Sibel Edmonds

[operator kos]

Sibel Edmonds just won't go away. The woman who Vanity Fair dubbed "The Inconvenient Patriot" has been subject to more government gag orders than anyone in history. What does this FBI insider know that the government is so desperate to keep under wraps? I, for one, would like to hear.

This website (http://www.justacitizen.com/) has the details.

[operator kos]

Well, it looks like Bush and company have really succeeded with their mission ofÂ*Â*traumatizing the American public so badly that most people can't rely on reason any more.Â*Â*When solid facts are automatically dismissed as "conspiracy theory", Doublethink has truly been ingrained.Â*Â*The fact that you moved this here immediately shows that you need psychological help.Â*Â*Get therapy while you still can.

Mind your manners. The comment about psychological help isn't called for. Next time you will recieve warning points.

[ECW]

I agree. This thread belongs in Current Events, The Law or Civil Rights. It is not a conspiracy theory. It is a whistleblower story.

[Labrocca]

Sorry but any theories about conspiracy by governments belong here. A single point of fact doesn't make something a conspiracy.

Reading that page shows me one person who is now a disgruntled employee suing her former employer. Had she not sued and simply whistleblown then they couldn't gag her. Also her statements about poor translations of documents and supervisors telling her to work slowly don't exactly make 9/11 a giant conspiracy...it makes it part of a theory that is unproven.

It's also NOT a current event since that story was written 1 year ago.


What does this FBI insider know that the government is so desperate to keep under wraps? I, for one, would like to hear.

That statement is an admission that you don't know the whole truth hence you theorize.

[operator kos]

Sorry but any theories about conspiracy by governments belong here. A single point of fact doesn't make something a conspiracy.

You make no sense.


Reading that page shows me one person who is now a disgruntled employee suing her former employer. Had she not sued and simply whistleblown then they couldn't gag her. Also her statements about poor translations of documents and supervisors telling her to work slowly don't exactly make 9/11 a giant conspiracy...it makes it part of a theory that is unproven.


Reading your post shows me that you hardly glanced at the page.


It's also NOT a current event since that story was written 1 year ago.


Um, yeah, if by a year ago you mean late November, 2006.


That statement is an admission that you don't know the whole truth hence you theorize.


Theorize about this: why have the following congressional representatives, intelligence agents, law enforcement officials, and military officers all said that the 9/11 Commission was a cover-up?

Rep. Cynthia McKinney, Rep. Ron Paul, Rep. Curt Weldon, Senator Max Cleland, Senator Mark Dayton, Louis Freeh, Edward L. Peck, Morton Goulder, Paul Craig Roberts, Catherine Austin Fitts, Michael Ruppert, John Loftus, Fred Burks, Daniel Ellsberg, Philip J. Berg, Major General Albert Stubblebine, Col. Ronald D. Ray, Col. Robert Bowman, Col. George Nelson, Major Douglas Rokke, Capt. Russ Wittenberg, Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, Barbara Honegger, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, Lt. Col. Stephen L. Butler, Major John M. Newman, Major Scott Ritter, Capt. Gregory M. Zeigler, Capt. Eric H. May, Raymond L. McGovern, William Christison, Robert David Steele, Melvin A. Goodman, Robert Baer, Sibel D. Edmonds, Bogdan Dzakovic, Edward J. Costello, John M. Cole, David Mark Conrad, Rosemary N. Dew, Steve Elson, David Forbes, Melvin A. Goodman, Mark Graf, Gilbert M. Graham, Diane Kleiman, Lynne A. Larkin, David MacMichael, Theodore J. Pahle, Behrooz Sarshar, Brian F. Sullivan, Larry J. Tortorich, Jane A. Turner, John B. Vincent, Dr. Fred Whitehurst, Col. Ann Wright, Matthew J. Zipoli, and others...

[Labrocca]

Theory
1. A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
2. The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fine musician who had never studied theory.
3. A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
4. Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.
5. A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.
6. An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.

I won't discuss how we categorize with you further. You are welcome to debate the topic but it's staff and I that place posts in their appropriate forums. I ask you respect our decisions.

[operator kos]

Well, I obviously have no choice in how you choose to spin what I submit to this forum, but I'll continue to debate as best as I can. Now, returning to my previous post, what do you have to say about all of these congressional representatives, intelligence agents, law enforcement officials, and military officers who have said that the 9/11 Commission was a cover-up? Are they all wrong? Do you think you know better than they do?

Rep. Cynthia McKinney, Rep. Ron Paul, Rep. Curt Weldon, Senator Max Cleland, Senator Mark Dayton, Louis Freeh, Edward L. Peck, Morton Goulder, Paul Craig Roberts, Catherine Austin Fitts, Michael Ruppert, John Loftus, Fred Burks, Daniel Ellsberg, Philip J. Berg, Major General Albert Stubblebine, Col. Ronald D. Ray, Col. Robert Bowman, Col. George Nelson, Major Douglas Rokke, Capt. Russ Wittenberg, Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, Barbara Honegger, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, Lt. Col. Stephen L. Butler, Major John M. Newman, Major Scott Ritter, Capt. Gregory M. Zeigler, Capt. Eric H. May, Raymond L. McGovern, William Christison, Robert David Steele, Melvin A. Goodman, Robert Baer, Sibel D. Edmonds, Bogdan Dzakovic, Edward J. Costello, John M. Cole, David Mark Conrad, Rosemary N. Dew, Steve Elson, David Forbes, Melvin A. Goodman, Mark Graf, Gilbert M. Graham, Diane Kleiman, Lynne A. Larkin, David MacMichael, Theodore J. Pahle, Behrooz Sarshar, Brian F. Sullivan, Larry J. Tortorich, Jane A. Turner, John B. Vincent, Dr. Fred Whitehurst, Col. Ann Wright, Matthew J. Zipoli, and others...

[Labrocca]

I stopped reading your list of people calling this a cover up with Cynthia McKinney. How about a list of people that say this isn't a cover up? I bet you can find a large list of people that believe in Area 51 as well. Belief doesn't make it fact. While I do believe it entirely possible the American citizens don't know all the facts. I am fairly confident that there is no vast conspiracy.

[ECW]

Let's see if I understand this correctly: the story is that a recent hiree of the FBI sees that they are fucking around and not doing there jobs in a timely manner, complains about it and gets the shitcan for her trouble. I guess in a strange sort of way you could call it a conspiracy theory and if that floats your boat, so be it.

The funny thing is that Chimpy was complaining not too long ago that we don't have enough people on the job that are fluent in Arabic that are helping us wade thru all these documents.

Will somebody call the White House and tell him that even if we did have enough agents that someone is conducting a work slow down to get more money for theirÂ*Â*department and to tell the FBI boss to stop firing people who are actually doing their jobs and to fire the asswipes that are not? It has to be a neo-con. Chimpy doesn't listen to Democrats or moderate Republicans.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

After much consideration I have reached the conclusion that I'd do her

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/images/0504/1dcf391b89ccc0911f8c.jpeg

[ECW]

Ha! Turks don't do monkeys. Sorry.

[Labrocca]

One persons statement does not make it fact. She may just be looking for a book deal.

[ECW]

One persons statement does not make it fact.Â*Â*

I guess that would apply to Cheney's statement's about Saddam having nukes as a justification for Iraq, too, eh? Works for me.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Ha! Turks don't do monkeys. Sorry.


Wasn't one of Sezen Aksu's four husbands a monkey?

[operator kos]

I stopped reading your list of people calling this a cover up with Cynthia McKinney....

Belief doesn't make it fact....

One persons statement does not make it fact. She may just be looking for a book deal.


Well, if you did bother to read the list, and look into the people named, you'd see that there are numerous intelligence agents who back up her story, which is that the White House had detailed foreknowledge of the attacks and intentionally obstructed the efforts of various intelligence agents to bring this to light before 9/11. The guy who was probably closest to revealing the truth, America's top Al-Qaeda investigator John O'Neill, was taken off the case and reassigned to security at the Twin Towers, where he died in the attacks. But maybe that's just another one of those crazy coincidences (http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/08/coincidence-theorists-guide-to-911.html).

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Well, if you did bother to read the list, and look into the people named, you'd see that there are numerous intelligence agents who back up her story


Not really.

[operator kos]

Not really.


That's the problem with you wacky conspiracy theorists. You think you can just say anything without backing it up with hard evidence.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Not really.


That's the problem with you wacky conspiracy theorists. You think you can just say anything without backing it up with hard evidence.


All the facts are laid out, so you saying I'm not backing it up with hard evidence is simply you ignoring the facts as they apply here.

The list is not people who back up her story, you are deliberately skewing the facts to suit your agenda rather than taking facts at face value.

[operator kos]

The list is not people who back up her story, you are deliberately skewing the facts to suit your agenda rather than taking facts at face value.


Okay, give me your little monkey paw and I'll guide you along here, and save that primate brain a little work.

Julie Sirrs
Coleen Rowley
Randy Glass
John O'Neill
Ken Williams
Robert Wright

are all US intelligence agents whose stories substantiate what Sibel Edmonds has alleged. Furthermore, a host of foreign intelligence agencies warned the US that the 9/11 attacks were imminent, including Germany, France, Great Britain, Russia, Egypt, Morocco, and in August of 2001, Israel, our big ally who supposedly has one of, if not the best intelligence organizations in the world. Even the Taliban tried to warn the US in August.

John Loftus, a US Federal Prosecutor who has held some of the highest security clearances in the world, said that "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." Only intentional internal obfuscation of investigations (such as Executive Order W199I) could have thwarted our intelligence network, which even the 9/11 Commission Report admits had deeply penetrated Al-Qaeda operations. Gary Berntsen, our top CIA officer in Afghanistan during the November 2001 invasion, went further, saying that we had detailed knowledge of OBL's every move, yet still managed to let him slip away at Tora Bora. Like Edmonds, Berntsen has been heavily censored by his agency.

[BoogyMan]

Okay, give me your little monkey paw and I'll guide you along here, and save that primate brain a little work.

Julie Sirrs
Coleen Rowley
Randy Glass
John O'Neill
Ken Williams
Robert Wright

are all US intelligence agents whose stories substantiate what Sibel Edmonds has alleged.Â*Â*Furthermore, a host of foreign intelligence agencies warned the US that the 9/11 attacks were imminent, including Germany, France, Great Britain, Russia, Egypt, Morocco, and in August of 2001, Israel, our big ally who supposedly has one of, if not the best intelligence organizations in the world.Â*Â*Even the Taliban tried to warn the US in August.

John Loftus, a US Federal Prosecutor who has held some of the highest security clearances in the world, said that "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."Â*Â*Only intentional internal obfuscation of investigations (such as Executive Order W199I) could have thwarted our intelligence network, which even the 9/11 Commission Report admits had deeply penetrated Al-Qaeda operations.Â*Â*Gary Berntsen, our top CIA officer in Afghanistan during the November 2001 invasion, went further, saying that we had detailed knowledge of OBL's every move, yet still managed to let him slip away at Tora Bora.Â*Â*Like Edmonds, Berntsen has been heavily censored by his agency.


You have had your say kos, now substantiate your claims using credible sources, not one of your conspiracy theorist buddies web sites.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

First off, you seem to think Sibel Edmonds story was that planes were gong to be driven into the WTC, that is misinformation on your part.

Secondly, while these people did work and make reports (mostly under Bill Clinton) that terrorists were planning attacks in the US, the Clinton administration made it clear that they were going to ursue terrorism in the US as a normal police matter. Clinton lacked the backbone to use the powers of the oval office to fight terrorism, he was too busy getting his knob polished by a young fat girl.

Julie Sirrs was fired under Clinton, her claims to have provided evidence of 9/11 prior to that event are suspicious and unsubstantiated.

Coleen Rowley made no mention of anything prior to 9/11, and it was only after 9/11 that she wrote a report. Her claims were in conjunction with a failed attempt to run for the house in '06.

Randy Glass wasn't an agent, he was a criminal, an informant, a guy who words carry no weight.

John O'Neill, who did most of his work under Clinton, never made a direct report of planes crashing into the WTC.

Ken Williams published a memo prior to 9/11 that theorized planes could be crashed into buildings by terrorists, but that memo never reached the white house.

[operator kos]

You have had your say kos, now substantiate your claims using credible sources, not one of your conspiracy theorist buddies web sites.


Gladly:
Julie Sirrs (http://web.archive.org/web/20020223063715/http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/DailyNews/wnt_missedsignals_1_020218.html)
Coleen Rowley (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/05/27/time.fbi/)
Randy Glass (http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/archive/video/randy_glass_video.htm)
John O'Neill (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0201/08/ltm.05.html)
Ken Williams (http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_rpt/fisa.html)
Robert Wright (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/06/19/column.novak.opinion.fbi/)
Robert Wright 2 (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,54070,00.html)
John Loftus (http://www.msnbc.com/news/984616.asp?cp1=1)
A Big Ol' List of Foreign Intelligence Warnings (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&warning_signs:_specific_cases=foreignIntelligence)

I've done my homework. Have you done yours?

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Your Julie Sirrs link says nothing about her. It simply links to a story about the Clinton Administration ignoring warnings and failing to build a reliable intel network, something we all know is the case.

[operator kos]

First off, you seem to think Sibel Edmonds story was that planes were gong to be driven into the WTC, that is misinformation on your part.


You know that's not what I said, so stop trying to misrepresent my claims.


Secondly, while these people did work and make reports (mostly under Bill Clinton) that terrorists were planning attacks in the US, the Clinton administration made it clear that they were going to ursue terrorism in the US as a normal police matter. Clinton lacked the backbone to use the powers of the oval office to fight terrorism, he was too busy getting his knob polished by a young fat girl.


Well, yeah, considering that Al-Qaeda was fighting on the same side as the US as late as 1999, (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1862515.stm) I won't argue with you there.


Julie Sirrs was fired under Clinton, her claims to have provided evidence of 9/11 prior to that event are suspicious and unsubstantiated.


Provide a source for this.


Coleen Rowley made no mention of anything prior to 9/11, and it was only after 9/11 that she wrote a report. Her claims were in conjunction with a failed attempt to run for the house in '06.


Huh, that's funny, I thought she made her claims long before that, which is why TIME made her a person of the year in 2002. (http://www.time.com/time/personoftheyear/2002/)


Randy Glass wasn't an agent, he was a criminal, an informant, a guy who words carry no weight.


Why would he be used as an informant if he didn't know anything and was completely untrustworthy?


John O'Neill, who did most of his work under Clinton, never made a direct report of planes crashing into the WTC.

Ken Williams published a memo prior to 9/11 that theorized planes could be crashed into buildings by terrorists, but that memo never reached the white house.


Because of interference by superiors, including President Bush's Executive Order W199I.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

First off, you seem to think Sibel Edmonds story was that planes were gong to be driven into the WTC, that is misinformation on your part.


You know that's not what I said, so stop trying to misrepresent my claims.


It is you who are misrepresenting the facts, claiming these people support Sibel Edmonds claims, when they don't.

You are playing very very loosely with the facts, everyone can see that.


Well, yeah, considering that Al-Qaeda was fighting on the same side as the US as late as 1999, I won't argue with you there.


Again you make a claim that your link does not support


Provide a source for this.


Julie Sirrs was fired from the DIA in 1999, who was president then? All her comments are post 9/11, claiming she knew something pre 9/11, but she has no concrete evidence. Your own links verify this.


Huh, that's funny, I thought she made her claims long before that, which is why TIME made her a person of the year in 2002.


Well then you better look it up and educate yourself.


Why would he be used as an informant if he didn't know anything and was completely untrustworthy?


Because criminals are used as informants all the time. I don't have time to educate you on the nature of informants, look it up yourself.

[BoogyMan]

You have had your say kos, now substantiate your claims using credible sources, not one of your conspiracy theorist buddies web sites.


Gladly:
Julie Sirrs (http://web.archive.org/web/20020223063715/http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/DailyNews/wnt_missedsignals_1_020218.html)
Coleen Rowley (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/05/27/time.fbi/)
Randy Glass (http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/archive/video/randy_glass_video.htm)
John O'Neill (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0201/08/ltm.05.html)
Ken Williams (http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_rpt/fisa.html)
Robert Wright (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/06/19/column.novak.opinion.fbi/)
Robert Wright 2 (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,54070,00.html)
John Loftus (http://www.msnbc.com/news/984616.asp?cp1=1)
A Big Ol' List of Foreign Intelligence Warnings (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&warning_signs:_specific_cases=foreignIntelligence)

I've done my homework.Â*Â*Have you done yours?


kos, this compendium of links, while very interesting reading, has essentially showed that our intelligence agencies are broken and little more. To try and glue them together and make a case that the 9/11 attacks were US government sponsored is a 2+2=9 kind of leap.

[Stoner]

That's the problem with you wacky conspiracy theorists.Â*Â*You think you can just say anything without backing it up with hard evidence.


I almost spit beer up through my nose when I read this statement.

It instantly brought me to your thread about the vast, evil, 9/11 conspiracy.

What's that saying about the pot and kettle?

[operator kos]

kos, this compendium of links, while very interesting reading, has essentially showed that our intelligence agencies are broken and little more. To try and glue them together and make a case that the 9/11 attacks were US government sponsored is a 2+2=9 kind of leap.


On the contrary, the testimony of these individuals shows not a series of administrative cock-ups, but rather a consistent pattern of deliberate administrative obstruction of investigations into Al-Qaeda activities before 9/11 and a cover-up of evidence afterwards. I chose the links relatively at random since there are so many mainstream media sources which back up what I'm saying, so I don't know if I necessarily picked the best ones, but there are plenty more to be found at the Complete 9/11 Timeline (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project). Yes, this is a "conspiracy theory" site, but it cross-references thousands of articles which you can link to and read for yourself.

[Labrocca]

On one hand KOS you argue that there is a government conspiracy for 9/11. Yet some of this so-called evidence is about ignoring an Al-Qaeda attack. So was it the government that did it or Al-Qaeda. So far you really haven't shown us your hand on how you interpret the whole ordeal. I would love to hear in your words what you think happened.

Also now that Bush is fighting terrorists very actively...are you FOR or AGAINST it? Seems they announce on the news attacks are coming yet they never do. I would think pre-9/11 that many agencies didn't take terrorist attacks on US soil too seriously. Even the 93 WTC attack didn't really do much damage. Al-Qaeda and most terrorists simply bomb small areas and are lucky to kill 100 people. In Isreal often less than 10 die. Do you really think the government knew that 3000 people and billions of damage would occur? Now I agree they knew Al-Qaeda was a threat and attempting to hit American soil. That's a given. However you infer our government purposely conspired to have this act committed.

Waiting anxiously for your response.

[operator kos]

So was it the government that did it or Al-Qaeda.


Again, the very premise on which your question is based is flawed. It is not an either/or scenario. As someone once said, "In a ham and eggs breakfast, the chicken is involved, but the pig is committed".

I do believe that Al-Qaeda operatives carried out the attacks. But even the government admits that it has intelligence assets deep within their organization. No one denies that the CIA essentially created modern Islamic Fundamentalism to fight the Soviets, but I would argue that many members of these organization still serve as "useful idiots" to western interests to this day.

I believe that most people in the police, the FBI, the military, etc. are honest and moral people who genuinely want to serve and protect the American public. But I believe that a number of top US officials are cynical enough to sacrifice American lives for what they consider to be the greater good; indeed, this intent is proven in historical documents such as the NORTHWOODS papers. I believe that leading up to, and on the day of 9/11, certain top officials deliberately interfered with our intelligence and air defense apparatus to ensure that the attacks would succeed. This gave them their "new Pearl Harbor" which they said they would need to achieve "full spectrum dominance" of the globe and secure the "strategic oil and natural gas reserves of Central Asia" neccessary for "continued American preeminence into the 21st Century" (all quotes from PNAC documents).

I strongly suspect that WTC7 was brought down via controlled demolition to ensure the destruction of evidence which they couldn't just shred since numerous people at least knew of its existence.


Also now that Bush is fighting terrorists very actively...are you FOR or AGAINST it? Seems they announce on the news attacks are coming yet they never do. I would think pre-9/11 that many agencies didn't take terrorist attacks on US soil too seriously. Even the 93 WTC attack didn't really do much damage. Al-Qaeda and most terrorists simply bomb small areas and are lucky to kill 100 people. In Isreal often less than 10 die. Do you really think the government knew that 3000 people and billions of damage would occur? Now I agree they knew Al-Qaeda was a threat and attempting to hit American soil. That's a given. However you infer our government purposely conspired to have this act committed.

Waiting anxiously for your response.


I think that Bush's actions have much worsened the terrorist situation. Invading the Middle East and supporting Israel's actions against Lebanon recruited more people into these organizations than OBL could have dreamed of. The only terrorist attacks the US government has prevented appear to be trumped up stories with no real substance behind them. Attacks which have succeeded- Madrid and London- have all the earmarks of classic false flag operations by western intelligence agencies.

[Labrocca]

But even the government admits that it has intelligence assets deep within their organization.

How do you decide what you believe when the government tells you something? I certainly have seen no evidence to support this claim.

Glad you posted your view at least. Now that I know where your coming from I don't feel the need to debate with you anymore. It's obvious you have come to conclusions and nothing would sway you.

I strongly suspect that WTC7 was brought down via controlled demolition to ensure the destruction of evidence which they couldn't just shred since numerous people at least knew of its existence.

I strongly suspect that you have no actual irrefutable evidence of this. Everything you have posted so far has been rebuked or proven faulty.

[operator kos]

I certainly have seen no evidence to support this claim.


Um, read the 9/11 Commission Report.


Glad you posted your view at least. Now that I know where your coming from I don't feel the need to debate with you anymore. It's obvious you have come to conclusions and nothing would sway you.


Well, you can lead a horse to water.


I strongly suspect that you have no actual irrefutable evidence of this. Everything you have posted so far has been rebuked or proven faulty.


You delude yourself. No one has provided any evidence against the claims about WTC7 which I actually made. Plenty of people have put words into my mouth and debunked claims I never made, but that is the essence of the strawman tactic used by people who know they have no actual evidence to debate with.

[Labrocca]

There is a 6 page thread about your WTC7 and it's been debunked.

http://www.democracyforums.com/showthread.php?tid=2766&page=1

[Stoner]

How do you decide what you believe when the government tells you something?Â*

If you're a democrat that depends on if it benefits their party or not.Â*Â*

If it's something that makes Bush look bad then it's considered truth.Â*Â*If it's something that makes democrats look bad it's a conspiracy theory.

It's what I like to call, "Liberal math."

[operator kos]

There is a 6 page thread about your WTC7 and it's been debunked.

http://www.democracyforums.com/showthread.php?tid=2766&page=1


Now you're just lying.


I am not a scientist so I can't make statements about chemicals in the area.


You already admitted that you can't answer my questions.

[Thirdparty]

I agree. This thread belongs in Current Events, The Law or Civil Rights. It is not a conspiracy theory. It is a whistleblower story.


C'mon, ECW, this woman is a one-worlder wacko. Google her and find out how crazy she is.!

[Labrocca]

Page 5 of that thread has this link:

http://www.911myths.com/html/traces_of_thermate_at_the_wtc.html

Sometimes I wonder if the conspiracy IS the conspiracy. How can so many be fooled into believing theories?

I will be awaiting your apology for calling me a liar. I admitted I couldn't answer questions about chemicals but that doesn't mean someone else couldn't.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Actually the questions about chemicals are answered.

[ECW]

I agree. This thread belongs in Current Events, The Law or Civil Rights. It is not a conspiracy theory. It is a whistleblower story.


C'mon, ECW, this woman is a one-worlder wacko. Google her and find out how crazy she is.!


Sorry, man. I Googled her and read a half dozen articles on her. She doesn't sound crazy to me. She sounds like another patriot trying to expose the shortcomings in our ever-continuing War On Terror. I saw nothing about her being a one-worlder either.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

She sounds like another patriot trying to expose the shortcomings in our ever-continuing War On Terror.


Which is why all this stuff ties back to clinton, a member of the trilateral commission, rather than bush.

This cutie was fired from the DIA in 1999 right? Who was prez then? Who squelched the (hee hee) Truth??

[operator kos]

She sounds like another patriot trying to expose the shortcomings in our ever-continuing War On Terror.


Which is why all this stuff ties back to clinton, a member of the trilateral commission, rather than bush.

This cutie was fired from the DIA in 1999 right? Who was prez then? Who squelched the (hee hee) Truth??


Sibel Edmonds was fired during Bush's stay at the White House. You obviously haven't looked much into anything I've said, because you don't even have the basic facts straight. And no, you never provided any evidence against my claims about WTC7 either. A page claiming to debunk other claims about WTC7 was quoted. If you want to argue with me, address my arguments.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Sibel Edmonds was fired during Bush's stay at the White House.


So now you claim Bush was in the white house in 1999?

What arguments about WTC7 do you feel haven't been addressed?

[operator kos]

Sibel Edmonds was fired during Bush's stay at the White House.


So now you claim Bush was in the white house in 1999?

What arguments about WTC7 do you feel haven't been addressed?


Now you are simply persisting in your ignorance. You are not worth debating, but for the sake of anyone else who's reading this and is confused:

Sibel Edmonds was fired from her position as a language specialist at the FBI's Washington Field Office in March, 2002 (I think Bush was in office then, right?), after she accused a colleague of covering up illicit activity involving Turkish nationals, alleging serious acts of security breaches, cover-ups, and intentional blocking of intelligence which, she contended, presented a danger to the United States' security. Since that time, court proceedings on her whistleblower claims have been blocked by the assertion of State Secrets Privilege.

I have repeatedly entered my claims about WTC7 in another thread, and I don't want to sidetrack this thread, so go look them up there (oh, wait, you don't bother looking things up, nevermind).

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Now you are simply persisting in your ignorance.


Oh, sorry, I got my left wing nutjobs mixed up, Julie Sirrs was the one sh1tcanned in 1999, Sibel Edmonds was hired under Bush, but fired less than a year later because no one could work with her.

I'd still do her though. She's not exactly a hottie but she's not bad either.

And your WTC7 claims have been debunked.

[Labrocca]

Well I guess my request for an apology is ignored. This is why I don't feel the need to debate with you Kos anymore. Sure I might post and reply but it's out of fun now. You have exposed yourself in this thread to have the ability to ignore evidence. Which is what most conspiracy theorists do. Instead you hang out to the "what if's" and "why that's" of the world. No one ever has all the answers.

You have a nice day but imho this thread has run it's course and you aren't worth my time anymore.

[operator kos]

Well I guess my request for an apology is ignored. This is why I don't feel the need to debate with you Kos anymore. Sure I might post and reply but it's out of fun now. You have exposed yourself in this thread to have the ability to ignore evidence. Which is what most conspiracy theorists do. Instead you hang out to the "what if's" and "why that's" of the world. No one ever has all the answers.

You have a nice day but imho this thread has run it's course and you aren't worth my time anymore.


Well, I'm here to share information, not coddle egos. You're the one clinging to a fantasy, as you admit in your desire to "take the blue pill". Ignorance is forgivable, but willful ignorance earns only my contempt.

[Labrocca]

Well, I'm here to share information...

If that's why you are here then you have failed.

[operator kos]

Well, I'm here to share information...

If that's why you are here then you have failed.


...because my words have evidently fallen on deaf ears, or people who rail against arguments I never made and then image that they've dunked what I've said. But I've put the facts out there; that's all I can do.

[Stoner]

I don't know what Kos needs more, a joint or to get laid.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

He needs a new conspiracy theory


Maybe this will help:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conspiracy_theories

I like the one where humanity is actually under the control of shape-shifting alien reptiles myself. Since they can shape shift it's impossible to disprove!

Oh, and I'm the one who needs a shotgun from Tara Reid!

[Stoner]

Actually did you all hear about that commotion at O'Hare the other day? A bunch of observers think they saw UFO's.

There you go, Kos. Travel to Chicago and begin the investigation. Go get those aliens!

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

It was only one, and as soon as I saw my cloaking device was off I put it in high gear and warped out of there!