff]

90. Well I guess that makes the official story the official story.

Thanks for clearing that up.

:crazy:

[Shoestring]

91. Bush gives new account of his reaction on 9/11

Just recently, Bush gave an interview with the German newspaper Bild where he gave a completely new description of his reaction on 9/11. Here is the relevant quote:

Q Three last very short questions. What was the most wonderful moment in your terms of being President so far, and what was the most awful moment?

THE PRESIDENT: The most awful moment was September the 11th, 2001.

Q The famous picture when somebody gave you the information?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, that. I think, like all of us, it took a while for the -- it was more than a moment. It was the event and the aftermath. On a situation like that, it takes a period to understand exactly what was going on. When somebody says, America is under attack, and -- you've got to fully understand what that meant. And the information coming was haphazard at best for a while. We weren't sure if the State Department got hit. I'd heard the White House had got attacked. Of course, I was worried that -- my family was here.

And so I would say the toughest moment of all was after the whole reality sunk in and I was trying to help the nation understand what was going on, and at the same time, be empathetic for those who had lost lives.

The full interview is here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/05/20060507-2.html

[mirandapriestly]

92. Good find

He was worried about his family so he just sat there? Also the thought that Card would say "america is under attack" without giving him specifics is just so obviously a lie. He would have said, we have an emergency you need to wrap up here and then they would have talked about it in private. If a president heard "we are under attack" he would think "I better get the hell out of here because it's public knowledge where I am today." He was sitting in a building full of children as well. It is just totally unbelievable.

[Shoestring]

93. Confusion because of a military exercise?

Where Bush says, "the information coming was haphazard at best for a while. We weren't sure if the State Department got hit. I'd heard the White House had got attacked," I wonder if some of this confusion was caused by the training exercises (Vigilant Guardian, Global Guardian, etc.)taking place that morning. Maybe one of these exercises included simulated attacks on the State Department and the White House?

[petgoat]

94. Good point. And welcome to DU! nt

[Shoestring]

95. Thanks....

and hello back :hi: