PDA

View Full Version : Ahmadinejad's UN speech regarding 9/11



Carsten Wiethoff
09-24-2010, 05:56 AM
Here is the part of the transcript that deals with 9/11.
Full transcript here (http://tangibleinfo.blogspot.com/2010/09/ahmadinejads-un-speech-full-text.html).


One can analyze the current governance of the world by examining three events:

First, the event of the II September 2001 which has affected the whole world for

almost a decade.



All of a sudden, the news of the attack on the twin towers was broadcast using

numerous footages of the incident.



Almost all governments and known figures strongly condemned this incident.



But then a propaganda machine came into full force; it was implied that the whole

world was exposed to a huge danger, namely terrorism, and that the only way to save

the world would be to deploy forces into Afghanistan.



Eventually Afghanistan, and shortly thereafter Iraq were occupied.



Please take note:



It was said that some three thousand people were killed on the 11 th September for

which we are all very saddened. Yet, up until now, in Afghanistan and Iraq hundreds

of thousands of people have been killed, millions wounded and displaced and the

conflict is still going on and expanding.



In identifying those responsible for the attack, there were three viewpoints.


1- That a very powerful and complex terrorist group, able to successfully cross

all layers of the American intelligence and security, carried out the attack.

This is the main viewpoint advocated by American statesmen.



2- That some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated the attack to

reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order

also to save the Zionist regime.

The majority of the American people as well as other nations and politicians agree

with this view.



3- It was carried out by a terrorist group but the American government supported

and took advantage of the situation. Apparently, this viewpoint has fewer proponents.



The main evidence linking the incident was a few passports found in the huge

volume of rubble and a video of an individual whose place of domicile was unknown

but it was announced that he had been involved in oil deals with some American

officials. It was also covered up and said that due to the explosion and fire no trace of

the suicide attackers was found.



There remain, however, a few questions to be answered:



1- Would it not have been sensible that first a thorough investigation should have

been conducted by independent groups to conclusively identify the elements involved

in the attack and then map out a rational plan to take measures against them?



2- Assuming the viewpoint of the American government, is it rational to launch a

classic war through widespread deployment of troops that led to the death of hundreds

of thousands ofpeople to counter a terrorist group?



3- Was it not possible to act the way Iran countered the Riggi terrorist group who

killed and wounded 400 innocent people in Iran. In the Iranian operation no innocent

person was hurt.



It is proposed that the United Nations set up an independent fact-finding group for

the event of the II September so that in the future expressing views about it is not

forbidden.



. I wish to announce here that next year the Islamic Republic of Iran will host a

conference to study terrorism and the means to confront it. I invite officials, scholars,

thinkers, researchers and research institutes of all countries to attend this conference. Who is that individual mentioned by Ahmadinejad?

Peter Lemkin
09-24-2010, 06:11 AM
Here is the part of the transcript that deals with 9/11.
Full transcript here (http://tangibleinfo.blogspot.com/2010/09/ahmadinejads-un-speech-full-text.html).


One can analyze the current governance of the world by examining three events:

First, the event of the II September 2001 which has affected the whole world for

almost a decade.



All of a sudden, the news of the attack on the twin towers was broadcast using

numerous footages of the incident.



Almost all governments and known figures strongly condemned this incident.



But then a propaganda machine came into full force; it was implied that the whole

world was exposed to a huge danger, namely terrorism, and that the only way to save

the world would be to deploy forces into Afghanistan.



Eventually Afghanistan, and shortly thereafter Iraq were occupied.



Please take note:



It was said that some three thousand people were killed on the 11 th September for

which we are all very saddened. Yet, up until now, in Afghanistan and Iraq hundreds

of thousands of people have been killed, millions wounded and displaced and the

conflict is still going on and expanding.



In identifying those responsible for the attack, there were three viewpoints.


1- That a very powerful and complex terrorist group, able to successfully cross

all layers of the American intelligence and security, carried out the attack.

This is the main viewpoint advocated by American statesmen.



2- That some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated the attack to

reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order

also to save the Zionist regime.

The majority of the American people as well as other nations and politicians agree

with this view.



3- It was carried out by a terrorist group but the American government supported

and took advantage of the situation. Apparently, this viewpoint has fewer proponents.



The main evidence linking the incident was a few passports found in the huge

volume of rubble and a video of an individual whose place of domicile was unknown

but it was announced that he had been involved in oil deals with some American

officials. It was also covered up and said that due to the explosion and fire no trace of

the suicide attackers was found.



There remain, however, a few questions to be answered:



1- Would it not have been sensible that first a thorough investigation should have

been conducted by independent groups to conclusively identify the elements involved

in the attack and then map out a rational plan to take measures against them?



2- Assuming the viewpoint of the American government, is it rational to launch a

classic war through widespread deployment of troops that led to the death of hundreds

of thousands ofpeople to counter a terrorist group?



3- Was it not possible to act the way Iran countered the Riggi terrorist group who

killed and wounded 400 innocent people in Iran. In the Iranian operation no innocent

person was hurt.



It is proposed that the United Nations set up an independent fact-finding group for

the event of the II September so that in the future expressing views about it is not

forbidden.



. I wish to announce here that next year the Islamic Republic of Iran will host a

conference to study terrorism and the means to confront it. I invite officials, scholars,

thinkers, researchers and research institutes of all countries to attend this conference. Who is that individual mentioned by Ahmadinejad?

Likely a translation error or error on his part. I doubt he is privy to any information the rest of us have not heard. His speech sounds reasonable enough to me...yet 30 nations walked out so as not to hear the possibility the fairy tale of 9-11 is not true and the wars of agresssion on various nations and nearly everyone within their own countries is a ploy for the Oligarchy to gain further power and riches and take away freedoms and rights of the citizens within them.

If that conference will also take up not just the hypothetical, but various issues of 9-11 it will be quite the conference!:shakehands:

Charles Drago
09-24-2010, 12:28 PM
If Ahmadinejad had been an agent for the perpetrators of 9-11 he could not have done a better job demonizing the discussion of the events' true sponsorship.

Wait a minute ...

Carsten Wiethoff
09-24-2010, 12:38 PM
If Ahmadinejad had been an agent for the perpetrators of 9-11 he could not have done a better job demonizing the discussion of the events' true sponsorship.

Wait a minute ...
I think in the current atmosphere Ahmadinejad is already so demonized that it really does not matter what he says any more. For most people the fact that A. mentions 9/11 automatically means that it is a taboo, never to be touched again.
In fact if you read what he says, there are much more provocative statements in many 9/11 documentaries and books. But in this case it is clearly the messenger that forms the perceived message.

Mark Stapleton
09-24-2010, 03:25 PM
If Ahmadinejad had been an agent for the perpetrators of 9-11 he could not have done a better job demonizing the discussion of the events' true sponsorship.

Wait a minute ...

I agree. Zionist Israel was in up to its neck on 9/11. I'ts so obvious.

I like Ahmadinejad. He has balls.

Peter Lemkin
09-24-2010, 05:31 PM
http://gadebate.un.org/Portals/1/statements/634208557381562500IR_en.pdf

Ed Jewett
09-24-2010, 08:27 PM
"Ahmadinejad, as of the count yesterday, had 950 stories condemning his “outrageous” statements at the United Nations. Please note that a total of 27 nations walked out, not the people of those nations but representatives of the governments.

What we fail to note is that 163 nations stayed."



http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/09/24/gordon-duff-what-ahmadinejad-isnt-telling-us/

The full text:

"When President Ahmadinejad announced, before the United Nations that most people in the world believe that the U.S. government was involved in the planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks, he told the truth. In America, groups have been popping up for years, not “fringe” types, but military and professional organizations, architects, engineers, pilots, intelligence officers. There is a vast underground that is never reported, never spoken of in the news and continually threatened. The FBI and Homeland Security have infiltrated these groups, illegal surveillance has been on a massive scale and, as the groups have grown and their reach has touched millions of Americans, the government, in the usual whispers, is talking about mass arrests, “unplugging” the internet, all those things the militia movements of the 90?s said would happen.
Outside the United States, not in the Middle East, but Canada, Europe, Latin America and the Far East, finding people who accept the Bush and Obama administration’s “party line” about “box cutters and hijackers” is difficult. No one wants to risk the public scorn of seeming like an imbecile.
However, back here in the “good ole’ USA,” even comedian Jon Stewart, normally an outspoken critic of government insanity, has agreed to lead a march on Washinton to quell “rumors” about 9/11, rumors of wrongdoing by people he despises.
What is the difference? Why do those outside the United States see things do differently? The answer is freedom of press, the first of the hasty additions to the constitution, a guarantee provided for in the 1st Amendment. There had been assaults on freedom of the press before, particularly during wartime but never anything on the scale seen after 9/11. Across the board, not just the news but even movies and television shows, fiction, censored, propaganda, peddling ignorance, fear and screaming “conspiracy theory” at anyone trying to get word out.
America is a dictatorship.
It isn’t just corporate lobbyists or two broken political parties. Elections are rigged, government agencies meant to provide for national security are now doing little but spying on Americans, our military is spread across the planet, tasked with everything but serving the United States. All the while, the “news” is everything but. Americans, to a one, know something is terribly wrong, totally out of control and, even their attempts to get at some semblance of truth are turned against them. The news is censored. With the country embroiled in two failed wars, obviously illegal, proof of war crimes piling up, financial collapse, citizen’s rights trampled on, nary a word is said about any of it.
“The president is a Muslim.” “Healthcare is socialism.” “The rich need their tax breaks, the same ones that pushed the country into 13.5 trillion in debt.”
The real message is always the same if you listen carefully, “be afraid, trust in government.” What are they really saying? “Greed is good.” How is that working out for you?
Ahmadinejad, as of the count yesterday, had 950 stories condemning his “outrageous” statements at the United Nations. Please note that a total of 27 nations walked out, not the people of those nations but representatives of the governments.
What we fail to note is that 163 nations stayed.
A few years ago, Ahmadinejad had a conference to discuss the holocaust. Scholars from around the world came, some openly hostile to Israel, some because they were scholars. It was called “outrageous” and Israel threatened to break up the meeting with a nuclear attack. What happened there, what were the findings? We will never know. Censorship in the American press, the same censorship that prevented evidence proving Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction from reaching the public, the same censorship that should have told Americans that Osama bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11, was imposed.
The truth never benefits from censorship. Censorship is dictatorship. Dictatorship is when those in power no longer trust the people. A government that doesn’t trust its own people can’t serve its people, its people serve it. This is the America of today.
9 years of censorship now clouds 9/11.
When President Bush announced that he saw the first plane crash into the World Trade Center, live TV, it was shown once and hidden away. TV never showed that, not real TV, not the kind the public sees. Bush may have watched it, but if he is telling the truth, it means he knew in advance. Does this explain why he simply sat there? When Larry Silverstein said that he ordered one of the World Trade Center buildings, number 7, “pulled,” meaning “blown up” did it mean that explosives had been planted in all the buildings? It sure looked like it to me."

Peter Lemkin
09-24-2010, 09:03 PM
trying to find complete list, but here is partial list of nations that walked out....Argentina, Australia, Britain, Canada, Costa Rica, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, New Zealand and the U.S.

Malcolm Pryce
09-24-2010, 09:51 PM
Ahmadinejad's speech has gone down surprisingly well with Daily Mail readers. At least half of the twenty plus commenters agree with him about 9/11!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ve-Israel.html

Magda Hassan
09-25-2010, 12:47 AM
Ahmadinejad's speech has gone down surprisingly well with Daily Mail readers. At least half of the twenty plus commenters agree with him about 9/11!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ve-Israel.html

That links gone.....

Peter Lemkin
09-25-2010, 05:56 AM
Ahmadinejad's speech has gone down surprisingly well with Daily Mail readers. At least half of the twenty plus commenters agree with him about 9/11!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ve-Israel.html

That links gone.....

Yup..that link is gone...but living here in Central Europe I can assure the Forum in my former classes, my university-aged students from a wide variety of countries [mostly of the former Soviet Bloc] overwhelmingly di NOT believe the official version of events of 9-11. Older peop; but even they do not generally 'buy' the story - or have enourmous doubts and questions. I think an international investigation is a super idea - but the USA will never allow it, if they have any sway over it - legally or using black assets/economic or other blackmail.
------------------------------------
Three Years before Ahmadinejad, Italian President said 9/11 was Inside Job and “All Democratic Circles in Europe and America Know it”
24th September 2010

Was Italy’s President Cossiga “hateful” and “offensive,” too? Well, once, yes - but only because he once collaborated with the CIA’s jackals … and eventually regretted it deeply, went public with his “hate” of the Agency’s lethal Gladio machinations throughout Europe … but he never lost his conviction that the CIA engineered 9/11, however “offensive” a certain a two-faced, drone-hugging American president may find it …

This is an excerpt. Full post: http://www.antifascistencyclopedia.com/allposts/obit-1-italian-ex-president-anti-terrorist-francesco-cossiga-was-an-architect-of-the-gladio-terror-network-2-cossiga-publicly-blamed-911-on-the-cia-mossad
” … One of Cossiga’s most controversial statements concerned the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks … ‘all of the democratic circles of America and of Europe, especially those of the Italian center-left, now know well that the disastrous attack was planned and realized by the American CIA and Mossad with the help of the Zionist world in order to place the blame on Arabic countries and to persuade the Western powers to intervene in Iraq and Afghanistan. … “

President Cossiga Blamed 9/11 on the CIA & Mossad

Friends, foes comment on Cossiga’s death

ROME, Aug. 18 (UPI) — In death, as in life, former Italian President Francesco Cossiga drew praise from supporters and derision from detractors, observers say.

Outside Gemelli Hospital in Rome flags flew at half-staff for the former head of the Christian Democrat party who died at the age of 82 Tuesday, ANSA reported Wednesday.

Messages left in the chapel memory book and around the hospital ranged from laudatory to vituperative.

Italian President Giorgio Napolitano said he had come to make “a small homage to a great statesman.” Another wrote, “Ciao Presidente Picconatore” (Goodbye Pickaxe-Wielding President), a reference to the blows Cossiga’s attempted demolition of political institutions and the party system during the last years of his 1985-1992 presidency.

Another citizen wrote, “A Killer Has Died,” on a poster that called Cossiga “a state criminal,” ANSA said.

Cossiga said he didn’t want a state funeral. He will have a private burial in his northern Sardinian home town.

One of Cossiga’s most controversial statements concerned the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks on the United States as reported in the Nov. 30, 2007, edition of Corriere della Sera in which he was quoted as saying, “all of the democratic circles of America and of Europe, especially those of the Italian center-left, now know well that the disastrous attack was planned and realized by the American CIA and Mossad with the help of the Zionist world in order to place the blame on Arabic countries and to persuade the Western powers to intervene in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

http://www.polijam.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=20825:friends-foes-comment-on-cossigas-death&catid=54:world&Itemid=5

Carsten Wiethoff
09-25-2010, 12:40 PM
The broken link is a technical problem.
Here it is:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1314667/Ahmadinejad-tells-UN-Some-believe-9-11-work-Americans-save-Israel.html


:flute:

Carsten Wiethoff
09-25-2010, 01:04 PM
In an interview with the BBC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11407326

Money Quote:
"It was offensive. It was hateful. And particularly for him to make the statement here in Manhattan, just a little north of Ground Zero, where families lost their loved ones. People of all faiths, all ethnicities who see this as the seminal tragedy of this generation. For him to make a statement like that was inexcusable," Mr Obama said.

Peter Lemkin
09-25-2010, 02:27 PM
In an interview with the BBC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11407326

Money Quote:
"It was offensive. It was hateful. And particularly for him to make the statement here in Manhattan, just a little north of Ground Zero, where families lost their loved ones. People of all faiths, all ethnicities who see this as the seminal tragedy of this generation. For him to make a statement like that was inexcusable," Mr Obama said.

How dare a short and swarthy-skinned man; branded, along with his country (which we had overthrown the democratically elected government of for our Oil-ogoply), speak truth to power....the nerve....when will these undermenschen learn their place and to keep their silence?......

However, I think O-bomb-ya will life to eat his words.....he knows are lies.

Peter Lemkin
09-26-2010, 07:49 PM
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/143885.html [video here]

An international lawyer says many now question the truth behind the 9/11 attacks, and that American citizens are demanding an international probe into the incident.


"Ahmadinejad is absolutely rational and correct on this, that the American people are now coming to the point of demanding an international inquiry (into the 9/11 attacks), " Franklin Lamb told Press TV.

The Beirut-based lawyer was referring to remarks by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in his address to the 65th UN General Assembly that the 9/11 incident might have been the result of an inside job in the United States.

"This call [for an international investigation] didn't start in the Middle East. It stated more than a year ago in Canada, in Europe, in Latin America, and increasingly in America itself," he continued.

"There are just too many questions raised by architects, by pilots, by experts, by engineers, by [US Department of] Homeland Security employees and the FBI," the international lawyer reiterated.

"There is every reason to have an inquiry and the [US President Barack] Obama administration should join this call, not oppose it," he underlined.

The lawyer added what President Ahmadinejad said was a 'logical proposal' and that "the president of Iran is now in synchronization with the majority of the American people."

Peter Lemkin
09-27-2010, 06:33 AM
[VERY] incomplete list
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/09/anniversary-of-911.html
9/11 Commissioners:
The 9/11 Commission's co-chairs said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements (free subscription required)
9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says "I don't believe for a minute we got everything right", that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue
9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said "We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting"
9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up"
9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that "There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn't have access . . . ." He also said that the investigation depended too heavily on the accounts of Al Qaeda detainees who were physically coerced into talking
And the Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) - who led the 9/11 staff's inquiry - recently said "At some level of the government, at some point in time...there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened". He also said "I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described .... 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." And he said: "It's almost a culture of concealment, for lack of a better word. There were interviews made at the FAA's New York center the night of 9/11 and those tapes were destroyed. The CIA tapes of the interrogations were destroyed. The story of 9/11 itself, to put it mildly, was distorted and was completely different from the way things happened"
If even the 9/11 Commissioners don't buy the official story, why do you?

Senior intelligence officers:
Former military analyst and famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said that the case of a certain 9/11 whistleblower is "far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers". He also said that the government is ordering the media to cover up her allegations about 9/11. And he said that some of the claims concerning government involvement in 9/11 are credible, that "very serious questions have been raised about what they [U.S. government officials] knew beforehand and how much involvement there might have been", that engineering 9/11 would not be humanly or psychologically beyond the scope of the current administration, and that there's enough evidence to justify a new, "hard-hitting" investigation into 9/11 with subpoenas and testimony taken under oath (see this and this)
A 27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials (Raymond McGovern) said “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke”
A 29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis (William Bill Christison) said “I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe (and see this)
A number of intelligence officials, including a CIA Operations Officer who co-chaired a CIA multi-agency task force coordinating intelligence efforts among many intelligence and law enforcement agencies (Lynne Larkin) sent a joint letter to Congress expressing their concerns about “serious shortcomings,” “omissions,” and “major flaws” in the 9/11 Commission Report and offering their services for a new investigation (they were ignored)
A decorated 20-year CIA veteran, who Pulitzer-Prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh called "perhaps the best on-the-ground field officer in the Middle East”, and whose astounding career formed the script for the Academy Award winning motion picture Syriana (Robert Baer) said that "the evidence points at" 9/11 having had aspects of being an inside job
The Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs, who served as Senior Analyst from 1966 - 1990. He also served as Professor of International Security at the National War College from 1986 - 2004 (Melvin Goodman) said "The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately a coverup"

If even our country's top intelligence officers don't buy the official story, why do you?

Congressmen:
According to the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham, an FBI informant had hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House (confirmed here)
Current Democratic U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy said "The two questions that the congress will not ask . . . is why did 9/11 happen on George Bush's watch when he had clear warnings that it was going to happen? Why did they allow it to happen?"
Current Republican Congressman Ron Paul calls for a new 9/11 investigation and states that "we see the [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on"
Current Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich hints that we aren't being told the truth about 9/11
Current Republican Congressman Jason Chafetz says that we need to be vigilant and continue to investigate 9/11
Former Democratic Senator Mike Gravel states that he supports a new 9/11 investigation and that we don't know the truth about 9/11

Former Republican Senator Lincoln Chaffee endorses a new 9/11 investigation
Former U.S. Democratic Congressman Dan Hamburg doesn't believe the official version of events
Former U.S. Republican Congressman and senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, and who served six years as the Chairman of the Military Research and Development Subcommittee Curt Weldon has shown that the U.S. tracked hijackers before 9/11, is open to hearing information about explosives in the Twin Towers, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job
If there is bipartisan questioning of the official story, why aren't you questioning it?

Other government officials:
U.S. General, Commanding General of U.S. European Command and Supreme Allied Commander Europe, decorated with the Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart (General Wesley Clark) said "We've never finished the investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused the intelligence information it had. The evidence seems pretty clear to me. I've seen that for a long time"
Former Deputy Secretary for Intelligence and Warning under Nixon, Ford, and Carter (Morton Goulder), former Deputy Director to the White House Task Force on Terrorism (Edward L. Peck), and former US Department of State Foreign Service Officer (J. Michael Springmann), as well as a who's who of liberals and independents) jointly call for a new investigation into 9/11
Former Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan; former U.S. Army Intelligence officer, and currently a widely-sought media commentator on terrorism and intelligence services (John Loftus) says "The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defense of incompetence"
The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted a massive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan (Col. Ronald D. Ray) said that the official story of 9/11 is "the dog that doesn't hunt"
The former director of the FBI (Louis Freeh) says there was a cover up by the 9/11 Commission
If top government officials are skeptical, why aren't you?

Numerous other politicians, judges, legal scholars, and attorneys also question at least some aspects of the government's version of 9/11.

Really - just go to Patriots For 911 Truth for another few hundred..... and many others are reluctant or afraid to join such lists, but have their questions and doubts or know the official version is the Big Lie we now base our Polity on.

David Guyatt
09-27-2010, 05:39 PM
2- Assuming the viewpoint of the American government, is it rational to launch a classic war through widespread deployment of troops that led to the death of hundreds of thousands ofpeople to counter a terrorist group?

Ahmen, Ahmadinejad.

The employed rationality very clearly supports the perspective that 911 was an inside job or a "Pearl Harbour" event (i.e., covertly permissable).

Carsten Wiethoff
09-28-2010, 03:38 PM
Unsurprisingly there is an ugly hit piece regarding Ahmadinejad's speech in relation to 9/11 in the Wall Street Journal. Read this and compare to the original.:thumpdown:
http://911blogger.com/news/2010-09-27/wall-street-journal-doing-all-it-can-contain-911-truth-movement

Peter Lemkin
09-28-2010, 04:13 PM
Wall Street was named for the physical wall once there in Manhattan's past. Below the 'wall' of Wall Street [South of it] was an area where slaves were sold in New York.....it hasn't changed much in metaphorical terms. While I have a few problems with President Ahmadinejad [if true] that he believes that the end of the world is upon us and that is a good thing - as well as his regular 'talking directly to God' [that puts him dead center in W territory - no more; no less] - the man has some smarts and some integrity [putting him far above a W!]. His speech at the UN is logical, on 9-11 inciteful and truthful and the walk-out on his speech a sign of the Lies Of Our Times triumphing over logic.
By the way, Ahmadinejad has pushed hard for the release of the three American 'hikers' arrested in Iran and has gotten one of them released. He is not the enemy. The enemy can be found MUCH closer to 'home'.....perhaps within the 'beltway', Wall Street and London Exchange areas.....

Carsten Wiethoff
09-28-2010, 06:10 PM
Correction: September 25, 2010
A headline on Friday with an article about an incendiary speech in the United Nations General Assembly by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran summarized his remarks about the Sept. 11 terror attacks incorrectly. In his speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad asserted various theories about the origin of the attacks, including the possibility that they had been planned by the United States. He did not say that the United States had planned the attacks.


At least the NYTimes has the guts to correct itself, after misinforming their readers.
I await the same from the Wall Street Journal. I don't hold my breath. :secruity:

Peter Lemkin
09-28-2010, 06:52 PM
Correction: September 25, 2010
A headline on Friday with an article about an incendiary speech in the United Nations General Assembly by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran summarized his remarks about the Sept. 11 terror attacks incorrectly. In his speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad asserted various theories about the origin of the attacks, including the possibility that they had been planned by the United States. He did not say that the United States had planned the attacks.


At least the NYTimes has the guts to correct itself, after misinforming their readers.
I await the same from the Wall Street Journal. I don't hold my breath. :secruity:

What a surprise there was the initial 'mistake'. I have known a few UN interpreters - and they are of the highest caliber and almost exclusively NOT of any political 'persuasion'. I would like to know if they used the U.N. translator's words - or their own...or the US intel's own....

Carsten Wiethoff
09-28-2010, 07:12 PM
From the Times of India: (here (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Ahmadinejads-UN-speech-lost-in-translation/articleshow/6601962.cms))


UNITED NATIONS: Iran (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Iran) President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Mahmoud-Ahmadinejad) gave a chaotic speech at the UN summit (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/search?q=UN%20summit) on Tuesday — with no one except for the controversial leader and his delegation really sure what he said.

Ahmadinehad broke off one minute into his presentation to complain about the translation to the UN assembly presidency.

The president carried on again but at the end, the UN interpreters said they were only "reading from a translated text" and not following Ahmadinejad's comments.

The assembly hall was half empty, but Western delegations did not boycott the speech as they have done in previous years.

According to the translated text, Ahmadinejad called for fundamental reform of "the undemocratic and unjust" world order.

"Demanding liberal capitalism and transnational corporations have caused the suffering of countless women, men and children in so many countries," he was quoted as saying.

Ed Jewett
09-28-2010, 07:50 PM
Unsurprisingly there is an ugly hit piece regarding Ahmadinejad's speech in relation to 9/11 in the Wall Street Journal. Read this and compare to the original.:thumpdown:
http://911blogger.com/news/2010-09-27/wall-street-journal-doing-all-it-can-contain-911-truth-movement


Yes, quite ugly. One could use that piece to teach someone else how it's done. Maybe later I'll deconstruct it....