http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...97/FBI-missed-chance-to-uncover-911-plot.html Additionally, they used closed court hearings to cover it up! I'm wondering if the people who've spewed venom at islam and Muslims since these attacks, will spew as much at their security forces, who were in a position to gain information and did not. I guess not. These people are generally the types who blame foreigners first and foremost.
Yeah, The House of Commons is a pretty unreliable place [/sarcasm] Additionally, the Telegraph (or Torygraph as it's known) is the most right wing paper in the UK.
I agree with the article for the most part. Had they not been withholding info from each other, had they been working closer together and sharing info, they might have been able to prevent the attacks.
Another in a mind-melding array of coincidences and incompetencies that ALL had to occur together so that the greatest crime in U.S. history could be the "success" that it was. And no one lost their job. Que bono? The most powerful empire in world history, with surveillance and intel penetration technology that would make average American's heads spin ... fooled by tribal Islamists, acting alone, half a world away. A group we had just been in negotiation with a few weeks/months beforehand, to build an oil pipeline through their beautiful lands.
Whether or not the CIA and FBI COULD have prevented 9/11 does not excuse the terrorists who did it. It always amazes me how much people try to excuse radical Muslims from their actions.
No doubt,as you can tell from the people that have defended the fairy tales of it,we got a lot of paid shills here defending it as well.
This is a classic example of the controlled opposition. The proof that the government did it is crushing. http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/239144-everythings-under-control.html#post1061030527 Anyone who still says Arabs did it and the government let it happen can only be a disinfo agent.
There is zero proof that 'the government did it'. Ten years of wishing by the 'truthers' does not constitute evidence.
No more than 10 years of avoiding "inconsistencies" "officially". Neither does a manipulated, filtered, inaccurate report.
Well, since you claim that everyone who doesn't buy into your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) theories is a shill, does that mean we can assume truthers are working for the terrorists? After all, they have the most to gain from you trying to distract everyone from being angry at the terrorists. Where you upset when OBL was killed?
There is no reason to assume anyone is a disinfo agent but given the actual evidence, it is more likely that the truthers are the disinfo agents if anyone is.
In your OPINION...right? As I'm often told, you have no actual evidence of that...(just to keep the same standards for both sides).
Actually Object227's claim has FAR more evidence than your claim of us being disinfo agents. See, the official story, BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION, has all the evidence to back it up while the truther theories have nothing. By definition, the truth is backed up by the evidence, thus we, the debunkers, are telling the truth while truthers, by the very fact they lie and obfuscate, are the disinfo agents.
Of course it does, because it agrees with your agenda. The "disinformation campaign" was not only admitted to, but was bragged about by Georgey.
It has nothing to do with any agenda. It has to do with the evidence. One side has all the evidence. One side has none. One side is the truth. One side are blatant liars. The evidence points to the truth. The liars are the disinfo agents. Simple enough even a truther can understand.... hopefully. You've already admitted the official story has all the evidence while the truther theories have none. Is it becoming clear now?
