Home › Forums › Chat Forum › 9/11 documentary
- This topic has 1,455 replies, 118 voices, and was last updated 6 years ago by jivehoneyjive.
-
9/11 documentary
-
sbobFree MemberPosted 6 years agojivehoneyjive – Member
Well, I used to work for the MOD at a missile test range
What brand of tea did you serve? 🙂
crankboyFree MemberPosted 6 years agoI’m perfectly prepared to believe the SAS helped train the mujahedeen, I’d even accept that on occasion they fought alongside them against the Russians in Afghanistan. After all they helped train the Khmer Rouge. But why on earth move the mujahedeen to a base in Scotland to do it when it would be cheaper and more efficient to do it in Afghanistan or a neighbouring area ?
Back on topic jive can you articulately and concisely explain what you think the conspiracy behind 9/11 is without use of links, cut and paste or random photos that juxtapose famous people.
BigDummyFree MemberPosted 6 years agocan you articulately and concisely explain what you think the conspiracy behind 9/11 is…
No. He cannot.
TurnerGuyFree MemberPosted 6 years agoBut why on earth move the mujahedeen to a base in Scotland
simples – obfuscation…
nickcFull MemberPosted 6 years agoWhy would you arrive at that conclusion on the basis of the
factsstuff that I’m trying desperately to link so it looks like a conspiracy of business doing evil things to make money… presented?because, you little scamp, you know as well as anybody, that once you actually write down a coherent “theory” that ties together all the strands that you’ve tried to hint at. 1. it sounds like the plot of a bad Bond movie, and 2. it’s obviously nonsense.
Have your little fantasy about the new world order by all means, indeed feel free to roll around in the huge swathes of gossip and coincidental tittle-tattle that the web offers, it’s just a nerd alternative to the Daily Mail sidebar of shame, and exists to serve the same purpose. It makes your world understandable, I get that. But don’t think for a moment that it’s anything more than a coping mechanism for modernity.
crankboyFree MemberPosted 6 years agoObfuscation ? If mujahedeen were detected training in or travelling to Scotland that would make UK invlovment crystal clear. If SAS ie generic western men were detected training mujahedeen in country, that would be unclear and deniable. The world is awash with mercenaries and contractors.
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberPosted 6 years agoHere’s a couple of accounts… there’s plenty more out there if you delve deep enough:
1980s – Afghanistan[/url]
SIS operatives were active in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation, assisting the Mujahideen resistance. Activities included supplying the anti-Soviet forces with weapons such as anti-tank missiles and anti-aircraft missiles (at first the largely useless British-built Blowpipe SAMs and later the more effective US-built Stingers). Ex SAS/SBS men were also involved in these operations.Other MI6 operations in Afghanistan included obtaining Soviet military equipment from the battlefield for later analysis.
SIS also arranged for Mujahideen fighters to be trained in heavy weapons on islands off Western Scotland by the SAS Revolutionary Warfare Wing (RWW). The Mujahideen soldiers were shuttled between Scotland and Pakistan by a C-130 operated by the RAF S&D flight, a small cadre of RAF special forces pilots that support SIS/Increment operations.
Guerrillas who protect US terror attack suspect Osama bin Laden were trained in Scotland, it has been alleged.
A former member of the SAS told the Sunday Mail newspaper that he helped train Mujahedin fighters at two secret camps in Scotland and another in northern England during the 1980s.Ken Connor said the training helped to transform the Afghan men into a “fighting unit” that inflicted heavy casualties on Russian forces occupying their country.
Mr Connor said one of the training camps was located in mountains surrounding the Criffel in Dumfries while the other was in the remote Applecross peninsula in the West Highlands.
He said: “The Mujahedin fighters were already excellent soldiers committed to their cause.
“The main thing they lacked was tactical knowledge and battle planning, so we worked constantly on that.
“Some helicopter training was also arranged for them and they were taught how to attack airfields.
“But the main achievement was to turn them from a disorganised mob into a fighting unit.”
Mr Connor said that the Afghan rebels were trained in Scotland in 1983 – four years after the former Soviet Union invaded their country.
Now aside from the obvious parallels with western support of ‘moderate rebels’ in Syria and ISIS ideology being based of Wahabist/Salafist beliefs actively spread by Saudi Arabia, where do Turki bin Faisal, Bandar Bin Sultan and Abu Zubaydah fit into all of this?
CaptainFlashheartFree MemberPosted 6 years agoDo tell.
Oh, and please do so
without use of links, cut and paste or random photos that juxtapose famous people.
nealgloverFree MemberPosted 6 years agoBack on topic jive can you articulately and concisely explain what you think the conspiracy behind 9/11 is without use of links, cut and paste or random photo
He can’t and won’t ever do this.
Putting his own thoughts and ideas forward for scrutiny is something Jivebunny is clearly scared of doing.
Which is understandable, as he will not have a hope of defending his nonsense ideas once he actually makes it clear what they are.
jonnyboiFull MemberPosted 6 years agoGuerrillas who protect US terror attack suspect Osama bin Laden were trained in Scotland, it has been alleged.
see, this is why, yet again, you are full of it
Firstly, it’s a single source from the daily mail.
secondly, there is literally no evidence, none that these individuals were protecting bin laden or even if they were alive. All that is known is that they returned to afghanisatn. The rest of the article is pure conjecture.
And another point, what the hell is this?
http://www.eliteukforces.info/
is it your website? it doesn’t even have sources listed, or authors, or even an ‘about’ page.
nealgloverFree MemberPosted 6 years agoGuerrillas who protect US terror attack suspect Osama bin Laden were trained in Scotland, it has been alleged.
Let’s be REALLY generous, and presume this is true.
So what if they were ?
Is the allegation that they trained there recently, in order for them to be able to protect Osama ?
Or as everyone sensible would know, that they were trained a long time ago, under totally different circumstances and for a totally different purpose.
It was the 80’s
They were our allies at the time.Seriously, how TF do you not get this.
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberPosted 6 years agoAnd yet you believe those who obscure information from you…
(and have a known track record of lying)
Life’s probably simpler that way
crankboyFree MemberPosted 6 years ago(and have a known track record of lying)
Jive remember when you linked to a faked BBC page that said the Charlie Hebro attacks were a false flag operation? then when the fraud was outed blamed your sources for letting you down?
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberPosted 6 years agoYep… I’m as fallible as any, but thankfully, I don’t have the raw destructive power of the Pentagon, or Her Majesty’s Government(s).
Nor do I provide anyone with Weapons of Mass destruction, before using the idea of Weapons of Mass destruction for an invasion which wreaks horror on people not so different from you and I to this day.
Anyhow, back on topic, due to some of my earlier mistakes, thankfully my facts are more reliable these days:
Now aside from the obvious parallels with western support of ‘moderate rebels’ in Syria and ISIS ideology being based of Wahabist/Salafist beliefs actively spread by Saudi Arabia, where do Turki bin Faisal, Bandar Bin Sultan and Abu Zubaydah fit into all of this?
CaptainFlashheartFree MemberPosted 6 years agoDo tell.
Oh, and please do so
without use of links, cut and paste or random photos that juxtapose famous people.
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberPosted 6 years agoHeaven forbid I provide you with evidence before coming to any conclusions…
jonnyboiFull MemberPosted 6 years agoHeaven forbid I provide you with evidence
Well you haven’t so far, but it’s never too late to start.
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberPosted 6 years agoJust a quick recap…
Over the last month, Al Waleed Bin Talal and Bandar Bin Sultan have both reportedly been detained as part of the Saudi Purge; there have also been suggestions of further investigation into the Al-Yamamah deal
Still no word on Turki Bin Faisal though…
With some of the richest and most powerful men in the world visiting these falconry camps, the camps also attract some of the world’s most undesirable — like weapons smuggler and the inspiration for the movie, Lord of War, Viktor Bout, who was frequently a guest at royal falconry camps. But the most infamous guest was Osama bin Laden, who, for many years, made annual visits to the royal falconry camps in both Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates during a time when he was already wanted around the world for mass murder. Former Saudi Ambassador, Prince Turki bin Faisal hunted with bin Laden often, and bin Laden was a VIP guest at the falconry camp organized by the former foreign minister from the U.A.E. bin Laden was so involved in falconry during the ‘90s and 2000s, that during the time he lived in Kandahar, Afghanistan, he stole most of the falcons from the surrounding tribes for his own personal use, giving the best birds as gifts to royal sheiks in the Emirates, and princes in Saudi Arabia.
Not forgetting of course that it was Turki bin Faisal’s sister (Bandar Bin Sultan’s wife) who was involved in money finding it’s way from the Riggs account set up by the UK paymaster general to the hijackers support network.
Though it’s not a direct mention of the falconry camps, there is this Time Article:
Yet when Zubaydah was confronted by the false Saudis, writes Posner, “his reaction was not fear, but utter relief.” Happy to see them, he reeled off telephone numbers for a senior member of the royal family who would, said Zubaydah, “tell you what to do.” The man at the other end would be Prince Ahmed bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz, a Westernized nephew of King Fahd’s and a publisher better known as a racehorse owner. His horse War Emblem won the Kentucky Derby in 2002. To the amazement of the U.S., the numbers proved valid.
Zubaydah, writes Posner, said the Saudi connection ran through Prince Turki al-Faisal bin Abdul Aziz, the kingdom’s longtime intelligence chief. Zubaydah said bin Laden “personally” told him of a 1991 meeting at which Turki agreed to let bin Laden leave Saudi Arabia and to provide him with secret funds as long as al-Qaeda refrained from promoting jihad in the kingdom.
Zubaydah said he attended a third meeting in Kandahar in 1998 with Turki, senior isi agents and Taliban officials. There Turki promised, writes Posner, that “more Saudi aid would flow to the Taliban, and the Saudis would never ask for bin Laden’s extradition, so long as al-Qaeda kept its long-standing promise to direct fundamentalism away from the kingdom.” In Posner’s stark judgment, the Saudis “effectively had (bin Laden) on their payroll since the start of the decade.” Zubaydah told the interrogators that the Saudis regularly sent the funds through three royal-prince intermediaries he named.
Posner told TIME he got the details of Zubaydah’s interrogation and revelations from a U.S. official outside the cia at a “very senior Executive Branch level” whose name we would probably know if he told it to us. He did not. The second source, Posner said, was from the cia, and he gave what Posner viewed as general confirmation of the story
There’s another unanswered question. If Turki and Mir were cutting deals with bin Laden, were they acting at the behest of their governments or on their own? Posner avoids any direct statement, but the book implies that they were doing official, if covert, business.
(To clarify, that’s the same Turki Bin Faisal… his full name is actually Turki bin Faisal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud ) [/quote]
If there’s any gaps you need filling in of the details provided within that post, do tell.
jonnyboiFull MemberPosted 6 years agoIf there’s any gaps you need filling in of the details provided within that post, do tell.
Nope I’m good.
It’s all irrelevant. But I admire your tenacity
nealgloverFree MemberPosted 6 years agoHeaven forbid I provide you with evidence before coming to any conclusions…
If there’s any gaps you need filling in of the details provided within that post, do tell.
Nope. Ok, no gaps.
Conclusions now please.
WhathaveisaidnowFree MemberPosted 6 years agoI know I’ve posted this before,….it was ignored…
from 1 min in…
Could someone paint this as perfectly normal? Pretty please?
GreybeardFree MemberPosted 6 years agoCould someone paint this as perfectly normal? Pretty please?
Sounded pretty normal to me. He watched a building burn for a long time after it was impacted, then collapse, then speculated that the fire had damaged the building structurally – seems pretty obvious to me, but I’m only a structural engineer. Then he used a term “ground zero” on broadcast TV, that was later picked up and used by others. So?
jonnyboiFull MemberPosted 6 years agoI think that’s the smoking gun, they told that guy everything, including stuff he didn’t need to know to be a credible witness. Then let him loose.
Sheesh, I feel like my world is crumbling around me
nealgloverFree MemberPosted 6 years agoCould someone paint this as perfectly normal? Pretty please?
Ok. Yes is pretty normal (for a day when two massive building were his by planes!)
The Guy called “Psycho” Mark Walsh, he worked for Fox as a freelance reporter at the time and is relatively famous.
He lives where said he lives, he saw what he said he saw. He even filmed it from his living room. This is all verifiable fact if you can bothered to look it up.
The term “Ground Zero” has been around and in widespread use since at least the mid 1940’s
Why is it so strange that he would use it, perfectly correctly, in this scenario ??
pondoFull MemberPosted 6 years agoAnd yet you believe those who obscure information from you…
(and have a known track record of lying)
Well, if we’re talking obscure information, you’re a world leader at that – I would never go as far as accusing you of lying, but you have a remarkable and proven record of lengthy, obscure posts with next to no information at all in them.
crankboyFree MemberPosted 6 years agoWhathaveIsaidnow what do you find abnormal about the interview ? Obviously other than its about an abnormal event on the day of the event !
WhathaveisaidnowFree MemberPosted 6 years agoWhathaveIsaidnow what do you find abnormal about the interview ? Obviously other than its about an abnormal event on the day of the event !
Mostly due to structural failure because the fire was just too intense.
…that’s a very assured guess…
…. the guy in black, with the ear piece moving in and listening intently… to make sure he gets it correct…
ow and he just happened to work for Fox occasionally…
…he is very assured, like he has read this a few times in advance, he doesn’t miss a beat, almost sounds excited….
WhathaveisaidnowFree MemberPosted 6 years agoThen he used a term “ground zero” on broadcast TV, that was later picked up and used by others.
any proof?
WhathaveisaidnowFree MemberPosted 6 years agospeculated that the fire had damaged the building structurally
Mostly due to structural failure because the fire was just too intense.
…maybe he should have said ‘maybe…’
or….I don’t know how the hell they collapsed like that, that is unbelievable…etc…
WhathaveisaidnowFree MemberPosted 6 years agoHe lives where said he lives, he saw what he said he saw. He even filmed it from his living room. This is all verifiable fact if you can bothered to look it up
…of course…you don’t set up for this and still be in the green room…
crankboyFree MemberPosted 6 years agoHe watched a building fall down that is what I’d call structural failure , he could see it was on fire , he said it was due to intense fire . mind you he was not a structural engineer possibly a non crisis actor would have said it was intact and fell over in high winds!
The man in a suit in the business end of new York who you find so exciting how do you read his mind ? How do you know why he is interested in listening to the interview , I would imagine the whole point of interviewing people for TV is that random people will be interested.
Let’s accept you are right he is an actor word perfect but not trusted to get it right with a men in black body guard what is the conspiracy’s gain from this ?
nealgloverFree MemberPosted 6 years agoThen he used a term “ground zero” on broadcast TV, that was later picked up and used by others.
any proof?Ground Zero isn’t a new term. It’s been in common useage since the 40’s.
(Do you even read what people post?)
The topic ‘9/11 documentary’ is closed to new replies.