And what would the point be? There was no evidence linking the ISI to 9/11. Why is it truthers think the 9/11 commission report should include any and all facts regardless of their relevancy to the attack themselves? So now the 9/11 commission report should have gone back before the creation of Al Qaeda? Why not go back even further? I am sure Christ had some hand in 9/11, right? Where does it stop?
I think you know that I'm going to disagree with you on this. The ISI's actions over a 30 year period has shown them to be in bed with AQ. How many times did they protect Bin Laden? Why does Ahmed Shah Massoud's brother think they were behind his brother's death? Why did the Obama administration finally get smart and not tell them about the final Bin Laden raid (finally succesful)?
I put shared values in quotations for a reason. However, the reason I did that was the ISI took a serious turn towards religious fanaticism which put them squarely in opposition to the CIA's goals in the 90's. I'm not sure why/how of the ISI's formation back in the late 40's is important to how it operates today. You realize Pakistan has achieved a level of automony right? You familiar with the name A.Q. Kahn? Did the CIA give the ISI/Pakistan Military a directive on that? All intelligence agencies work under their own best interests, but many of the actions of the ISI should put them in the "enemy" category. Hardly.
i heard one of them ninelevin truthtards say that the lizard people were flying the planes and the pentagon was hit by the anunaki, flight 93 was shot down by a big ball of aspertame... obamas birth certifacate burned up in wtc2, vaccines were planted in wt7, jordan maxwell had sex with david icke and made luke rodouski , alex jones was there with norman meneta when he overheard cheney (reptoid) . larry silverstein had sex with condi rice for jew money, jay-z killed john lennon, skull and bones tried to buy cake from africa. mexicans were trimming the grass on the grassy knoll. it wasnt a jew who sold jesus...it was a muslim dressed up like a jew.
I am not saying the ISI has no involvement in Al Qaeda and it would surprise me if there were no connections between the two. I am saying there is no evidence we know of that links the ISI, either at a personal level or a sanctioned level, to Al Qaeda as it related to 9/11 as truthers like Jango claim. Likewise there is no evidence linking General Mahmoud to 9/11. The Times of India couldn't back up their claim and they would have if they could considering the black eye it would give Pakistan. I even went so far as to contact Dennis Lormel who was the lead FBI investigator into the financing of 9/11. He told me straight up there was no known financial link between the ISI and Al Qaeda for the funding of 9/11. If you are an organization like Al Qaeda organizing a major attack that relies on secrecy above all else, you don't get a foreign intelligence agency to help you out. This is just common sense. The ISI and, by extension, Pakistan is out for itself. If they can get something from the US for rolling over on Al Qaeda on a planned attack, they would have in a heart beat in my opinion.
I wasn't referring to the General Mahmoud supposed funding because I'm dubious of that as well. I'm referring to documented actions by the ISI over many years. Their possible link to the death of Massoud could be quite (*)(*)(*)(*)ing, but I'm sure they've covered their tracks well. I'm curious on what your stance is concerning their protection of Bin Laden for many years.
Generally I agree with NAB, but your point here is worth considering(assuming I'm correct in your meaning): "If they can get something from the US for rolling over on Al Qaeda on a planned attack, they would have in a heart beat in my opinion." There are many countries unhappy, justified and otherwise, with US foreign policy. If a foreign power had evidence of an "inside job", someone would blow the international whistle.
I think it was a (*)(*)(*)(*)ty thing for the ISI to do if they were doing it as an agency. The evidence is clear that at least one person within the ISI was tipping off Al Qaeda. It doesn't take a lot to snitch. Would it surprise me if the directors of the ISI or even the government of Pakistan were aware of the leak or were the leak? No. Would I be in favor of breaking ties with Pakistan over it? As much as it galls me, no I wouldn't. Pakistan would just become like the old Afghanistan. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer is a cliche, but a cliche with a lot of merit.
You have it right. And countries have proven time and time again that they may not like our foreign policy, but they are more than happy to receive whatever they can from the US.
Based on the information blackout the US instituted on the final Bin Laden raid, I'd say it was more than just one snitch. Systemic comes to mind.
I do know beyond any shadow of a doubt our government didn't trust anyone in Pakistan, which would certainly lend credence to your suspicions of systemicosity.
That's the biggest thing that separates truthers from non-truthers. Non-truthers know that for something the size of 9/11 to go off without a hitch it would require too many people that, eventually, would let it leak. Truthers will cite all the bad things that the government has done over the years (watergate, Northwoods) but not ONCE do they stop to think that the reason they talk about those IS BECAUSE SOMEONE CAME OUT AND SAID IT. They didn't leak it a decade afterwards when a bunch of paranoid individuals located the small inaccuracies in the overall story. No, they leaked it\it got discovered during the event. After a decade we have lost a lot of people that were directly involved in 9/11. I am not going to list them cause it would take too much time, but you can do the research with a simple google search. There has not been one person that has said anything about it being an inside job, not one bed side confession, and not one person has come forth. Which is another point of contention with Truthers. All these people have to either be A) Lying to cover up for the gubbamint. B) Getting paid to cover up for the gubbmint. C) Afraid to come out for fear of the gubbmint. That doesn't make any sense at all. So basically Truthers have no issue implicating anyone, no matter how they were involved, in being apart of a mass murder of 3,000+ people...all without an valid evidence. Well done!
Don't forget. You, me and every other person here who doesn't believe the truther BS has been accused of being a shill. At this point there are more people IN on the conspiracy than aren't in on the conspiracy. Uh oh. I think I just sent some truther paranoia into overdrive! Now EVERYONE is out to get them because they know the truth that is only being withheld from the truthers! AAAAH!
You know you laughed. I HEARD you laugh, you laughed And laughed and laughed And then you left, And now you see I'm Utterly Mad
Phil go off his meds again? Seems par for the course. You didn't contribute to the bullsh . . . er . . ."research" as Phil calls it? You're not supposed to question things. Just swallow what's on your plate and crap out some more for the next fool to swallow.
Pat had mentioned the stinger buy back program earlier and these official intelligence agency things thrashed about the media aren't inherently logical. The stinger missiles had a shell casing and when the mujhadeen fired a missile they had to return the casing back to the CIA handler to get another one. We never gave them any missiles to lose in the wilderness, so the 'buy back program' was probably cover for the CIA and media persons like Emerson to establish a replacement vehicle for Hekmatyar, who was militarily no match for Massoud;thus we got the mystical one eyed Omar and the Taliban.
You have an excuse for every failure, don't you. Did they teach you that in the military? Flip flop! Flip flop!
There is relevance of our actions in the region that pertain to 9/11. OBL was part of the mujahideen. How many of the Taliban were created out of that mujahideen. Or al Qaeda. There is relevance, unpleasant as it is.
