Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

mlingley · Feb 21, 2004, 03:05 pm

The FBI had prior knowledge of the WTC Bombing in 1993. They conspired with an Egyptian officer they planted as a mole to infiltrate terrorists targetting the United States. The FBI was to supply fake explosives for the WTC, but backed out of the agreement. They knew the people who bombed the WTC were planning it months before hand. Read the NY Times article if you don't believe me. It's at:
http://www.geocities.com/mlingley

I would post a link directly to the NY Times Archive, but it doesn't go back that far. If you don't trust my link you can always go to the library and look it up. The articles come from October 27th and 28th 1993 Section A Page 1 Column 4

Stigmata66 · Feb 21, 2004, 04:25 pm

Yes and the Jews plotted the destruction on 9-11...

**Pooeypants** · Feb 21, 2004, 04:33 pm

Let's see some sources please, and stigmata, less strawmen arguments would be more useful.

Stigmata66 · Feb 21, 2004, 05:11 pm

That was sarcasm sorry.............................................
Ok like Pooepypants said: "Let's see some sources please"

mlingley · Feb 21, 2004, 06:33 pm

Here is a copy of a NY Times Article
http://www.geocities.com/mlingley

Here is one web site that sites a bunch of different newspaper sources...
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/adam.htm

Feb 23, 2004, 12:10 pm

You can also write/e-mail Dr. Stanley Monteith (www.radioliberty.com) for a physical copy of the NYT article.

Mathieu · Feb 23, 2004, 12:33 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building
a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center,
and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting
harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after
the blast.

(...)

Mr. Salem, a 43-year-old former Egyptian Army officer, was used
by the Government [of the United States] to penetrate a circle
of Muslim extremists who are now charged in two bombing cases:
the World Trade Center attack, and a foiled plot to destroy
the United Nations, the Hudson River tunnels, and other
New York City landmarks. He is the crucial witness in the
second bombing case, but his work for the Government was
erratic, and for months before the World Trade Center blast,
he was feuding with th F.B.I.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

.... Where is the conspiracy here ? This infiltration could have prevented the plot, I agree, but they failed, maybe because they wanted to go further in the investigation. Infiltration is common for secret service ...

And the point is ?

mlingley · Feb 23, 2004, 02:07 pm

So in your opinion it's ok they knew about it and did nothing?

The point is.. what else is our government involved in?

Mathieu · Feb 23, 2004, 02:20 pm

No , my opinion is they knew, tried to do something, it failed. And they probably had all the trouble wich goes with failing such thing.

IronYuppie · Feb 23, 2004, 06:08 pm

So how did you get from "knew about it and failed to stop it" to "provided chemicals and trigger for the bombs?" The logic seems pretty weak and the link non-existent.

**Pooeypants** · Feb 23, 2004, 06:14 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (IronYuppie,)
So how did you get from "knew about it and failed to stop it" to "provided chemicals and trigger for the bombs?" The logic seems pretty weak and the link non-existent.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Good point but both actions are unacceptable wouldn't you say?

IronYuppie · Feb 23, 2004, 06:21 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (IronYuppie,)
So how did you get from "knew about it and failed to stop it" to "provided chemicals and trigger for the bombs?" The logic seems pretty weak and the link non-existent.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Good point but both actions are unacceptable wouldn't you say?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

We can call failure unacceptable, but's it's inevitable. Failing to stop something is fundamentally different from perpetrating an act, in this case terrorism.

Mathieu · Feb 23, 2004, 06:36 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building
a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center,
and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting
harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after
the blast.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

That quite different than providing chemicals and trigger for the bomb ...

**Pooeypants** · Feb 23, 2004, 06:37 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (IronYuppie,)

We can call failure unacceptable, but's it's inevitable. Failing to stop something is fundamentally different from perpetrating an act, in this case terrorism.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
If they knew about it but did nothing isn't that gross negligence?

IronYuppie · Feb 23, 2004, 06:43 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (IronYuppie,)

We can call failure unacceptable, but's it's inevitable. Failing to stop something is fundamentally different from perpetrating an act, in this case terrorism.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
If they knew about it but did nothing isn't that gross negligence?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

That's a legal term and there's a lot that goes into demonstrating negligence if it exists. I'm certainly not willing to convict someone based on some suspect newspaper articles (contained within a thread that has been totally discredited by some observant people). Maybe they thought the plan to replace the powder was assinine and would be found out by the terrorists faster than you can say "jihad?" Maybe they had another plan that didn't work either? Maybe they were grossly negligent? We dont know.

mlingley · Feb 24, 2004, 12:58 am

http://www.geocities.com/mlingley/

There you go guys.. 2 full NY Times Articles.. paints a much clearer picture than the links I supplied before.

castille · Feb 25, 2004, 08:39 am

Its easy for the observer to criticise failure, especially if they have never tried it before.

dotcoma · Feb 25, 2004, 09:17 am

[quote=IronYuppie,][quote=Pooeypants,]

Quote:

Quote by: IronYuppie,

(contained within a thread that has been totally discredited by some observant people).

Totally discredited? That's a stretch.

Mathieu · Feb 25, 2004, 09:46 am

Why don't you have the direct link to ny time archive ??? YOu did sooooo much research and all, but did not had time to look for the articles on the archive site ??
common.

Mathieu · Feb 25, 2004, 09:52 am

While those two prove nothing more than What I staed before, and show there was no conspiration , here is the interrestind memo a the end of the second article ...

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
An article yesterday about accounts of a plot to build a bomb that was eventually exploded at the World Trade Center referred imprecisely in some copies to what Federal officials knew about the plan before the blast. Transcripts of tapes made secretly by an informant, Emad A. Salem, quote him as saying he warned the Government that a bomb was being built. But the transcripts do not make clear the extent to which the Federal authorities knew that the target was the World Trade Center.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

But I guess you'll say it was disinformation , cover up etc ...

Feb 21, 2004, 04:25 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Stigmata66 Molten Ash Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 74	Yes and the Jews plotted the destruction on 9-11... Hate heals, you should try it some time! Fukin Arch Enemy!

Feb 21, 2004, 04:33 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,541	Let's see some sources please, and stigmata, less strawmen arguments would be more useful. War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 21, 2004, 05:11 pm	#4 (permalink) (top)
Stigmata66 Molten Ash Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 74	That was sarcasm sorry............................................. Ok like Pooepypants said: "Let's see some sources please" Hate heals, you should try it some time! Fukin Arch Enemy!

Feb 23, 2004, 12:33 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center, and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after the blast. (...) Mr. Salem, a 43-year-old former Egyptian Army officer, was used by the Government [of the United States] to penetrate a circle of Muslim extremists who are now charged in two bombing cases: the World Trade Center attack, and a foiled plot to destroy the United Nations, the Hudson River tunnels, and other New York City landmarks. He is the crucial witness in the second bombing case, but his work for the Government was erratic, and for months before the World Trade Center blast, he was feuding with th F.B.I.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> .... Where is the conspiracy here ? This infiltration could have prevented the plot, I agree, but they failed, maybe because they wanted to go further in the investigation. Infiltration is common for secret service ... And the point is ?

Feb 23, 2004, 06:14 pm	#11 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,541	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (IronYuppie,) So how did you get from "knew about it and failed to stop it" to "provided chemicals and trigger for the bombs?" The logic seems pretty weak and the link non-existent.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Good point but both actions are unacceptable wouldn't you say? War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 21, 2004, 03:05 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
mlingley Molten Ash Posts: 120	The FBI had prior knowledge of the WTC Bombing in 1993. They conspired with an Egyptian officer they planted as a mole to infiltrate terrorists targetting the United States. The FBI was to supply fake explosives for the WTC, but backed out of the agreement. They knew the people who bombed the WTC were planning it months before hand. Read the NY Times article if you don't believe me. It's at: http://www.geocities.com/mlingley I would post a link directly to the NY Times Archive, but it doesn't go back that far. If you don't trust my link you can always go to the library and look it up. The articles come from October 27th and 28th 1993 Section A Page 1 Column 4

Feb 21, 2004, 06:33 pm	#5 (permalink) (top)
mlingley Molten Ash Posts: 120	Here is a copy of a NY Times Article http://www.geocities.com/mlingley Here is one web site that sites a bunch of different newspaper sources... http://www.serendipity.li/wot/adam.htm

Feb 23, 2004, 12:10 pm	#6 (permalink) (top)
StoneWT Guest Posts: n/a	You can also write/e-mail Dr. Stanley Monteith (www.radioliberty.com) for a physical copy of the NYT article.

Feb 23, 2004, 02:07 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
mlingley Molten Ash Posts: 120	So in your opinion it's ok they knew about it and did nothing? The point is.. what else is our government involved in?

Feb 23, 2004, 02:20 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	No , my opinion is they knew, tried to do something, it failed. And they probably had all the trouble wich goes with failing such thing.

Feb 23, 2004, 06:08 pm	#10 (permalink) (top)
IronYuppie Sedimentary Rock Posts: 9	So how did you get from "knew about it and failed to stop it" to "provided chemicals and trigger for the bombs?" The logic seems pretty weak and the link non-existent.

Feb 23, 2004, 06:21 pm	#12 (permalink) (top)
IronYuppie Sedimentary Rock Posts: 9	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (IronYuppie,) So how did you get from "knew about it and failed to stop it" to "provided chemicals and trigger for the bombs?" The logic seems pretty weak and the link non-existent.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Good point but both actions are unacceptable wouldn't you say?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> We can call failure unacceptable, but's it's inevitable. Failing to stop something is fundamentally different from perpetrating an act, in this case terrorism.

Feb 23, 2004, 06:36 pm	#13 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center, and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after the blast.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> That quite different than providing chemicals and trigger for the bomb ...

Feb 23, 2004, 06:37 pm	#14 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,541	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (IronYuppie,) We can call failure unacceptable, but's it's inevitable. Failing to stop something is fundamentally different from perpetrating an act, in this case terrorism.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> If they knew about it but did nothing isn't that gross negligence? War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 23, 2004, 06:43 pm	#15 (permalink) (top)
IronYuppie Sedimentary Rock Posts: 9	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (IronYuppie,) We can call failure unacceptable, but's it's inevitable. Failing to stop something is fundamentally different from perpetrating an act, in this case terrorism.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> If they knew about it but did nothing isn't that gross negligence?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> That's a legal term and there's a lot that goes into demonstrating negligence if it exists. I'm certainly not willing to convict someone based on some suspect newspaper articles (contained within a thread that has been totally discredited by some observant people). Maybe they thought the plan to replace the powder was assinine and would be found out by the terrorists faster than you can say "jihad?" Maybe they had another plan that didn't work either? Maybe they were grossly negligent? We dont know.

Feb 24, 2004, 12:58 am	#16 (permalink) (top)
mlingley Molten Ash Posts: 120	http://www.geocities.com/mlingley/ There you go guys.. 2 full NY Times Articles.. paints a much clearer picture than the links I supplied before.

Feb 25, 2004, 08:39 am	#17 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	Its easy for the observer to criticise failure, especially if they have never tried it before. Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Feb 25, 2004, 09:46 am	#19 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	Why don't you have the direct link to ny time archive ??? YOu did sooooo much research and all, but did not had time to look for the articles on the archive site ?? common.

Feb 25, 2004, 09:52 am	#20 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	While those two prove nothing more than What I staed before, and show there was no conspiration , here is the interrestind memo a the end of the second article ... </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by An article yesterday about accounts of a plot to build a bomb that was eventually exploded at the World Trade Center referred imprecisely in some copies to what Federal officials knew about the plan before the blast. Transcripts of tapes made secretly by an informant, Emad A. Salem, quote him as saying he warned the Government that a bomb was being built. But the transcripts do not make clear the extent to which the Federal authorities knew that the target was the World Trade Center.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> But I guess you'll say it was disinformation , cover up etc ...