"Terror" Plot "Thwarted" in England

[lord_casek]

dude, once again i ask you to provide something specifically related and you give me some shit that doesn't confirm anything related to what i asked you. so how does this specifically confirm bin laden was 'trained in america'?? and you forgot to attribute the quote you started your post off with, and then followed up with nothing that has the quote in it, unless those are your own words.

also, there seems to be a discrepancy with the conspiracy set about the alleged hijackers still being alive. your quote states that all of them were trained by the US at SOA(link pleasssse), yet by other accounts, many of them are still alive and had nothing to do with 9/11.

aside from that, my understanding of school of the americas is that it is for operations specifically in...the 'americas', namely central/south.

 

i lived near the school of americas in columbus georgia, man. i know it was there because i passed by it several times.

 

and yeah, the school of americas trained such people. as did the hijackers trained at the pensacola naval air station.

 

http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Hijackers_trained_Bases.htm

 

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/special_packages/school_of_the_americas/

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/11/20/schooloftheamericas.ap/index.html

 

http://www.betterworldlinks.org/book73e.htm

[lord_casek]

casek, he's got a point, you need to step up to the plate when it comes to these quotes and references. We all know about the School of Americas so showing us it's official webpage isn't going to do anything.

 

there's this button on firefox. it says "find"

 

it's in that washington post article. why don't you look? find/"school of americas" it leads you directly to the quoted text. you fuckers make assumptions and then try to make it look like i'm not posting relevant information. but i am. you're just not reading.

[lord_casek]

Bomb Plot “Key Player” a CIA-ISI Asset

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=522

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

No, I see your point... you're more on than off when you talk about the 'canned' coverage that the Bush administration demands. I mean, there were pictures of the protestors taken from the press truck but nobody was gonna take credit for them because the Bush administration would have black-balled them FOR REAL. The Admin office went so far as to actually tell them that, "You take pictures of the protestors and you'll never walk onto White House grounds while Bush is President"... still, pictures were taken.

 

I absolutely agree that this is the most demonic and controlling administration since EVER.

 

As far as these ongoing investigations go, there just isn't that much day to day... or even week to week. People are working and investigating but it's vital to the investigation that they not describe their progress for fear of paper shredders so there are often huge lags between reports. It doesn't mean the reporters aren't trying to follow what's going on.

 

Remember how pervasive the Lewinski scandal was, seemed like it was in the news everyday but if you really think back it was all fluff and bullshit between the days that Ken Lay actually made statements. There's a lot of 'wait and see' with stuff lke this.

 

I mean, let's take it away from the politcal arena for a second, think about jury trials, big murder stuff, OJ, Scott Peterson... these stories break, then basically fizzle and hump by on little tidbits and rumors until the trial starts, which is often at least a year later. Same with the DC Sniper case, I mean, when they hadn't shot someone that day they didn't make the news until it got WAY out of hand and then the arrest followed quickly. Not because of public outrage or media coverage but because they finally caught the dudes that were doing it.

 

A lot of what Americans seem to misunderstand these days is that 'news' isn't immediate (for all the internet and 24hr news channels want you to believe it is). Things take time, the public (by and large) isn't willing to wait and isn't willing to keep ongoing stories (investigations being a perfect example) alive in their own minds. Most people NEED to be told everyday that people are looking into this or that or the people lose interest.

 

I don't think this is a bad thing, the loss of interest, because it clears out a lot of the kooks and idiots. I do think it's a bad thing to color all journalists with the same brush. The people ARE out there and they ARE working hard on stories but stories need time to develop, ripen and show their fruit on their own.

 

Imagine if every journalist was like Casek, hear a rumor, jazz it up with a bunch of self-invented connections to stuff that only MAY have happened and throw it on the front page... Can't be good.

 

Have you read 'Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail'? Not saying about content or analysis but just look how long it took to produce the book itself. Hunter was also rarely at a loss for words but still, it takes time.

 

Not sure about the wiretapping scandal, still ongoing I guess... Plame has been 'sort of' settled but please believe there are civil suits and much more investigating to be done on that front as well but things just don't happen day to day. Someone delivers a briefing to a Judge, then it sits in a pile on his desk until he gets to it... would you want to hear the news report everyday that the briefing is STILL ON THE PILE? I mean, they could do that and the public could get all bent and the judge could be forced to bump it to the top of the pile but, who is to say that any of the other briefings in that pile are more or less important. Also, wouldn't that (making the judges rank cases by 'impotance' instead of the date they came through the door) cheapen the entire judicial process?

 

OK, you were ranting and now I'm rambling...

 

 

I agree'd with the majority of this statement, however I do not see how "things take time" could apply to 9/11 the Pentagon and Flight 93. These things happened 5 years ago, and the information that Casek is talking about and the information I know is out there, is exactly what I just said, out there. It's easily accessible if you'd like to find it via the internet. The people that are pushing this movement, are also out there making themselves known, and pushing what exactly it is they believe in, and if any of these "journalist's" wanted to access this information or these people, in an attempt to push this story to the people, it wouldn't be hard to do at all, but still they don't.

 

Reporters are just getting around to reporting these things now, and when they do address it in the media, it is with a skeptic attitude, as if this person isn't to be trusted, but this is what he thinks anyway.

 

Everytime a scholor represting the truth movement is put infront of a "journalist" he/she blatently tries to twist the story against them, and make them seem like a "conspiracy theorist" when in all actualtiy he is the only one of the two, telling the truth.

 

Sure I don't think that ALL journalist's behave this way, but the ones that are on our T.V's every night sure do, and thats pretty much all that matters at this point.

[Larry Pubes]

there's this button on firefox. it says "find"

 

it's in that washington post article. why don't you look? find/"school of americas" it leads you directly to the quoted text. you fuckers make assumptions and then try to make it look like i'm not posting relevant information. but i am. you're just not reading.

 

uh, sorry but that's bullshit. i read just about everything that you post after i've asked for it. i read the articles you posted above, and that quote was not attributable to anything within those links...so you meant the other washington post article, right. i would know that if i was a psychic. unfortunately i'm not a psychic.

as for doing my own research, i've read a fuck load of stuff casek, so don't get pissed off when you throw around claims some of us find a little sketchy, then expect the onus is on US to verify the shit your yammering on about. the onus is on YOU to back your shit up.

as for school of the americas, i'm confused as to your response. i am not contesting it exists. and as i said above, my understanding is that it was a 'education/training' center for central/south american operations ONLY.

i'll read your links later. i just hope this time you're not wasting my time with stuff that doesn't directly relate or verify the info you claim is solid.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

I don't know about the School of America stuff. I can vouch for most of the stuff he posts about 9/11. I am not an expert in any of the subjects either, I just tend to agree with people that are experts in these subjects and aren't directly affilated with the people I think did 9/11, that is a criminal element inside of our goverment.

 

The onus shouldn't be on Casek to provide this information to you either. It's our goverments and the so called journalists we have in the media. The fact that Casek even has to go out of his way to find this information, and then get it to the masses just makes me laugh, and you guys making fun of him for doing so, is also pretty funny.

 

As I said in another post, the information is out there, you just have to be man enough to read it, and interpret it with a OPEN MIND.

[lord_casek]

<yawn> part 4

starring chuck norris

[lord_casek]

if you can't use the search button, larry, get off the internet. that washington times article clearly has the quote i used in it.

[fermentor666]

Hey, we're not the masses. We're on a message board and do it in our spare time from whatever else we might be doing. Not all of us want to go out and use google to search for some of this shit, not only because a lot of it would come up with 402424 links, but because it also involves delving into a world of wikipedish tangents. Sourcing specific quotations and uncommon ideas should be a common courtesy on the internet, not some horrible task. Especially if you are cut and pasting the text.

[fermentor666]

Oh, and casek: that quote wasn't in the actual article, it was in the comments section of the EDITORIAL. And surprise, surprise, the person who posted the comment did not provide any evidence/citations. In fact, you pretty much just reposted his comment.

[lord_casek]

Oh, and casek: that quote wasn't in the actual article, it was in the comments section of the EDITORIAL. And surprise, surprise, the person who posted the comment did not provide any evidence/citations. In fact, you pretty much just reposted his comment.

 

 

i can recall seeing a 20/20 or 60 minutes on usama that specifically cited that he did attend the S.O.A at columbus. also read it many times from many sources.

 

if you want direct links to the CIA, check "mujahadeen"

 

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20060614/index.htm

[eeeeee]

The media make out like terrorists get off on the terror

that they cause and that they have no real plot or plan

or reason to do what they do.

Fact of the matter is we're down there driving tanks over

their gardens and fucking up their country just for the sake

of having someone to push around and call dog at the end

of the day.

The only reason why "TERRORISTS" exist is because us

and the Americans have killed off or locked up anyone

whos tried to bring a real democracy to the country.

When I say real democracy I DON'T mean a Starbucks

and a McDonalds everywhere you look.

This whole thing now about not being allowed your ipod

or your tooth brush on the plane, it's not about stopping

"terror" it's about feeling owned by your government.

[fermentor666]

Well, there's a lot of non-US-corporation sentiment that goes into as well. A lot of it is based on ideology, specifically religious ideology. Much of it comes from a hate of Western consumer culture and Western interference in other countries. For instance, the Cold War lead to major inteference in the Middle East by the Russians and the US. But there is much terrorism within these countries themselves that is insular, aimed at the people within. A lot of that is done in the name of religion in order to gain absolute power. Take a look at the history of a country like Lebanon and how radical ideology lead to massacres and civil wars. Same can be said of certain African, Asian, and South American countries. There has been terrorism within the US, as well, much of it racially motivated. The KKK burning down African American churches is an explicit example of terrorism.