Cycling and bicycle racing discussion forums.   View New Forum Topics
Today's Forum Topics

Set as homepage


Go Back   Cycling Forums > Other Stuff > Your Bloody Soap Box
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Welcome to CyclingForums.com

You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread.

By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds.


did you used to take WURM more seriously?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 24-08.-2006, 06:20 AM   #16
cheapie
Registered User
 
cheapie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 847
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

hahahaha...the ones you post stand up the BEST???
cheapie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08.-2006, 07:32 AM   #17
Wurm
Registered User
 
Wurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,145
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

Absolutely. For example:

Quote:
9-11 "conspiracy theorists" vindicated: Pentagon deliberately misled public opinion; military officials made false statements to Congress and to the 9-11 Commission

Aug 4, 2006, 00:15



Recent revelations by members of the 9-11 Commission (quoted in the Washington Post, 2 August 2006) have far reaching implications.

They confirm that the Pentagon was involved in criminal wrongdoing by deliberately distorting and/or withholding information concerning the September 2001 attacks:

"Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate." (WP, 2 August 2006)

These revelations uphold what has been documented regarding 9-11 in several carefully researched studies, which the mainstream media continues to identify as "conspiracy theories".

It would appear that the 9-11 "Conspiracy Theorists" have at last been vindicated. The information now released and yet to come is that the Pentagon was involved in acts of cover-up at the highest levels of the military hierarchy.

"Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said." (Ibid)

If this were known to the 9-11 Commission, why was it withheld?

More generally, why was the contradictory evidence presented by the Pentagon, the White House and the CIA taken at face value. Why did the 9-11 Commission uphold the lies and falsehoods in its "authoritative" report?

Damage control

The Commission was not misled. The Commission deliberately and consciously distorted the facts regarding 9-11. A large part of the 9-11 narrative as presented in its report is fabricated.

The Pentagon's top brass (including senior NORAD officials) were involved in acts of perjury with a view to misleading public opinion. If the Commission doubted the veracity of the information presented, why did it replicate the lies and falsehoods in its report?

These recent revelations have all the appearances of "damage control": they consist in admitting that the Pentagon withheld information, without questioning the broader findings of the 9-11 Commission Report:

"I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described," John Farmer, a former New Jersey attorney general who led the staff inquiry into events on Sept. 11, said in a recent interview. "The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. . . . This is not spin. This is not true." (Ibid).

Arnold, who could not be reached for comment yesterday, told the commission in 2004 that he did not have all the information unearthed by the panel when he testified earlier. Other military officials also denied any intent to mislead the panel.

John F. Lehman, a Republican commission member and former Navy secretary, said in a recent interview that he believed the panel may have been lied to but that he did not believe the evidence was sufficient to support a criminal referral.

"My view of that was that whether it was willful or just the fog of stupid bureaucracy, I don't know," Lehman said. "But in the order of magnitude of things, going after bureaucrats because they misled the commission didn't seem to make sense to me." (Ibid).

The integrity of the 9-11 commission members remains unscathed. The broader issue of sheer fabrication, presenting al Qaeda as the architect of the WTC attacks is not mentioned. Neither is the issue of Operation Able Danger, the Pentagon's secret operation, which consisted essentially in fabricating terrorist cells ahead of 9-11:

"Atta," according to the Kean report, was the �tactical leader of the 9/11 plot.� He was the pilot who on that dreadful morning flew the first plane, American Airlines 11, into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York. It was Atta�s face, on television and in newspapers across the world, that became the symbol of Islamic terrorism. And it was Atta�s name -- not the names of any of the 18 other hijackers allegedly lead by Atta on that day -- that was cited by international security researchers. Atta was, as the Kean report stresses, �the tactical commander of the operation in the United States.� According to both the Bush administration and the official 9/11 Commission report, he was working on the orders of Osama Bin Laden who, from remote Afghanistan, controlled the entire operation.

Now, almost exactly four years after 9/11, the facts appear to have been turned upside down. We now learn that Atta was also connected to a top secret operation of the Pentagon�s Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in the US. According to Army reserve Lieutenant-Colonel Anthony Shaffer, a top secret Pentagon project code-named Able Danger had identified Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers as members of an al-Qaida cell more than a year before the attacks.

Able Danger was an 18-month highly classified operation tasked, according to Shaffer, with �developing targeting information for al-Qaida on a global scale,� and used data-mining techniques to look for �patterns, associations, and linkages.� He said he himself had first encountered the names of the four hijackers in mid-2000." (See Daniele Ganser's study on Operation Able Danger

Link
__________________
"Bush is the first President to admit to an impeachable offense."

- John Dean, former Counsel to the President (Nixon)

The aim of big corporations is to separate fools from their money all of the time and ordinary folks from their money most of the time. The rest of us must fend for ourselves.
Wurm is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08.-2006, 07:51 AM   #18
Carrera
Registered User
 
Carrera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Staffordshire
Posts: 4,782
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/refute.htm
"A 112-page document drawn up by Ramzi Binalshibh, of Al Qaeda, and released by Qatar-based TV station Al Jazeera, admits that the organisation was involved in the terrorist attacks in the USA on September 11th and warns of a wave of new terrorist activities.

The document, called “The new reality of the Crusades” is about the justification for the terrorist attacks on September 11th, 2001 and celebrates the destruction caused by the attacks on the twin towers and the Pentagon, described by the author as “That glorious Tuesday”.

The document tries to justify the attacks by quoting from Islamic Sunnah, or teachings, such as “For anyone that has followed the events, it is clear that what happened in America was a punishment from God for all the injustice and oppression which America has done to the nations everywhere in the world, especially to the Moslems”.

It claims that the main planners for the attacks were Khaled Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshibh and the four pilots of the hijacked aircraft, Mohammed Atta, Marwan Al-Shehhi, Ziad Samir Jarrah and Hani Hanjour, although it attributes the responsibility for the attacks on the USA, stating that the Koran stipulates that it is legal to destroy any country which shows aggressiveness against Moslem nations, claiming also that “if the infidel fixes as objectives women, children and old people, then the Moslems can do the same thing”.

The document declares that “America converted itself into a country at war when it broke the peace and helped the Jews, over 50 years ago, to occupy Palestine…the day it bombed Iraq and began the blockade, when it attacked Sudan and when it bombed and blockaded Afghanistan and attacked the Moslems there”.

It is claimed that the attacks were a pre-emptive strike because the USA was already planning to attack Afghanistan: “America had drawn up a plan to invade Afghanistan and to make an attack there by diverse countries long before the events in America”.

The author of the document goes on to gloat over the fact that the USA lost around one billion USD in revenue after the attacks on September 11th, and the fact that it lost 2,000 financial experts, suffered a Stock Exchange crash, the USD lost value and airline companies went bankrupt.

Finally, the document promises “thousands more attacks” like September 11th to make that event “the beginning of the end for America”.

Timothy BANCROFT-HINCHEY PRAVDA."


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm
Absolutely. For example:

Link
__________________
"Everybody has a philosophy. However, what philosophy you have is a matter of choice, and most people don't make a conscious choice with regard to what philosophy they accept."
Carrera is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08.-2006, 08:05 AM   #19
Wurm
Registered User
 
Wurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,145
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

Nice try Crappyshorts, but this is more hopeful rantings from extremist Muslims, used as red meat propaganda to stir up the masses, but highly doubtful that it's an an accurate story.

__________________
"Bush is the first President to admit to an impeachable offense."

- John Dean, former Counsel to the President (Nixon)

The aim of big corporations is to separate fools from their money all of the time and ordinary folks from their money most of the time. The rest of us must fend for ourselves.

Last edited by Wurm : 24-08.-2006 at 08:10 AM.
Wurm is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08.-2006, 08:17 AM   #20
limerickman
Community Team
 
limerickman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: at the bar
Posts: 12,306
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

I go back to the cost/benefit analysis as regards 9/11?

What was the cost ? And who stood to benefit most ?

There are serious gaps in what the various commissions reported in the aftermath of 9/11.
Indeed the conduct of the central players like Bush has never really been able to standup to questioning.

I don't believe that what we have heard about 9/11 is the truth.

The fact that the truth has been witheld, this allows various pro and anti conspiracy theories to germinate and fester.
__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.
limerickman is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08.-2006, 08:30 AM   #21
limerickman
Community Team
 
limerickman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: at the bar
Posts: 12,306
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm
Nice try Crappyshorts, but this is more hopeful rantings from extremist Muslims, used as red meat propaganda to stir up the masses, but highly doubtful that it's an an accurate story.



Whos Mike Griffiths at ourworld, anyhow?
Quoting bloggs ain't exactly compelling evidence leading to proof.

It's just one fantasist cogging his script from another clown.

Mike Griffith : more like Dell Griffith from "Planes, Trains and Automobiles"
__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.
limerickman is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08.-2006, 09:09 AM   #22
Wurm
Registered User
 
Wurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,145
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

At any rate, Crappy's cut n' paste (they say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery ) in no way refutes the article I posted, which deals with the Pentagon's 9-11 lies to the Congress.

Which goes to show ONCE AGAIN! that Crappy can't stay on-topic for more than 4 nanoseconds without veering off into his virtual "cow pasture" of inane poppycock.

I don't thnk he outfoxed that bull after all - but rather got the horns up his backside causing him to bump his head. Hard.
Attached Images
  
__________________
"Bush is the first President to admit to an impeachable offense."

- John Dean, former Counsel to the President (Nixon)

The aim of big corporations is to separate fools from their money all of the time and ordinary folks from their money most of the time. The rest of us must fend for ourselves.
Wurm is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08.-2006, 09:11 AM   #23
Carrera
Registered User
 
Carrera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Staffordshire
Posts: 4,782
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

Russia warned the U.S.A. about fundamentalism way before 9/11 took place. Likewise Europe was warned. These warnings were laughed off till the events of 9/11 took place and then America woke up.
The conspiracy theory happened immediately - the same one you propose. The immediate reaction from the Arab street was that America had faked the entire incident. So, none of this is new.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm
Nice try Crappyshorts, but this is more hopeful rantings from extremist Muslims, used as red meat propaganda to stir up the masses, but highly doubtful that it's an an accurate story.

__________________
"Everybody has a philosophy. However, what philosophy you have is a matter of choice, and most people don't make a conscious choice with regard to what philosophy they accept."
Carrera is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08.-2006, 09:37 AM   #24
Wurm
Registered User
 
Wurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,145
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

Russia, 'yurp, or anyone else didn't need to warn the US of Islamic fundie-ism. It was clear decades ago, especially after the Iranian Revolution in 1979.

What, do you imagine that the CIA, NSA, and others in the US braintrust were ignorant of radical Islam until some ally clued them?
__________________
"Bush is the first President to admit to an impeachable offense."

- John Dean, former Counsel to the President (Nixon)

The aim of big corporations is to separate fools from their money all of the time and ordinary folks from their money most of the time. The rest of us must fend for ourselves.
Wurm is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08.-2006, 09:54 AM   #25
Carrera
Registered User
 
Carrera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Staffordshire
Posts: 4,782
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

They were caught out. I read an account of a guy who had been following David Koresh for ages and knew Koresh was planning an Armageddon scenario at Waco Texas. Yet the authorities handled the whole situation like amateurs. By the time they arrived at Waco the cult members were armed to the teeth and ready. That cost lives for the security forces. That's how clumsy they can be.
I agree Bush may have used 9/11 as an excuse to attack Iraq. But no way would I accept Bush actually planned 9/11.
Did you know this same old theory did the rounds of Rome after Christians set fire to the city in the first century A.D. Just as today, they said it was Nero. Nero was supposed to have played the sack of Troy while Rome burned. Now it's Bush. History never changes.
If people don't want to see Islamic terror in cities and at airports, time to stop funding these preachers of hate and giving them a safe haven. As Putin says the west has double standards. America was hit because it ignored the threat inside its own borders where those terrorists operated quite freely. It could have happened again here and far worse had it not been for Pakistani security services.
When are governments going to learn, I wonder?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm
Russia, 'yurp, or anyone else didn't need to warn the US of Islamic fundie-ism. It was clear decades ago, especially after the Iranian Revolution in 1979.

What, do you imagine that the CIA, NSA, and others in the US braintrust were ignorant of radical Islam until some ally clued them?
__________________
"Everybody has a philosophy. However, what philosophy you have is a matter of choice, and most people don't make a conscious choice with regard to what philosophy they accept."
Carrera is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 25-08.-2006, 12:43 AM   #26
limerickman
Community Team
 
limerickman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: at the bar
Posts: 12,306
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm
Russia, 'yurp, or anyone else didn't need to warn the US of Islamic fundie-ism. It was clear decades ago, especially after the Iranian Revolution in 1979.

What, do you imagine that the CIA, NSA, and others in the US braintrust were ignorant of radical Islam until some ally clued them?


I would have thought that the CIA, NSA etc would have known exactly what they were getting in to - when they funded the Islamic jihadi in Afghanistan during the 1980's!

The US goverment is like that - they get other people to fight their wars for them.
They enlisted Osama BinLaden to fight the Russians in 1980's in Afghanistan.
History repeats itself - they use the Zionists to engage Hezbollah now.
__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.
limerickman is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 25-08.-2006, 03:38 AM   #27
lyotard
Registered User
 
lyotard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 333
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

true, take the example of the us supplies of cluster bombs being used upon civilian targets in S.L. by israel at present, and another supply of these is ordered and pending approval by the us...
the clusters are remaining unexploded, some times concealed sometimes not, to become a human threat such as land mines...
this while germany has suspended arms sales to israel during their attacks.
btw, notice the formative un force for this conflict appears to be composed soley of nations which supply israel weapons.

the us has funded many efforts that it is now in opposition to, up to and including irans' nuclear power program, this during the reagan era by those who surround bush at present...


the trend i see, is the us is moving away from what you describe here, covert war in it's own interest, to overt invasion and occupation for the same purposes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by limerickman
I would have thought that the CIA, NSA etc would have known exactly what they were getting in to - when they funded the Islamic jihadi in Afghanistan during the 1980's!

The US goverment is like that - they get other people to fight their wars for them.
They enlisted Osama BinLaden to fight the Russians in 1980's in Afghanistan.
History repeats itself - they use the Zionists to engage Hezbollah now.
__________________
"i think it would be a good idea"

-mahatma gandhi, upon being posed the question
"what do you think of western civilization?"
lyotard is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 25-08.-2006, 04:58 AM   #28
Wurm
Registered User
 
Wurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,145
Default Re: did you used to take WURM more seriously?

__________________
"Bush is the first President to admit to an impeachable offense."

- John Dean, former Counsel to the President (Nixon)

The aim of big corporations is to separate fools from their money all of the time and ordinary folks from their money most of the time. The rest of us must fend for ourselves.
Wurm is offline  
Reply With Quote

Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT +10. The time now is 09:05 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Copyright © 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 cyclingforums.com

Links to websites we like:
Pezcyclingnews | Cyclingnews.com | Wine Zone | iinet