the case had some very interesting evidence and testimony. did Iran allow the hijackers and other terrrorists transit through their land to Afghanistan?
Wahhabis are scum who support Jihad and terrorism. what you gonna do when it turns out the Saudis did somehow assist the 9-11 attacks? what excuses will you come up with?
The argument is just silly regarding Saudi involvement as it pertains to the "OCT" ... did the Saudis plant the explosives for the controlled demolition ... you truthers can't have it both ways ... is it hijackers financed by Saudis or the Jews planting explosives or the CIA? ... please try to (anyone of you) try to piece this puzzle together ... not one coherent theory from truther nation ... just a hodgepodge of dubious info scattered all over the place with no glue holding any of it connected ... not a single shred of evidence that anything but planes hijacked crashing into buildings and another crashing into the ground caused what happened on that tragic day ... but plenty of "expert theorists" trying to cash in on the gullible ... keep pimping the Youtube hits and buying the books ... let us know when you blow it all open and win that Pulitzer ...
Saudis are funding the Syrian civil war. they fund extremists and terrorists. they did before 9-11. They are doing it now.
So, if these cases are successful, does that mean 9/11 truth have been wrong about the hijackers all this time? Surely not. LOLOL
Indeed it is. Not sure if you read Bob Graham's article in the New York Post from Saturday (it's the first link in the quoted material above), but I think it's worth quoting an excerpt: **The release of the 28 pages would allow the American people to evaluate important questions, such as: -Should we believe that the 19 hijackers — most of whom spoke little English, had limited education and had never before visited the United States — acted alone in perpetrating the sophisticated 9/11 plot? -Did the hijackers have foreign support? If so, who provided it? -Brennan stated the 28 pages contain information that is “uncorroborated, unvetted” and “inaccurate.” What is the investigatory basis for his conclusion? -Has the 13-year delay in empowering the American people with the information in the 28 pages affected national security, delayed justice to the families of the nearly 3,000 Americans killed on 9/11 or undermined the confidence in the federal government?**
Yes I read it. What about it? This subject has been politicised to the extreme, and I no longer believe anything I read about it. I'll wait for the release before I consider anyone's opinion as valid.
I assume you are referring to articles such as the following one which I have linked to in the past: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hijackers.html Note that not -all- of the men listed as hijackers have since been reported alive and well. And while none of them had to have actually hijacked the planes, some of them may well have been used as patsies (those arabs in flight training schools, flying terribly, but leaving useful evidence for the false narrative) and offed elsewhere. I think you're going to find that the veracity of articles such as the one linked to above will become more apparent if the Senate can just override Obama's veto. Let's see if they can do it. Then, let the cards fall where they may.
No, I was talking about articles on the redacted pages, nothing else. I understand all the speculation surrounding these pages, but I'll believe little until I can read them for myself.
What's your problem? If you have a point then state it. My response related to the redacted pages, nothing else. I'll wait for the release before I make any judgements in this highly politicised case. Speculation is not my thing. Of course.
You stated: "So, if these cases are successful, does that mean 9/11 truth have been wrong about the hijackers all this time?" What, precisely, do you think 9/11 truth has been wrong about concerning the hijackers all this time?
Wow, never thought an eye roll would rile you . I'm guessing you are somewhat fazed by these recent developments. I think Bob Graham has a point: all of the issues he raises in the above quote from him are -very- important. The fact that you seem so humdrum about it is what got me rolling my eyes... Again, I hope you're with me in hoping that the Senate actually has the votes to override Obama. If not, perhaps this will all die down once again and we will essentially be where we are now, with only hints from people like Bob Graham and speculating because there's nothing more we can do.
The linked article above has more than speculation, but I concede that I can't do more then speculate on what, precisely, is said in the 28 pages.
No, I didn't know what to make of it, but it didn't rile me at all. Furthermore, why do you think I would be fazed by all this? That's quite a projection there, considering that I don't really care. What's that about? I'll wait for the release thanks. Politicians state much to score political points, and I rarely give what they say much credence. I said I was with you on that. Of course I want them released, and furthermore, I want a new investigation into 9/11.
Fair enough . I just thought that your reaction to my eye roll suggested you were fazed by all of this. It was, as you like to say, speculation, no more . If the Senate could just get those 66 votes. Man, I hope it happens... Alright, alright, let's just see if they can override Obama on this one. Awesome . I missed that, sorry. Wow, now you really have surprised me. You didn't strike me as the type who'd want a new investigation, more a "it's all been done, move along folks' type of guy...
Well think about the diversity in the truther camp. There are no-planers; those who state emphatically that the government was responsible; those who believe there were no hijackers, those who believe they were patsies; those who believe the buildings were 'dustified' and those who believe the planes were holograms, and on and on and on.... The very existence of the hijackers somewhat destroys some of those notions.
No, I don't really care about this subject until the pages are released. So do I. I hope so, but I also hope it doesn't jeopardise the relationship with Riyadh. Allies in the ME have to be a good thing, and we don't need to alienate any more governments in that region. No problems. I do believe the NIST report is fairly accurate, however, I would like a new investigation into the collapses, if only to confirm the findings of the NIST, or not. I feel it may put much of this argument to bed if it was reinvestigated, but others state that 9/11 truth would only accept findings that support their hypotheses, so I don't know. I feel it may be expensive, but worth it, however, many of my peers disagree and I find myself alone on that one.
It provided strong evidence that 7 of the 19 hijackers are still alive and well and vehemently deny having anything to do with 9/11. Perhaps that is what you call "noise", but to me that's pretty interesting information.
Yeah, well, sorry Phoenyx, but I thought the evidence was stretched and moulded a little. Allow me to revise the piece. While I'm doing that, you may wish to peruse the following: http://skepticproject.com/articles/911/hijackers-still-alive/ I think having the DNA of 13 of them is somewhat, damning.
I certainly agree that not all of the conspiracy theories out there concerning 9/11 (including the official one) can be true. And I'm glad we agree that a new -official- investigation is warranted.
Speaking of the Middle East in general, I think one of Obama's best accomplishments was its deal with Iran, despite all the war hawks poo pooing it. As to Saudi Arabia, I think you will agree that no "relationship" is worth the blood spilled on 9/11. To be honest, I think that Saudi Arabia is incredibly backwards; there isn't even a hint of democracy there. There is literally more freedom in Iran, where they atleast have elections, and a record 6% of women were elected in the ones that just passed (yes, it's pretty low, but given the fact that women aren't even allowed to show their faces in public in Saudi Arabia, I definitely think they're way ahead of them there). "or not", huh? Am I right in suspecting that you have some doubts about it? Anyway, glad we agree on the notion that a new official investigation is warranted. While you may find yourself alone on the official story side of the debate, there are legions of truthers who want a new investigation. Even amoung the general American population, 41% support a new investigation, compared to only 21% who oppose one (Source: http://rethink911.org/news/new-poll-finds-most-americans-open-to-alternative-911-theories/ ).
