"Why are there no whistleblowers?"

Originally posted by deltaboy
There are no whistleblowers because there is no conspiracy on this. But when you assumed or reached a conclusion that there is none because it must be that threat of death or they have been silenced already. Good reason.

Well this is not a conspiracy, its a real story about a person facing court marshall charges for speaking out against the 9/11 official story.

www.rawstory.com...

Under Fire! U.S. Army Intelligence Analyst Targeted For Suggesting New Independent 9/11 Investigation

Army: Doubting Official 9/11 Story Is ‘Disloyal To The United States’

reply to post by deltaboy


Question:

Why did it take Deep Thraot over 30 years after he took down Nixon and on his death bed to come clean as to who he was?

What or who was he afraid of?

reply to post by Griff


Question: Why is there no Deep Throat equivalent as of right now?

No evidence to send to journalists? No hints or tips?

Originally posted by deltaboy
There are no whistleblowers because there is no conspiracy on this. But when you assumed or reached a conclusion that there is none because it must be that threat of death or they have been silenced already. Good reason.

One thing you've forgotten is the sheer scale of the problem. We're not talking about some company exec stealing millions of dollars here - we're talking about the government of a country killing its own people to go to war for its own ends, with an enemy that doesn't exist (in the context they suggest, anyway).

I'm not doubting terrorism doesn't exist - it certainly does - but when you have a president standing up saying "axis of evil" and then naming countries like IRAQ, when in fact the Taliban and Al Qu'eda are in Afghanistan, then you see that GWB, son of GB who had a war there just 9 years earlier, is planning to go to war with Iraq like his father, something is definitely up.

Regarding compartmentalization - the Shuttle is a great example. Guys building rocket motors - could easily be for missiles, never mind the Shuttle, and they wouldn't necessarily know.

reply to post by mirageofdeceit


Sheesh, you think just because Bush invaded Iraq and Afghanistan compare to Clinton's lobbing of missiles in those countries does not mean there is a conspiracy. Its just different policies. Bush is more hardline compare to Clinton.

Originally posted by deltaboy
No evidence to send to journalists? No hints or tips?

I notice you did not respond to the evidence i posted.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


I notice that I cant even see it.



[edit on 20-12-2007 by deltaboy]

Originally posted by deltaboy

I notice that I cant even see it.

Sorry, don't know why it wont show.

But here is the text.

Under Fire! U.S. Army Intelligence Analyst Targeted For Suggesting New Independent 9/11 Investigation
Monday, August 21, 2006
By Stephen Webster, Investigative Reporter


Army: Doubting Official 9/11 Story Is ‘Disloyal To The United States’

FT. SAM HOUSTON, Texas — Forty-one-year-old Sergeant First Class Donald Buswell is a hero. Having served over 19 years in the United States Army, Buswell has seen a lot of terrain. On April 15, 2004, he was injured in a rocket attack while serving a tour in Iraq. For this, SFC Buswell was given a Purple Heart. And until recently, Buswell was an Intelligence Analyst stationed at Ft. Sam Houston, Texas.

But if one were to ask Buswell’s Commanding Officer what he thinks of the Sergeant, the response would likely sound a little bit more like, "No comment."

Such were the words given to The Iconoclast by Lieutenant Colonel Jane Crichton after inquiring why SFC Buswell is the focus of an investigation initiated by Colonel Luke S. Green, Chief of Staff at Fifth Army in Ft. Sam Houston.

According to unnamed military sources contacted by The Iconoclast, SFC Buswell "used his Government issued email account to send messages disloyal to the United States …" Because of these statements, SFC Buswell could soon find himself dishonorably discharged, court martialed, or worse.

It all started as a simple response to a common, unsolicited mass email, sent to 38 individuals at Ft. Sam Houston on Aug. 2, 2006. The message, as well as Buswell’s response, is among documents obtained by The Iconoclast. The sender of the first message is identified as "Anderson, Larry Mr JMC". It reads:

[edit on 20-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by ULTIMA1


I still can't see it.

Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by mirageofdeceit

 

Sheesh, you think just because Bush invaded Iraq and Afghanistan compare to Clinton's lobbing of missiles in those countries does not mean there is a conspiracy. Its just different policies. Bush is more hardline compare to Clinton.

...now throw in the fact that GWB went in because of WMDs (that didn't exist) and yeah - I'd say it is heading in the direction of a conspiracy.

He had no reason to invade Iraq (unlike Afghanistan - at least he had a serious terrorist threat as a reason), but he did it anyway.

If they wanted OBL they would have been far better off sending in the SAS or SEALs to pick him up, but from other information on OBL, it seems the CIA knew very well where he was already. Instead, they invade the country, and wait 3 months before sending in anyone to find OBL, by which time he has hidden himself in the mountains. Yeah - good plan.

To say the USA had no idea 9/11 was coming is getting to be a bit far-fetched, considering all the times the FBI were alerted to a problem.

[edit on 20-12-2007 by mirageofdeceit]

reply to post by mirageofdeceit


Throw in the fact that Clinton viewed Iraq as a threat by lobbing missiles at Iraq during Operation Desert Fox. Throw in the fact that Clinton viewed Osama as a threat by blowing up a pharmacy in Sudan which is in Africa, while Osama was detected in Afghanistan. Unless the cruise missiles were programmed with the wrong coordinates.

O and besides that, remember that the U.S. knows that Osama and Al Qaeda has interests in attacking the U.S. for many years. The question is what and how exactly.

[edit on 20-12-2007 by deltaboy]

reply to post by mirageofdeceit


I guarantee you that someone who is clever enough to be building rocket engines, would know exactly what it was for. They'd know by its size, thrust, fuel capacity, etc... what it's utility would be for. You forget- the folks that are in these types career fields are well educated and astute folks. They don't use folks from the Temp agency to fill in on Mondays at the rocket engine plant.

If I said I was building a high pressure pump, what would you say I was making it for?

[edit on 20-12-2007 by mirageofdeceit]

Originally posted by deltaboy
[I still can't see it.

Thats why i posted the text for you.

reply to post by mirageofdeceit


It's one thing if it is you building it, as I'm not a high pressure pump expert. If they were building it though, they'd probably have a better idea of it's use.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


I rather have the whole thing instead of like the cliff hanger at the end "it reads........"

Unless he was trying to spread discontent by using govt. resources. Otherwise hes entitled to his own opinion.

reply to post by deltaboy


Let me get this straight. Since Clinton is a royal screw up, that makes Bush's screw ups not as bad? Maybe it's just me not understanding.

Originally posted by deltaboy
Unless he was trying to spread discontent by using govt. resources. Otherwise hes entitled to his own opinion.

Yes i agree, so why is the government harassing him for sending an e-mail with is own opinion that he did not believe the official story.

here is the original e-mail,

This is being sent more as assurance for what happens when a plane hits a nuclear site more so than in response to that German website alleging a government conspiracy related to the 9/11 Pentagon plane crash (though the website does present an interesting perspective) – LarrySubject: F-4 vs. Concrete Wall

Take a look at this clip [not included] and you’ll get a good feel for what happens to an airplane when it hits a concrete wall. Many of you have seen the produced (but not factual), Michael Moore-esque website that asks the question; "If it’s true that a Boeing airliner hit the Pentagon, what happened to all the parts of it? Why do we not find more pieces of it?

Where did all that mass GO???" (Therefore, the paranoid loony liberal reasoning, 9-11 must have been a US gov’t conspiracy!) Well, for those who question what happened to "all the mass of that airplane".......watch this clip.

It’s the old Air Force engineering tests of the concrete barrier that surrounds nuclear reactor domes —tests to see if it will indeed survive an aerial attack. With the hi-speed cameras rolling, they accelerated an F-4 Phantom to 500mph and.........

Recall: "What happens when an ‘Unstoppable Force’ meets an ‘Immovable Object’???" (Remember, as you watch in slow motion as the F-4 turns to vapor, the Phantom was one of the toughest airplanes ever built).

This is what his response was ,

SFC Buswell responded later that day, saying:

Subject: F-4 vs. Concrete Wall Hello,

I receive many unsolicited e-mails daily, this one I chose to respond to. The below mentioned premise that an F4 Phantom fighter jet hitting that hardened concrete barrier is akin to the alleged 757 hitting the Pentagon is like oil and water; they don’t mix, and they serve to muddy the issue. The issue is 911 was filled with errors in the ‘official report’ and ‘official story’ of that day, and, what happened that day. We all know and saw 2 planes hitting the WTC buildings, we didn’t see the 757 hit the Pentagon, nor did we see the plane crash in Shanksville PA. Both the PA and Pentagon ‘crashes’ don’t have clues and tell-tale signs of a jumbo-jet impacting those zones!

The Pentagon would have huge wing impacts in the side of the building; it didn’t. Shanksville PA would have had debris, and a large debris field; it didn’t.

Getting back to the F4...The Pentagon isn’t a nuclear hardened structure, so I can’t follow your weak logic that since an F4 vaporized itself in a test impact on a nuclear hardened structure that the alleged 757 hitting the Pentagon should have exhibited the same characteristics!

I say Occums razor is the best way to deduce this ‘day of infamy’; if you weigh all options, do some simple studying you will see 911 was clearly not executed by some arabs in caves with cell phones and 3 day old newspapers! I mean how are Arabs benefiting from pulling off 911? They have more war, more death and dismal conditions, so, how did 911 benefit them? Answer: It didn’t. So, who benefited from 9-11? The answer is sad, but simple; The Military Industial [sic] Complex.

It’s not a paranoid conspiracy to think there are conspiracies out there...and, it’s not Liberal Lunacy either, nor is it Conservative Kookiness! People, fellow citizens we’ve been had! We must demand a new independent investigation into 911 and look at all options of that day, and all plausabilities [sic], even the most incredulous theories must be examined.

I would say to my mind a reason why people don't come forward would be that they have already been "silenced". I'm sure it's a job at some level to off people who were involved to prevent security leaks, the only problem is that you had better hope that you're high enough on the pole to not get offed by the next guy up as well. With how many people die each day in this country from any cause, it wouldn't take long to get rid of a team of hundreds without even so much as raising a blip on the radar.
For example say you have a crew of 20+ working on setting charges throughout the building for a CD, sept. the 11th rolls around and you send the team there for the final placement of charges all the while with your hand sitting on the detonator miles away. Pretty quick and easy way to take care of a decent cross section of your problem. If any were to survive a quick easy "died of smoke inhalation" after the fact and you're free and clear of any suspicion.
I know if I can think of something like this, people who actually carry out a conspiracy sure can too.

Originally posted by Hypntick
I know if I can think of something like this, people who actually carry out a conspiracy sure can too.

That's the thing isn't it. People think everyone's nice and plays by the rules. Sorry to burst bubbles, but even America has blood on it's hands. We don't even need to get into conspiracies to see this. That's why I wonder about "deniars" some times. They think "America is good...you are bad....because we say so.". Period. What sense is that?