Walking on the moon?

[sasguru]

Everyone knows the New World Order controls New Scientist.

The fish follow the trawler, not the trawler the fish.

(c) Eric Cantona, 1996

[sasguru]

When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea.

HTH

[Old Greg]

The fish follow the trawler, not the trawler the fish.

(c) Eric Cantona, 1996

Ah, now I get it.

[oraclesmith]

The fish follow the trawler, not the trawler the fish.

(c) Eric Cantona, 1996

They would do if they're stuck in a bloody great net !

[gingerjedi]

It is my own feeling that the US intelligence authorities did know about a plot to crash airplanes. The investigation was blocked a number of times (see The Road to 9/11). I think they actually let it happen, they may have not expected it to be that horrific but I think they let the terrorist go ahead to provide the reason for the subsequent military endeavours in Afghanistan and Iraq.

And what did Iraq have to do with any of this? To this day there is not one bit of evidence that Iraq has had any involvement in any terrorist activities outside of its own borders, so what did they do? Fabricated another bit of so called evidence.

Afghanistan is a mess and always has been but then America is guilty of letting them get into that state in the first place.... now I see!!

There’s a lot more to all this than meets the eye but I maintain the 9/11 attacks were just that.

[oraclesmith]

They only thing the US Government are covering up is that they're a bunch of half-wits. In my opinion.

[Charles Foster Kane]

They only thing the US Government are covering up is that they're a bunch of half-wits. In my opinion.

Not much of a cover-up then.

[Old Greg]

They only thing the US Government are covering up is that they're a bunch of half-wits. In my opinion.

They're not doing a very good job of it. QED.

[zathras]

And what did Iraq have to do with any of this?

Nothing at all, but one of the first things George Bush ordered after the event was to find proof that Iraq was responsible. Unfortunatly for the PNAC this turned out to be untrue. Hence the attempts to manufacture evidence that Saddam was far more dangerous than it turned out to be.

To be honest I think this has to do with the document produced by the PNAC over America retaining it's power in a post-coldwar world. For this it was felt some kind of Bogeyman was needed. Islamic terrorism is that Bogeyman. By allowing the attack of 9/11 to go ahead they created this idea of international terrorism as some kind of new threat - it is not Islamic terrorist murdered the Israli athletes in Munich and blew up airliners in the early 70's.

Any right thinking person would have realised that fighting a war in Afghanistan would create a messy guerilla war. After all they faced down the British Empire, and the Russians.

Ditto Iraq. There is a world of difference between kicking someone out of a country that they do not live in and attacking a soverign nation. It makes a difference to the soldier if his family is a long distance away and when it is right behind him!

However these two wars have now lasted longer than WWI and WWII but with vastly reduced casualties (on the Coalition side). From the point of view of the dollars flowing into US Oil firms, construction firms and the like - many with close links to the Bush Administration cheap at half the price.

[Old Greg]

Nothing at all, but one of the first things George Bush ordered after the event was to find proof that Iraq was responsible. Unfortunatly for the PNAC this turned out to be untrue. Hence the attempts to manufacture evidence that Saddam was far more dangerous than it turned out to be.

I was chatting to a bright young American the other day who was sure that Saddam had 'something to do with 9/11'.

Amusing cartoon on this subject (the black and white one 3rd from top":
Get Your War On