posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 06:59 AM
Hmmmm... I am curious where the BBC report gets some of their information-sources.
AlQueda has been around for some time before Sept 11th, with their offical inception date somewhere back in 1988-89 (can be checked doing a google and
checking out reports shown, as well as wikipedia which I dont really care for).
We know this because the US is directly responsible for the rise of Bin Laden because of our actions in afghanistan during the Soviet invasion. The
CIA supported the Muhajadeen with weapons and money, and towards the end, ended their support, which infuriated Bin Laden.
Bin Laden has an established militant history in Saudia Arabia, where he was stripped of his citizenship and banned from staying in the country. He
was infuriated by the Kingdoms request for American troops on their soil (deterrant from Iraq/Iran - securing world oil supplies, insert whatever
reason for us troops to be there here).
The argument that Al Qudea does not exist is simply puzzeling, being there is enough information out there to the contrary. As far as a group with
tenticles being impossible, I suggest people check out history, and you will find information about organizations with tenticles everywhere (OSS, CIA,
Vatican - A former Pope actually worked for the OSS during WWII - Pope John Paul II).
To me it seems they are discounting these possibilities because Al Queda is not a nation state, but a network spanning multiple areas.
Did 9/11 happen - Yes
Was it tragic - Yes
Is it Bushes Fault - I dont think the blame lands here 100%
Clinton attempted to take Bin Laden out during his presidency using cruise missiles. At the last minute he notified the Pakistani Government to let
them know we invaded their airspace. From here it is theorized that the ISI (pakistani intelligence) teipped off binladen of the impending attack.
If our Government created all of this as a massive coverup to justify a False Flag Operation, dont you think President Obama would be the first person
to make this information public? Dont you think other governments would also come forward with their information?
If other governments have information to the contrary, and dont come forward with it, it would make them complicit in mass murder (once again we
Don't get me wrong, I think there are questions that still need to be answered. The question is can they be answered without jeopradizing innocent
people? You dont let the otherside know you have the ability to read the cyphers.
Sometimes it just appears the evidence is twisted / read in such a way for the sole intention of trying to blame President Bush and his administration
for the actions of a group that have been around a lot longer than his presidency.
I have a lot of questions about 9/11, and granted some incidents dont make sense based on the information released. However, I work in Law
Enforcement, and have had cases where if you are on the outside with limited information looking in, the case doesnt make sense. If you are on the
inside with the few pieces of information the public does not have, you see the whole picture which makes sense.
If eveidence comes out that our Government was complicit, then I have no issues with the people holding their government responsible.
Either or, and intresting post OP.