If the purpose of the torture was to get "confessions" of links between Saddam and 9/11..

[NightWatcher]

...so that we could invade Iraq http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x301640 why is it tin foil hattery to suggest that 9/11 was faked?

Please dont send this to the dungeon, I am not debating any details about 9/11, but the levels to which bushco would go to make sure that they would be able to get their war.

If we can accept that torture ( a terrible, terrible thing that is nothing but pure evil) was committed by this crew, why can we not wrap our heads around the POSSIBILITY that they would stage a terror attack? Why is it that the only ones who suggest this are labeled as "looneys" and "conspiracy nuts"?

Please dont discuss details, I'm talking BIG PICTURE here folks.

Bushco wiretapped everyone, including Congresscritters, so that they could be manipulated to capitulate to Cheney's will....


This is all BIG PICTURE. What does all of this have in common? Bush wanted this war and was going to break every law if necessary. He would lie, cheat, wiretap, stage terror, kill......so that he could get his war and be re-elected (where Poppy failed because he didnt manipulate his political capital during the 1st Iraq war)


This was Bushco's BIG PLAN. All the pieces are becoming visible

[seemslikeadream]

1. why is it tin foil hattery to suggest that 9/11 was faked?

It is not, period...



not "faked" though but blame shifted

[NightWatcher]

2. yes it is. anyone who suggests that is marginalized because most people

cant accept that their government may have done some evil nastiness

[seemslikeadream]

3. Well we do have proof of evil now don't we?

We have proof of what they wanted

PNAC

Transforming event

[rcrush]

4. I dont understand it either.

I mean its so easy to accept that Bush lied to get us into Iraq, He lied about the memos saying we were going to be attacked. He lied about knowing Katrina was going to be hit by a big storm. He lied about torture.

But when the Bush administration says WE KNOW IT WAS OSAMA FOR SURE 100% OMG then everyone is 'OMG TERRORISTS!!!'

[seemslikeadream]

5. I hope you didn't misunderstand me

It is not tin foil hat to believe they are capable of immence evil

[Echo In Light]

18. Most heavy "marginalization" only occurs online - I've had numerous real life talks in groups...

...re 9/11, and none of the smug, Mr Know-It-All, blowhard venom-spewers have ever once jumped in the way they do at internet forums. The only people, again, in real life, not the internet, whom I've noticed have trouble w/accepting the inside job aspect are older/middle aged males. Conversely, I've rarely encountered anyone under the age of 30 who actually believes the official version of events.

[seemslikeadream]

6. They had warnings, ignored, then they immediately try and frame Saddam

what's up with that?

[tridim]

7. The record is pretty clear, DU has been right about everything RE: BushCo.

IMO MIHOP/LIHOP are back on the table. Based on what is now confirmed, it's LOGICAL to assume BushCo was involved in 9/11. Occam's razor.

To this date we've never seen any video of a jet hitting the pentagon or any evidence of wreckage in PA.

[indepat]

52. There's no way Rumsfeld was sitting in the Pentagon oblivious to the fact

of attacks having occurred until the Pentagon was hit, if he in fact was as has been claimed (sorry, no link - hopefully someone was of mind enough to bookmark that story). :D

[greyl]

8. The 9/11 Troof Industry garbage doesn't make sense, especially considering this story.

Explain why the "Inside Job" wasn't set up to implicate Iraq to begin with.

edit: Also, I don't really consider it tinfoilhattery to consider that 9/11 may have been faked ... before looking at the evidence. However, if after looking at the evidence from all sides, including the dozens of contradictory and purely speculative craziness spread around by the 9/11 Truth Industry and far-right-wing wackjobs, you still think it was faked, then it is tinfoilhattery writ large.

[seemslikeadream]

9. because they didn't have any Saddam people to do that

but they did have Al Qaeda on the payroll

[greyl]

12. That doesn't make sense. Al Qaeda isn't a country.

You're saying the guys on the payroll had to be tortured into cooperating.
Were they on the payroll or not?

You think the controlled demolitions you believe in were set-up up by Al Queda on the US payroll?
You believe much of the evidence that implicates Saudi and Afghan terrorists was fake (like passports), but you don't think the US could have faked some Iraqi documents?

[seemslikeadream]

13. Quit putting fucking words in my mouth and leave your speculation of my beliefs

at the door

[greyl]

16. Feel free to answer the questions and provide some clarity.

Sometimes it's difficult for me to piece together the reasoning in your posts, so please forgive me for asking you to explain yourself.

[seemslikeadream]

19. I just did

[greyl]

24. No, you didn't.

I checked to see if you edited your rude and reactionary post to include some answers, but you hadn't.

[seemslikeadream]

28. post 15 check the time

tit for tat

[Echo In Light]

29. Rude? Right off the bat you relegated any/all who question this as "troofers"

Pot, meet kettle

[seemslikeadream]

30. Amazing isn't it but they can't get away with here in GD away from

the security of the dungeon

[seemslikeadream]

33. oh dear I have to go back and check my spelling, was my post too long, did I make a grammatical erro...

:rofl:

[Subdivisions]

38. Shit, I hate it when people I'm ignoring in the Dungeon come into GD. Hard to follow things... n/t

[tridim]

46. Open the dungeon door, let the freaking sun shine in.

You're naive if you still believe BushCo didn't have a hand in making sure 9/11 happened.

[seemslikeadream]

15. The Al Qaeda individuals that were framed for the 9/11 attacks were not the ones they were torturin

for proof that Saddam did it


Remember they're dead :crazy:

[NightWatcher]

10. we needed to implicate Iraq and Afghanistan. Remember the oil pipelines?

we wanted to invade Iraq for shits and giggles and we wanted to invade Afghanistan so that we could secure the oil pipelines for our oil companies (see Dick Cheney's secret oil/energy meetings- oh wait we dont know what happened in secret).

We had two goals: war and oil, so bushco devised their plan to get both.

[Subdivisions]

11. This:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

-snip-

CREATING TOMORROW’S DOMINANT FORCE
To preserve American military
preeminence in the coming decades, the
Department of Defense must move more
aggressively to experiment with new
technologies and operational concepts, and
seek to exploit the emerging revolution in
military affairs. Information technologies,
in particular, are becoming more prevalent
and significant components of modern
military systems. These information technologies
are having the same kind of transforming
effects on military affairs as they
are having in the larger world. The effects
of this military transformation will have
profound implications for how wars are
fought, what kinds of weapons will
dominate the battlefield and, inevitably,
which nations enjoy military preeminence.
The United States enjoys every prospect
of leading this transformation. Indeed, it
was the improvements in capabilities
acquired during the American defense buildup
of the 1980s that hinted at and then
confirmed, during Operation Desert Storm,
that a revolution in military affairs was at
hand. At the same time, the process of
military transformation will present
opportunities for America’s adversaries to
develop new capabilities that in turn will
create new challenges for U.S. military
preeminence.
Moreover, the Pentagon, constrained by
limited budgets and pressing current
missions, has seen funding for experimentation
and transformation crowded out
in recent years. Spending on military
research and development has been reduced
dramatically over the past decade. Indeed,
during the mid-1980’s, when the Defense
Department was in the midst of the Reagan
buildup which was primarily an effort to
expand existing forces and field traditional
weapons systems, research spending
represented 20 percent of total Pentagon
budgets. By contrast, today’s research and
development accounts total only 8 percent of
defense spending. And even this reduced
total is primarily for upgrades of current
weapons. Without increased spending on
basic research and development the United
States will be unable to exploit the RMA
and preserve its technological edge on future
battlefields.
Any serious effort at transformation
must occur within the larger framework of
U.S. national security strategy, military
missions and defense budgets. The United
States cannot
simply declare a
“strategic pause”
while
experimenting
with new
technologies and
operational
concepts. Nor
can it choose to
pursue a
transformation
strategy that
would decouple
American and
allied interests.
A transformation strategy that solely
pursued capabilities for projecting force
from the United States, for example, and
sacrificed forward basing and presence,
would be at odds with larger American
Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century
51
policy goals and would trouble American
allies.
Further, the process of transformation,
even if it brings revolutionary change, is
likely to be a long one, absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a
new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and
industrial policy will shape the pace and
content of transformation as much as the
requirements of current missions. A
decision to suspend or terminate aircraft
carrier production, as recommended by this
report and as justified by the clear direction
of military technology, will cause great
upheaval. Likewise, systems entering
production today – the F-22 fighter, for
example – will be in service inventories for
decades to come. Wise management of this
process will consist in large measure of
figuring out the right moments to halt
production of current-paradigm weapons
and shift to radically new designs. The
expense associated with some programs can
make them roadblocks to the larger process
of transformation – the Joint Strike Fighter
program, at a total of approximately $200
billion, seems an unwise investment. Thus,
this report advocates a two-stage process of
change – transition and transformation –
over the coming decades.
In general, to maintain American
military preeminence that is consistent with
the requirements of a strategy of American
global leadership, tomorrow’s U.S. armed
forces must meet three new missions:
• Global missile defenses. A network
against limited strikes, capable of
protecting the United States, its allies
and forward-deployed forces, must be
constructed. This must be a layered
system of land, sea, air and spacebased
components.
• Control of space and cyberspace.
Much as control of the high seas – and
the protection of international
commerce – defined global powers in
the past, so will control of the new
“international commons” be a key to
world power in the future. An
America incapable of protecting its
interests or that of its allies in space
or the “infosphere” will find it
difficult to exert global political
leadership.
• Pursuing a two-stage strategy for of
transforming conventional forces. In
exploiting the “revolution in military
affairs,” the Pentagon must be driven
by the enduring missions for U.S.
forces. This process will have two
stages: transition, featuring a mix of
current and new systems; and true
transformation, featuring new
systems, organizations and
operational concepts. This process
must take a competitive approach,
with services and joint-service
operations competing for new roles
and missions. Any successful process
of transformation must be linked to
the services, which are the institutions
within the Defense Department with
the ability and the responsibility for
linking budgets and resources to
specific missions.

-snip-

and oil.

[seemslikeadream]

14. revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event

like a new Pearl Harbor

[Subdivisions]

17. An event catastrophic enough to cause wide-spread psychological

trauma so that transformation is facilitated. Like the Patriot Acts, Military Commissions Act, "Shock and Awe", etc.

[Echo In Light]

22. Bingo. AMAZING how many will scream "coincidence" re this

[Subdivisions]

34. Funny how we were all shocked beyond measure...how we all suddenly

dropped our differing ideologies to become "One America"...how we all became flag-waving patriots ready to retaliate against anything that moved while singing Cumbaya...er...I mean "God Bless the USA".

I remember it. Even I was ready to kick somebody's ass...

[greyl]

21. Some myth-busting by a left-winger here:

www.911myths.com/html/new_pearl_harbour.html

[Subdivisions]

27. Oh, well then, I guess 911myths.com is the final word on the topic. My bad...n/t

[seemslikeadream]

31. oh Sub you are so closed minded

:hi: :rofl:

[SalviaBlue]

26. You are exactly right: PNAC lays it out in black and white. nt

[Subdivisions]

37. And what happened after the catalyzing events of 9/11? Drumroll please...

TRANSFORMATION.

[seemslikeadream]

39. It's like they were psychic or something

[Echo In Light]

40. LOL....dude

[seemslikeadream]

41. Parenti is one of my favorites did you know about his speeches collected here?

http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=parenti

[Echo In Light]

43. Very recently I started a thread w/several of his speeches, but it was dungeoned immediately

Thanks, tho

[seemslikeadream]

45. I think that was a mistake I can't figure why they did that

[rucky]

20. That wasn't the purpose of the torture.

They fabricated shit. They didn't need or use anything they gathered. They tortured because they wanted to test the boundaries of human rights.

[Echo In Light]

32. Per the PNAC blueprint, which was WHY Bush/Cheney were INSTALLED in 00

...they needed to stir shit up to create the degree of conflict that would serve to justify their militant worldview.

[Subdivisions]

35. Torture = Transformation = "American military preeminance" n/t

[Still Sensible]

23. Then again, If torture makes prisoners tell their captors

"anything they want to hear" in order to make the torture stop, why wasn't Bushco ever able to trot out any "confessions" from Iraq or Gitmo to support their desire for there to be a connection between 9/11 and Iraq? It seems to me torture or no torture they would have released such coerced statements to anybody and everybody if they could have.

[NightWatcher]

25. my bet is that is what Cheney is referring to. He says there are memos that prove the torture worked

I wish the CIA kept those videos.

[Subdivisions]

36. If torture works, as Cheney suggests, I suggest we torture Cheney. Maybe then

we can get to the truth.

[Soylent Brice]

42. K&R

most see the big picture, they just don't want to believe that we were that gullible into falling for it.

[Subdivisions]

44. Gullible? Ha! That's an understatement! We were all singing along with Lee Greenwood, ffs! n/t

[Soylent Brice]

54. is that the "proud to be an amurikan" song guy?

[Nothing Without Hope]

47. Totally agree with you. Why is this a forbidden idea? Why assume that

there is an ethical line that these people wouldn't cross to get what they wanted? That they would go so low and no lower? This is the real world, and there are sociopathic, greedy people in it. They are not the majority, but they often crave power and get into positions of authority. Why assume they have a conscience like "normal" people? Dangerous, willful blindness.

[RufusTFirefly]

51. Exactly! "Nah, they wouldn't ever do THAT!" is not a plausible rebuttal.

History is replete with monstrous acts committed by "civilized" people.

[Nothing Without Hope]

55. Yes, like destroying the lives of millions in Iraq for greed. n/t

[jberryhill]

48. The Joy Of "Consistent With"

[leftstreet]

49. K&R - an excellent question

[RufusTFirefly]

50. Please! Folks. We need to step back just a bit

The key thesis in NightWatcher's post seems rock solid to me (although I would definitely quibble with the word "faked").

Now that we have firm evidence of exactly what BushCo is capable of, what prevents us from entertaining the possibility that they played some sort of a role in 9/11?

Although the topic has been taboo, based on the evidence, this seems to me to be an entirely reasonable question to ask and fully investigate.

It is when we go beyond this question that many of us run into trouble.

Rather than speculating, we should be gathering evidence.

The problem with speculating before fully gathering all the evidence is that we will almost certainly be wrong about something.

And when we are, we will almost certainly hear about it and be publicly ridiculed. It has happened repeatedly. Speculators are at a deep disadvantage because unlike the perpetrators they don't actually know for sure what happened. So when they miss their mark or, conversely, hit too close to home, the people who actually know can release evidence or information that can be used to debunk them.

The entire 9/11 Truth Movement has been smeared because of reckless speculation. The baby has been thrown out with the bathwater and thousands who can probably agree that the official story is implausible have been led to re-embrace it because they have been repulsed by speculation that they've branded lunatic -- or too frightening to consider -- whether it actually is or not (and whether it actually originated with the Truth Movement or not. Agents provocateurs are just as valuable in these contexts as they are in demonstrations.)

We need to convince more people to join the growing skepticism about the Official Story instead of alienating more people with over-extended speculation which may in fact turn out to be correct but is not yet fully supported by evidence.

[Echo In Light]

53. Good points. "an entirely reasonable question to ask and fully investigate"....which is likely one..

...of the reasons for the initial "Look ahead!" reluctance in opening the Pandora's Box... unless the illusion of enforcing the law/accountability can safely occur w/o having ill fitting data surface, or become common knowledge. They know they have to tread very carefully in crafting the illusion of imposing 'accountability' while preventing such investigations of one area from overlapping into the REAL biggie that would doom them all.

[Nothing Without Hope]

56. A late night kick - hope the light will finally shine on this n/t