I'm sorry, I.M.E, but this is getting on my nerves. I've clicked onto a number of the links you give. Convinced me? No - just the opposite. Why? Here's a quick assessment of some of the sources:
In June, we announced a plan to remove the Taliban: <a href="http://www.indiareacts.com/archivefeatures/nat2.asp?recno=10∓ctg=policy" target="_blank">http://www.indiareacts.com/archivefeatures/nat2.asp?recno=10∓ctg=policy</a>
.
The report cited here isn't about conspiracy theories; quick summary: the Taliban represent[ed] a threat to the US (terrorism), Russia (ditto); the Central Asian states (perceiving a threat to their territorial integrity & their oilfields); India (Afghan trained mercenaries in Kashmir). Further quick summary: everyone in the region is/was worried by the Taliban, they wouldn't negotiate, so it might have been necessary to do something about them militarily - which is what happened, if not in the fashion anticipated.
Alleged hijackers trained by USA:
<a href="http://www.msnbc.com/news/629529.asp" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.com/news/629529.asp</a>
Looks an exciting set of revelations, but notes that hijackers may have used false names, and in fact peters out into a mish-mash of might haves, could haves, etc.
FEMA in position on 10 Sept:
<a href="http://www.rumormillnews.net/cgi-bin/config.pl?read=14109" target="_blank">http://www.rumormillnews.net/cgi-bin/config.pl?read=14109</a>
A posting followed up by another pointing out that the 'revelation' was a slip of the tongue, made by a man who'd been awake for 48 hours straight, and who corrected the mistake.
<a href="http://www.halturnershow.com/FEMA.htm" target="_blank">http://www.halturnershow.com/FEMA.htm</a>
From a radio DJ who proudly claims to aim at a 'Straight, White American audience'. Regarded in many circles as slightly biased, then... Report made up of assertion and innuendo and no original hard evidence
Odigo, the instant messaging service, says that two of its workers received messages two hours before the Twin Towers attack on September 11 predicting the attack would happen, and the company has been cooperating with Israeli and
American law enforcement, including the FBI, in trying to find the original sender of the message predicting the attack.
Micha Macover, CEO of the company, said the two workers received the messages and immediately after the terror attack informed the company's management, which immediately contacted the Israeli security services, which brought in
the FBI.
This isn't foreknowledge, but reaction. The workers who got the message two hours before the attack probably thought 'nutter!' and got on with their work. Read it more carefully: the information reached the Israeli security services after the attack, they then contacted the Americans, so the Americans learned of the message only afterwards
A real loooong look at the events of 9/11:
<a href="http://www.whatreallyhappened.com" target="_blank">http://www.whatreallyhappened.com</a>
I do hope the author of that website's paranoia clears up soon. Once again lacking that crucial thing called hard evidence. Please note, I.M.E that there is a difference between assertion and hard evidence. One is unreliable, the other reasonably reliable.
The most massive so-called "terrorist" attacks on U.S. soil since the Oklahoma City bombings of 1995, were known, a week ahead of time, by the American CIA. Among the foreign intelligence agencies who penetrated the plots were the French CIA and Israel's The Mossad, units of both often working with one another.
This would be the same Mossad who knew about Mr Exploding Shoes and forgot to tell the French and US services?
Foreign intelligence sources confirm the validity of this story.
Really? Where's the evidence? Anyone from these services prepared to be quoted? Until there's evidence, it's assertion.
And they state that they informed the U.S. secret police who absolutely failed, neglected, and outright refused to take action as to known prior specifics of which the top-level of the CIA were informed in advance.
Ditto about evidence. And the US 'Secret Police' :wouldn't be an agenda there, then would there??
Also, while we're about it, remember that OBL has disowned/been disowned by his family, so doing business with the legitimate wing of the family (if I can use that term) doesn't quite equate to doing business with OBL himself.
And as for the oil pipeline, the other side to the argument is quite a simple one: the US, rather than launching military action against the Taliban (for which they would have been slaughtered in the press), tried to use diplomacy – untold wealth for the Taliban and the implication that they wouldn't interfere in Afghanistan if the Taliban behaved themselves. The Taliban didn't and got the carpet of bombs not gold. Also, blowing the you-know-what out of Afghanistan would presumably delay getting in to put down a pipeline, not expedite matters
From I.M.E's first posting:
'Although it took me a number of hours to put together, anyone can take the material here and quickly follow up on his or her favored theory and make some good menus of the vultures.'
I'd call that incitement to bull$hit; Look at the stories and put them together in your own DIY conspiracy theory is what we're being told.
Can we either have some hard evidence or an end to the insulting of our collective intelligence, please?
Rant Off; sorry about the length
[Edited for spoooling]
[ 09 January 2002: Message edited by: Archimedes ]</p>