new evidence of E-4B fly-over of WH on 9/11

[mhgaffney]

STUNNING NEW EVIDENCE
Proves an E-4B circled over the White House on 9/11

FYI, my revised and expanded article about the E-4B fly-over of the White House on 9/11 is now posted at the Scholars for 9/11 Truth online journal.

Here's the journal page:

http://www.journalof911studies.com/

or go straight to the article:

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/911MysteryPlane.pdf

This paper presents all of the evidence -- including detailed commentary about the 3 new stunning photos that we just pulled from some raw CNN footage from 9/11. These photos are included in the article.

This CNN video evidence has never aired on US TV -- nor on the internet -- until now. The evidence gathered dust in the CNN archive for almost 6 years. We discovered it some weeks ago.

The CNN video and still shots remove the last shred of doubt -- and prove that the world's most advanced military plane circled above the White House on 9/11 at about the time of the Pentagon attack.

As far as I know, this is the only article about this event. This is also the most comprehensive available discussion of the USAF E-4B "doomsday" plane.

This evidence alone ought to be sufficient grounds for a new 9/11 investigation. I think it will also be helpful in persuading Democrats to "get off the fence" and support the immediate impeachment of Bush and Cheney. Someone needs to explain why this E-4B fly-over on 9/11 was scrubbed from history. Indeed, someone is going to have a lot of explaining to do.

Don't go away. I will also post a link to the full CNN video as soon as it's available on the internet.

Mark H. Gaffney

Remember: YOU SAW IT HERE FIRST.

[mhgaffney]

Wednesday July 25, 07

Dear Bob Woodward,

I just finished reading your Jan-Feb 2002 series in the Post about 9/11 -- and also your book Bush At War. I noticed that you mentioned the E-4B -- the flying command post. Are you aware that the White House fed you a fairy tale? How does it feel -- knowing they made a fool out of you?

FYI, my updated paper about the E-4B just went up at the Scholars for 9/11 Truth on-line journal. The link is below. The article presents all of the evidence -- including my commentary about the 3 new stunning photos that we recently pulled from some raw CNN footage from 9/11. We found this footage some weeks ago in the CNN archives. It has never aired on US TV -- nor on the internet -- until now. It gathered dust for almost 6 years at CNN. The video and still shots remove the last shred of doubt -- and prove that the world's most advanced military plane circled above the White House on 9/11 at about the time of the Pentagon attack.

As far as I know, this is the only article about this important event. This is also the most comprehensive available discussion of the USAF E-4B "doomsday" plane.

Will you print a correction to your 2002 story?

I would be happy to submit a shortened version suitable for publication in the Washington Post -- an exclusive complete with photos -- on request. Please let me know if you are interested.

This evidence alone ought to be sufficient grounds for a new 9/11 investigation. I think it will also be helpful in persuading Democrats to "get off the fence" and support the immediate impeachment of Bush and Cheney. Someone needs to explain why this E-4B fly-over on 9/11 was scrubbed from history. Indeed, someone is going to have a lot of explaining to do.

Sincerely,

Mark H. Gaffney

[Taco John]

I noticed that you mentioned the E-4B -- the flying command post. Are you aware that the White House fed you a fairy tale? How does it feel -- knowing they made a fool out of you?




Just out of curiosity, do you honestly expect to get anywhere with rhetoric like that, or do you know that you're going to be ignored and just want to get a pot shot in?

[theAPAOps5]

One picture sort of resembles your "claim." So under your claim the E-4B must be grounded at all times unless there is a conspiracy or an attack. So what if it was scrambled, no one knew what was going on at that time. I still fail to see the conclusive evidence in your pictures. I love the message to Bob Woodward. You yourself, so desperate to find the government at fault rather than look at logic are the fool. Don't be used, you are a smart guy. This was not an inside job and you are disgracing the people who have died because of that with your outlandish claims.

[Taco John]

...you are disgracing the people who have died because of that with your outlandish claims.



I just wanted to note that I don't believe this line. I don't think it disgraces anyone to investigate the worst attack in US history under any circumstances.

[theAPAOps5]

I just wanted to note that I don't believe this line. I don't think it disgraces anyone to investigate the worst attack in US history under any circumstances.

No you are right I should take that back. Sorry Gaff.

[mhgaffney]

Just out of curiosity, do you honestly expect to get anywhere with rhetoric like that, or do you know that you're going to be ignored and just want to get a pot shot in?

Taco, if you'd read Woodward's series in the Post -- and the 9/11 Commission Report -- you'd know I am am not speaking rhetoric.

Unfortunately, it's the truth.

Woodward has elephant skin. He is not going to be phased by some straight talk on my part.

I am hoping that he will acknowledge this new evidence -- which proves that the White House fed him lies about 9/11.

A follow up story in the Post about the E-4B would be potentially explosive -- because all of the evidence does point to a covert operation. We shall see.

[mhgaffney]

I meant fazed -- not phased. Sorry. Another Gaffney foopah.

[Taco John]

Taco, if you'd read Woodward's series in the Post -- and the 9/11 Commission Report -- you'd know I am am not speaking rhetoric.

Unfortunately, it's the truth.

Woodward has elephant skin. He is not going to be phased by some straight talk on my part.



Of course he's not. What he's going to do is crumple it up, and throw it away without bothering to read past it. Which is why I asked the sincere question:

When you write him like that do you honestly expect to get anywhere, or do you know that you're going to be ignored and just want to get a pot shot in?

I'm just wondering what your intentions are, because if you're honestly trying to persuade him of anything, you seem to be sabotaging your own efforts right out of the gates.

[mhgaffney]

Of course he's not. What he's going to do is crumple it up, and throw it away without bothering to read past it. Which is why I asked the sincere question:

When you write him like that do you honestly expect to get anywhere, or do you know that you're going to be ignored and just want to get a pot shot in?

I'm just wondering what your intentions are, because if you're honestly trying to persuade him of anything, you seem to be sabotaging your own efforts right out of the gates.

Well, of course, I had very low expectations when I sent Woodward that email. If you are curious as to why I suggest you read Woodward's 2002 book Bush at War.

It was all I could do to get through it. It's not a serious piece of journalism -- but is the work of a lap dog - a poodle -- a toadie.

I had to constantly remind myself that the author, Woodward, is the legendary hero of the Watergate era. You'd never know it from his account of Bush's post-911 White House. Woodward long ago surrendered his soul for the privilege of gathering crumbs from the table of the high and mighty.

He was the anointed journalist selected to be the mouthpiece for the Bush administration after 9/11. They fed him a fairy tale -- and that fictional account became the basis for the official 911 narrative. In other words, a pack of lies.

Might as well call a spade a spade. Surely by now Woodward knows that he was had. My former high esteem for the guy has shrunk to next to nothing

[mhgaffney]

One picture sort of resembles your "claim." So under your claim the E-4B must be grounded at all times unless there is a conspiracy or an attack. So what if it was scrambled, no one knew what was going on at that time. I still fail to see the conclusive evidence in your pictures. I love the message to Bob Woodward. You yourself, so desperate to find the government at fault rather than look at logic are the fool. Don't be used, you are a smart guy. This was not an inside job and you are disgracing the people who have died because of that with your outlandish claims.

According to the official account the US military was not informed about the hijacked planes until the Pentagon was hit. This timeline is reflected in Bob Woodward's Jan 2002 story in the Washington Post, where he stated that the flying command center, i.e., the E-4B, was sent up AFTER the Pentagon hit.

The problem is that the CNN video clearly shows that the E-4B was already up. Simple as that.

In short, they lied to us again. They also went to a lot of trouble to conceal its presence. The US media cooperated by going to sleep on the matter -- despite a lot of video and photograpic evidence, and eye witness accounts. The event was allowed to disappear from history.

The question is why?

[mhgaffney]

I mean they went to a lot of trouble to conceal its presence over the White House.

[BroncoBuff]

I just wanted to note that I don't believe this line. I don't think it disgraces anyone to investigate the worst attack in US history under any circumstances.
But the real "disgrace" here is that the most powerful nation ever has freely allowed the persons who planned and committed this worst attack in U.S. history to remain free and at large 6 years later.

Scandal. Of epic proportion.

[BroncoBuff]

You don't need a "conspiracy theory" to identify this scandal.

We know who did it.

It is the greatest single crime in the history of our nation.

We knew who did it - when it happened.

We knew then - approximately where he was.

We know now - approximately where he is.

And yet, we have never brought sufficient resources to bear to apprehend these mega-criminals. And, yes - we could have done it. Rather easily we could have done it. Think, "140,000 men in Tora Bora" .... were we not shamefully over-committed in Iraq, OBL and Al-Zawahiri would be dead or in custody.

Scandal.

Of epic proportion.

No "conspiracy theory" required.

[BroncoBuff]

And more will die because of this scandal.

OBL's survival in the wake of his mega-crimes has swelled the ranks of Jihadi terror worldwide. "Al-Quaeda Iraq" would not exist had we brought resources to bear to capture him in Spring 2002, as we should have.

An absolute scandalous failure in the perfomance of the simplest, most basic of all "Commander-in-Chief" duties.


Scandal. And more will die because of this scandal.

Simple, indefatigueable logic.

Beat my argument. I dare you.

[BroncoBuff]

MORE WILL DIE because of this scandalous failure by our president.

[baja]

Didn't you get the memo? The commander in chief hardly ever think about Ben ladin any more.

[ant1999e]

According to the official account the US military was not informed about the hijacked planes until the Pentagon was hit. This timeline is reflected in Bob Woodward's Jan 2002 story in the Washington Post, where he stated that the flying command center, i.e., the E-4B, was sent up AFTER the Pentagon hit.
The problem is that the CNN video clearly shows that the E-4B was already up. Simple as that.

In short, they lied to us again. They also went to a lot of trouble to conceal its presence. The US media cooperated by going to sleep on the matter -- despite a lot of video and photograpic evidence, and eye witness accounts. The event was allowed to disappear from history.

The question is why?

At least one of these planes are flying at all times. WTF are you talking about?


"Let us remember, by this time the World Trade Center was in flames. Hundreds
of people had already perished. Multiple hijackings were known to be
in progress."
So maybe "the world's most advanced military plane" should have been over D.C.

[mhgaffney]

"On alert" means sitting on the runway -- waiting for orders. It doesn't mean in the air.

According to one report 3 E-4Bs were participating in the 2001 Global Guardian exercise. So these three may have been in the air.

I have just heard from a man whose uncle was a flight engineer on one of the E-4Bs -- and on 911 he was apparently with Bush in Florida. So if true this means an E-4B did accompany the presidential entourage, after all.

Why has this been kept out of the official record?

[mhgaffney]

You don't need a "conspiracy theory" to identify this scandal.

We know who did it.

It is the greatest single crime in the history of our nation.

We knew who did it - when it happened.

We knew then - approximately where he was.

We know now - approximately where he is.

And yet, we have never brought sufficient resources to bear to apprehend these mega-criminals. And, yes - we could have done it. Rather easily we could have done it. Think, "140,000 men in Tora Bora" .... were we not shamefully over-committed in Iraq, OBL and Al-Zawahiri would be dead or in custody.

Scandal.

Of epic proportion.

No "conspiracy theory" required.


I beg your pardon.

If Osama staged 911 then it was indeed a conspiracy. Why are you so scared of the phrase "conspiracy theory?"

If Osama had done the deed -- the US would have hunted him down and killed him. Instead, we let him go. Gen Richard Myers stated he never received a specific order to get bin Laden.

There is also good reason to believe that bin Laden was allowed to get medical treatment at a US medical facility in Dubai -- in July 2001 -- just weeks before the "attack." Instead of arresting him on the spot he was treated like a dignatary -- or if you prefer -- an intelligence asset. A US CIA agent reportedly met with bin Laden on this occasion. It would be interesting to know what they talked about. The pleasant weather, maybe? I doubt it.

In short -- you need to face reality. Oh but we understand. The problem is that reality threatens your comfort zone.

[c_lazy_r]

Question, gaffney...

I know you believe that the appearance of this plane over the WH (I am making a large assumption that you are correct) indicates a government cover-up of some kind. But, do you really think that our government should publicly specify what exact, detailed steps are taken in a national security situation? Does that undermine national security?

Trust me, I'm very certain that the American public is left in the dark in alot of situations and I'm about the most suspicious guy on the planet, but the presence of a US Military plane at the WH on 9/11 just isn't that compelling to me.

[ant1999e]

"On alert" means sitting on the runway -- waiting for orders. It doesn't mean in the air.

According to one report 3 E-4Bs were participating in the 2001 Global Guardian exercise. So these three may have been in the air.

I have just heard from a man whose uncle was a flight engineer on one of the E-4Bs -- and on 911 he was apparently with Bush in Florida. So if true this means an E-4B did accompany the presidential entourage, after all.

Why has this been kept out of the official record?

An E-4B follows the president everywhere he goes. This is common knowledge. You're really dumster diving on this one.Getting real desperate.

[ant1999e]

http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=99

"To provide direct support to the president and the secretary of defense, at least one E-4B is always on alert at one of many selected bases throughout the world."

[Garcia Bronco]

So what did this plane do....hit the Pentagon? I have a friend that works there....believe me...a plane crashed in to it.

[mhgaffney]

Question, gaffney...

I know you believe that the appearance of this plane over the WH (I am making a large assumption that you are correct) indicates a government cover-up of some kind. But, do you really think that our government should publicly specify what exact, detailed steps are taken in a national security situation? Does that undermine national security?

Trust me, I'm very certain that the American public is left in the dark in alot of situations and I'm about the most suspicious guy on the planet, but the presence of a US Military plane at the WH on 9/11 just isn't that compelling to me.

Maybe I'm just old fashioned. I happen to believe that the function of government is to serve the needs of the people.

I also believe that government must be responsive to the people.

Moreover, for democracy to work government must be transparent. Even in areas of national security there has to be democratic oversight. I should say -- oversight is ESPECIALLY important in areas of national security.

Our big problem is that this has gone the way of the Dodo. We have Senators who chair major committees WITH subpoena authority -- and they still cannot find out what's happening behind the closed doors of the Pentagon.

We call them black projects for this very reason. Incredible breathroughs are being made in science -- and used in military applications -- and much of this is being kept secret -- even from Congress.

Generals testify before Senatorial and Congressional committess all the time and they lie through their teeth. This is routine.

Today, our military -- and the White House -- is out of control.

The need to know protocol is just an excuse to avoid democratic oversight -- and if you fall for that one then you deserve the horrible future that awaits you.

The path we are on leads to a police state. It's that simple.

Technology can either liberate us -- or enslave us -- and at present we are headed in the latter direction.

[W*GS]

There is also good reason to believe that bin Laden was allowed to get medical treatment at a US medical facility in Dubai -- in July 2001 -- just weeks before the "attack." Instead of arresting him on the spot he was treated like a dignatary -- or if you prefer -- an intelligence asset. A US CIA agent reportedly met with bin Laden on this occasion.

Speaking of facing reality...

There is absolutely no corroboration or substantiation for the above allegations. Period.

Besides, we all know OBL is really a Mossad agent, isn't he?

[baja]

Speaking of facing reality...

There is absolutely no corroboration or substantiation for the above allegations. Period.

Besides, we all know OBL is really a Mossad agent, isn't he?

I hate it when you end up with the first post on a new page, it means I am forced to look at it every time I open the page.

[c_lazy_r]

Maybe I'm just old fashioned. I happen to believe that the function of government is to serve the needs of the people.

I also believe that government must be responsive to the people.

Moreover, for democracy to work government must be transparent. Even in areas of national security there has to be democratic oversight. I should say -- oversight is ESPECIALLY important in areas of national security.

Our big problem is that this has gone the way of the Dodo. We have Senators who chair major committees WITH subpoena authority -- and they still cannot find out what's happening behind the closed doors of the Pentagon.

We call them black projects for this very reason. Incredible breathroughs are being made in science -- and used in military applications -- and much of this is being kept secret -- even from Congress.

Generals testify before Senatorial and Congressional committess all the time and they lie through their teeth. This is routine.

Today, our military -- and the White House -- is out of control.

The need to know protocol is just an excuse to avoid democratic oversight -- and if you fall for that one then you deserve the horrible future that awaits you.

The path we are on leads to a police state. It's that simple.

Technology can either liberate us -- or enslave us -- and at present we are headed in the latter direction.



Let's put this in football terms (seems sort of appropriate)...

If you are down by a touchdown in the final two minutes would you want the other team to know what play you were going to call? Hell no, you wouldn't. Run or pass, you want 'em guessing, IMO.

[ant1999e]

Maybe I'm just old fashioned. I happen to believe that the function of government is to serve the needs of the people.

I also believe that government must be responsive to the people.

Moreover, for democracy to work government must be transparent. Even in areas of national security there has to be democratic oversight. I should say -- oversight is ESPECIALLY important in areas of national security.

Our big problem is that this has gone the way of the Dodo. We have Senators who chair major committees WITH subpoena authority -- and they still cannot find out what's happening behind the closed doors of the Pentagon.

We call them black projects for this very reason. Incredible breathroughs are being made in science -- and used in military applications -- and much of this is being kept secret -- even from Congress.

Generals testify before Senatorial and Congressional committess all the time and they lie through their teeth. This is routine.

Today, our military -- and the White House -- is out of control.

The need to know protocol is just an excuse to avoid democratic oversight -- and if you fall for that one then you deserve the horrible future that awaits you.

The path we are on leads to a police state. It's that simple.

Technology can either liberate us -- or enslave us -- and at present we are headed in the latter direction.

Lay off the drugs:puff: . They're making you paranoid.:tinfoilha :crazy: :tearhair:

[baja]

Lay off the drugs:puff: . They're making you paranoid.:tinfoilha :crazy: :tearhair:

Strange answer given your sig and all.

[W*GS]

I hate it when you end up with the first post on a new page, it means I am forced to look at it every time I open the page.

Darn it all, eh?

[baja]

Darn it all, eh?

Well at least I took you off of ignore, my morbid curiosity won out.

[ant1999e]

Strange answer given your sig and all.

Just trying to fit in with the rest of you.

[mhgaffney]

This was also reported by the LOndon Times and separately by the Guardian.

Bin Laden Met With CIA Agent in July 2001

Radio France International - Le Figaro

http://www.truthout.org/docs_01/11.01A.htm

t r u t h o u t -- 10.31.01 | According to information's collected by Radio France International, and Le Figaro, Oussama Ben Laden met with an American CIA agent last July while he was being treated for a kidney ailment at the American Hospital of Dubai.

The billionaire Saudi Ben Laden visited the American Hospital of Duba? from July 4 to July 14th, two months before the attacks of September 11, confirmed by sources close to European services of information.

He was accompanied by his personal doctor and faithful lieutenant, Egyptian Ayman Al-Zawahari, a male nurse and four bodyguards. Ben Laden suffers from a renal infection which is propagated with the liver and requires specialized care. Doctor Terry Callaway at The American Hospital of Dubai is known for the specialized treatment of such ailments.

During his hospitalization, Oussama Ben Laden was visited by several members of his family, and on July 12th the local representative of the CIA, that many people know in Duba?, was seen going into his room.

A few days later, shortly after Ben Laden left for Quetta with a new kidney dialysis machine, the CIA agent bragged to friends about visiting the billionaire saudi and was subsequently recalled to the USA on July 15th.

According to various Arab diplomatic sources and the services of French information themselves, very precise information was communicated to the CIA relating to terrorist attacks aiming at American interests in the world, including on the territory of the United States. A report of the DST on September 7 gathers the totality of this data, specifying that the order to act was to come from Afghanistan.

The American press is appears unwilling to report this information to the 270 million people of the American public.

[mhgaffney]

BTW, Le Figaro is owned by the Carlyle Group -- not some left wing fringe group

[mhgaffney]

Answer:

He was at a hospital in Pakistan -- our ally -- no doubt, being treated like royalty -- and totally protected.

Yet we are told Osama was a wanted man -- at te top of the wanted list. If so, then why didn't the Pakistani secret police simply pick him up and deliver him to us?

There can only be one answer: bin Laden was a protected intelligence asset.

Where was Osama bin Laden on 9/11?

Bush Administration knew the Whereabouts of Osama

by Michel Chossudovsky

www.globalresearch.ca 16 November 2003 (revised 17 November 2003)
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO311A.html

If the CBS report by Dan Rather is accurate and Osama had indeed been admitted to the Pakistani military hospital on September 10, 2001, courtesy of America's ally, he was in all likelihood still in hospital in Rawalpindi on the 11th of September, when the attacks occurred. In all probability, his whereabouts were known to US officials on the morning of September 12, when Secretary of State Colin Powell initiated negotiations with Pakistan, with a view to arresting and extraditing bin Laden.

A recent Reuters report (11/13/03; scroll down) quoting Labeviere's book "Corridors of Terror" points to alleged "negotiations" between Osama bin Laden and the CIA, which took place two months prior to the September 11, 2001 attacks at the American Hospital in Dubai, UAE, while bin Laden was recovering from a kidney dialysis treatment

Enemy Number One in hospital recovering from dialysis treatment "negotiating with CIA"?

The meeting with the CIA head of station at the American Hospital in Dubai, UAE was confirmed by a report in the French daily newspaper Le Figaro, published in October 2001. (See Alexandra Richard, at http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/RIC111B.html ,

For a virtual tour of the hospital click http://www.ahdubai.com/site/tour_1.htm



The "negotiations" between the CIA and Osama (a CIA "intelligence asset") is sheer disinformation. Even though the CIA has refuted the claim, the report serves to highlight Osama as a bona fide "Enemy of America," rather than a creation of the CIA. In the words of former CIA agent Milt Bearden in an interview with Dan Rather on September 12, 2001, “If they didn’t have an Osama bin Laden, they would invent one.”

Intelligence negotiations never take place on a hospital bed. The CIA knew Osama was at the American Hospital in Dubai. Rather than negotiate, they could have arrested him. He was on the FBI most wanted list.

According to the Reuters report: "At the time, bin Laden had a multi-million dollar price on his head for his suspected role in the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa". So why did the hospital staff, who knew that Osama was at the American Hospital in Dubai, not claim the reward?

The Figaro report points to complicity between the CIA and Osama rather than "negotiation". (see excerpt below). Consistent with several other reports, it also points to the antagonism between the FBI and the CIA.

If the CIA had wanted to arrest Osama bin Laden prior to September 11, they could have done it then in Dubai. But they would not have had a the war on terrorism pretext for waging a major military operation in the Middle East and Central Asia.

According to Le Figaro:

"Dubai... was the backdrop of a secret meeting between Osama bin Laden and the local CIA agent in July [2001]. A partner of the administration of the American Hospital in Dubai claims that "public enemy number one" stayed at this hospital between the 4th and 14th of July. While he was hospitalized, bin Laden received visits from many members of his family as well as prominent Saudis and Emiratis. During the hospital stay, the local CIA agent, known to many in Dubai, was seen taking the main elevator of the hospital to go [up] to bin Laden's hospital room. A few days later, the CIA man bragged to a few friends about having visited bin Laden. Authorized sources say that on July 15th, the day after bin Laden returned to Quetta [Pakistan], the CIA agent was called back to headquarters. In the pursuit of its investigations, the FBI discovered "financing agreements" that the CIA had been developing with its "Arab friends" for years. The Dubai meeting is, so it would seem, within the logic of 'a certain American policy.'" (http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/RIC111B.html )

The Figaro report is confirmed by several other news reports including the London Times (1 Nov 2001 at http://www.unansweredquestions.org/timeline/2001/londontimes110101.html ). During his 11-day stay in the American hospital, Osama received specialized medical treatment from a Canadian urologist Dr. Terry Calloway .(See http://www.ahdubai.com/site/ps18_2.htm )

Osama back in Hospital on September 10, 2001, one day before the 9/11 attacks


According to Dan Rather, CBS, Bin Laden was back in Hospital, one day before the 9/11 attacks, on September 10, this time, courtesy of America's indefectible ally Pakistan. Pakistan's Military Intelligence (ISI) told CBS that bin Laden had received dialysis treatment in Rawalpindi, at Pak Army's headquarters:

[transcript of CBS report, see http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CBS203A.html ,

see also http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/28/eveningnews/main325887.shtml ]

DAN RATHER, CBS ANCHOR: As the United states and its allies in the war on terrorism press the hunt for Osama bin Laden, CBS News has exclusive information tonight about where bin Laden was and what he was doing in the last hours before his followers struck the United States September 11.

This is the result of hard-nosed investigative reporting by a team of CBS news journalists, and by one of the best foreign correspondents in the business, CBS`s Barry Petersen. Here is his report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) BARRY PETERSEN, CBS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Everyone remembers what happened on September 11. Here`s the story of what may have happened the night before. It is a tale as twisted as the hunt for Osama bin Laden.

CBS News has been told that the night before the September 11 terrorist attack, Osama bin Laden was in Pakistan. He was getting medical treatment with the support of the very military that days later pledged its backing for the U.S. war on terror in Afghanistan.

Pakistan intelligence sources tell CBS News that bin Laden was spirited into this military hospital in Rawalpindi for kidney dialysis treatment. On that night, says this medical worker who wanted her identity protected, they moved out all the regular staff in the urology department and sent in a secret team to replace them. She says it was treatment for a very special person. The special team was obviously up to no good.

"The military had him surrounded," says this hospital employee who also wanted his identity masked, "and I saw the mysterious patient helped out of a car. Since that time," he says, "I have seen many pictures of the man. He is the man we know as Osama bin Laden. I also heard two army officers talking to each other. They were saying that Osama bin Laden had to be watched carefully and looked after." Those who know bin Laden say he suffers from numerous ailments, back and stomach problems. Ahmed Rashid, who has written extensively on the Taliban, says the military was often there to help before 9/11.

AHMED RASHID, TALIBAN EXPERT: There were reports that Pakistani intelligence had helped the Taliban buy dialysis machines. And the rumor was that these were wanted for Osama bin Laden.

PETERSEN (on camera): Doctors at the hospital told CBS News there was nothing special about that night, but they refused our request to see any records. Government officials tonight denied that bin Laden had any medical treatment on that night.

(voice-over): But it was Pakistan`s President Musharraf who said in public what many suspected, that bin Laden suffers from kidney disease, saying he thinks bin Laden may be near death. His evidence, watching this most recent video, showing a pale and haggard bin Laden, his left hand never moving. Bush administration officials admit they don`t know if bin Laden is sick or even dead.

DONALD RUMSFELD, DEFENSE SECRETARY: With respect to the issue of Osama bin Laden`s health, I just am -- don`t have any knowledge.

PETERSEN: The United States has no way of knowing who in Pakistan`s military or intelligence supported the Taliban or Osama bin Laden maybe up to the night before 9/11 by arranging dialysis to keep him alive. So the United States may not know if those same people might help him again perhaps to freedom.

Barry Petersen, CBS News, Islamabad.

(END VIDEOTAPE) END

It should be noted, that the hospital is directly under the jurisdiction of the Pakistani Armed Forces, which has close links to the Pentagon. U.S. military advisers based in Rawalpindi. work closely with the Pakistani Armed Forces. Again, no attempt was made to arrest America's best known fugitive, but then maybe bin Laden was serving another "better purpose". Rumsfeld claimed at the time that he had no knowledge regarding Osama's health. (see CBS transcript above).

Needless to say, the CBS report is a crucial piece of information in the 9/11 jigsaw. It refutes the administration's claim that the whereabouts of bin Laden are unknown. It points to a Pakistan connection, it suggests a cover-up at the highest levels of the Bush administration.

Dan Rather and Barry Petersen fail to draw the implications of their January 2002 report. They fail to beg the question: where was Osama on 9/11? If they are to stand by their report, the conclusion is obvious: The administration is lying regarding the whereabouts of Osama.

Inpatient dialysis treatment tends to be longer than 24 hours in most American hospitals, which suggests that Osama would have been discharged from the Hospital on or "after" September 11.

If the CBS report is accurate and Osama had indeed been admitted to the Pakistani military hospital on September 10, courtesy of America's ally, he was in all likelihood still in hospital in Rawalpindi on the 11th of September, when the attacks occurred. In all probability, his whereabouts were known to US officials on the morning of September 12, when Secretary of State Colin Powell initiated negotiations with Pakistan, with a view to arresting and extraditing bin Laden.

These negotiations, led by General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan's military intelligence, on behalf of the government of President Pervez Musharraf, took place on the 12th and 13th of September in Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage's office.

For further details, see: M. Chossudovsky, Cover-up or Complicity of the Bush Administration? The Role of Pakistan's Military Intelligence (ISI) in the September 11 Attacks, 2 November 2001 http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO111A.html , See also War and Globalization, the Truth behind September 11 , Global Outlook, Shanty Bay, 2003, http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html )

[mhgaffney]

More than likely -- bin Laden is dead.

[baja]

Is the reward for him dead or alive

[Bob]

When is this going to the Butt?

[mhgaffney]

Is the reward for him dead or alive

I'm not sure.

But as of July 2001 the $$ reward was in the millions. Why didn't the Dubai government simply arrest him? Why didn't an ambitious hospital employee simply turn him in?

Obviously, because the US government was protecting binny. We wanted him free to fulfill his ordained roll as the "911 mastermind"

As a former CIA agent said: "If bin Laden didn't exist the US would have had to create him..."

[theAPAOps5]

As someone with such strong convictions about the US and its evil leadership I wonder why you have yet to leave? I mean based on the stuff you post Gaff you seem absoultely terrified of the government. I mean mini-nukes, RC Jets, the E-4B, and now Bin Laden. Man if I believed the stuff you have convinced yourself of I would be in a hut in the middle of Costa Rica.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

As someone with such strong convictions about the US and its evil leadership I wonder why you have yet to leave?

He has criticized the leadership/government - not the country.

It's intellectually dishonest to confuse the two.

[W*GS]

Read this:

http://911myths.com/html/bin_ladin_met_the_cia.html

And form your own judgement on the validity of gaffney's story.

[SPfloppy]

W*GS thanx for your retort and for once again bringing Gaffer's horrible BS to a close. LABF good on you for mediating. Gaff you are full of it man and in my non-professional opinion- in need of serious couseling. I love you dude and I don't want to see you hurt yourself or worse someone close to you. Only you can save your life bro. Lean on me, when your not strong I'll be your friend, someone you can count on...

[mhgaffney]

Read this:

http://911myths.com/html/bin_ladin_met_the_cia.html

And form your own judgement on the validity of gaffney's story.

I checked the site. The claim that the hospital in Dubai denied that bin Laden was there is laughable. Did you really think they wold admit it?

The site also claims there were no confirmations -- but this is wrong. The London Times also ran a story about Bin Laden's July dialysis treatment in Dubai.

The fact that bin Laden had a follow up treatment on Sept 10-11 at a military hospital in Rawalpindi under the watchful eyes of the Pakistani intelligence, ISI, also tends to corroborate the story's veracity. CBS did this report (posted above) based on sources inside the ISI. At the time bin Laden was a wanted man -- so why didn't the ISI simply pick him up and turn him over to the US?

If the CBS story is not confirmation -- the word has no meaning

You clowns simply refuse to believe that if something isn't in the NY Times - then it didn't happen. Given the pathetic record of the NYTimes in recent years -- helping disseminate Bush's lies -- only underscores the extent of your denial.

To solve problems you must get outside the box -- and with the lockdown of the US media since the 1990s -- when the huge mergers and buy outs happened -- this means often we must go outside the US media to learn what is happening. This means the world press.

I could say more -- but will leave it at that.

[W*GS]

The site also claims there were no confirmations -- but this is wrong. The London Times also ran a story about Bin Laden's July dialysis treatment in Dubai.

What was the LT source? Just because a story appeared twice doesn't mean one of the news stories confirms the other.

The fact that bin Laden had a follow up treatment on Sept 10-11 at a military hospital in Rawalpindi under the watchful eyes of the Pakistani intelligence, ISI, also tends to corroborate the story's veracity.

Only in your feverish imagination.

CBS did this report (posted above) based on sources inside the ISI. At the time bin Laden was a wanted man -- so why didn't the ISI simply pick him up and turn him over to the US?

If the CBS story is not confirmation -- the word has no meaning

The CBS story isn't confirmation. Re-read it carefully.

You clowns simply refuse to believe that if something isn't in the NY Times - then it didn't happen. Given the pathetic record of the NYTimes in recent years -- helping disseminate Bush's lies -- only underscores the extent of your denial.

I don't take the NYT as the final arbiter of the truth, by any means.

To solve problems you must get outside the box -- and with the lockdown of the US media since the 1990s -- when the huge mergers and buy outs happened -- this means often we must go outside the US media to learn what is happening. This means the world press.

By "world press", you mean "Weekly World News", right?

You're so freaking whacked and conspiratorial, you're a joke, gaffney. You're proof that people with your mindset cannot be swayed by any evidence, or lack of evidence - absolutely everything "fits", regardless. You're completely impervious to fact or reason.

[mhgaffney]

You're so freaking whacked and conspiratorial, you're a joke, gaffney. You're proof that people with your mindset cannot be swayed by any evidence, or lack of evidence - absolutely everything "fits", regardless. You're completely impervious to fact or reason.

Remember, this is the same guy (i.e., W*gs) who thinks the molten steel found under the WTC ruin was created by rust --

I'm not kidding. W*gs has stated as much on this board numerous occasions.

Any sixth grade student could point out the obvious crack in this theory. Rust, being a process of oxidation, requires oxygen. The problem is that there was precious little or no oxygen under a hundred thousand tons of wreckage.

W*gs has never explained this itty bitty flaw which blasts his pet theory full of holes big enough to accomodate a Boeing 767.

W*gs, himself in flight from unpleasant facts -- masks his own denial by accusing others of "whackitude."

What a bunch of de decrap-i-tude!

[W*GS]

Remember, this is the same guy (i.e., W*gs) who thinks the molten steel found under the WTC ruin was created by rust --

Sigh. There's still no proof that the steel under the WTC was "molten". You keep stating that as a fact, when I've shown time and again that the evidence for it is very meagre and highly doubtful.

Any sixth grade student could point out the obvious crack in this theory. Rust, being a process of oxidation, requires oxygen. The problem is that there was precious little or no oxygen under a hundred thousand tons of wreckage.

What was sprayed into the pile by the thousands of gallons? What is its chemical formula? What happens to it when it meets hot things?

W*gs has never explained this itty bitty flaw which blasts his pet theory full of holes big enough to accomodate a Boeing 767.

I've already explained it numerous times - and for you to point out a non-flaw when you've got fatal flaws in your whackitude is just too rich. You're in absolutely no position to criticize my arguments as being unsupported when your nonsense rests on mere vapors.

W*gs, himself in flight from unpleasant facts -- masks his own denial by accusing others of "whackitude."

This from the guy who posits impossibilities on a regular basis. Snort.

[mhgaffney]

Sigh. There's still no proof that the steel under the WTC was "molten".

your nonsense rests on mere vapors.

This from the guy who posits impossibilities on a regular basis. Snort.

Are you denying your own eyes?

The raw CNN footage proves that the most advanced military plane on the planet circled over Washington at the time of the Pentagon strike. Do you agree that this happened? Do you also deny this hard evidence?

If so, you are no better than the "no planers" who say that no planes hit the WTC or Pentagon.

The fact is -- this plane was erased from history. According to the USAF, most US media, and the 911 Commission, the event never happened.

Someone is lying. Usually when people lie it's because they have something to hide. Yet, you rush to the defense of Cheney and Bush --- like a well trained lap dog.

Mere vapors?

As for the molten steel -- the highest levels of micron and submicron-sized particles of Vanadium ever detected in air samples in the US is all the hard evidence necessary to substantiate the many eyewitness accounts of molten steel -- which you have dissed on cue, like a trained poodle.

The vanadium in the air means the steel was aerosolized -- more than melted -- vaporized -- which required incredible heat.

If you showed an ounce of skepticism about the official account I wouldn't be so hard on you, but your uncritical acceptance, the fact that you have so wllingly swallowed the whole hog, leaves me no alternative.

[W*GS]

Are you denying your own eyes?

Most anything coming from you is suspect.

The raw CNN footage proves that the most advanced military plane on the planet circled over Washington at the time of the Pentagon strike. Do you agree that this happened? Do you also deny this hard evidence?

It's not clear to me that even if you can prove that the plane was what you claim it was, and the time you claim it was in DC is the correct time, the rest of your whackitude is therefore correct. Like I said, your cred is quite low around here.

Someone is lying. Usually when people lie it's because they have something to hide. Yet, you rush to the defense of Cheney and Bush --- like a well trained lap dog.

Pointing out that your posts are chock-full o' delicious whackitude hardly constitutes a defense of Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, or the Zodiac Killer.

As for the molten steel -- the highest levels of micron and submicron-sized particles of Vanadium ever detected in air samples in the US is all the hard evidence necessary to substantiate the many eyewitness accounts of molten steel -- which you have dissed on cue, like a trained poodle.

What "many eyewitness accounts"? What about the vanadium concentration is extraordinary? How does the concentration of vanadium prove that the WTC steel was molten? You draw lots of dots, and then connect them haphazardly and ignorantly. Those of us experienced in making arguments based on reason and clear logical deduction readily point out where you err, but, for some reason, you never get it.

If you showed an ounce of skepticism about the official account I wouldn't be so hard on you, but your uncritical acceptance, the fact that you have so wllingly swallowed the whole hog, leaves me no alternative.

I'll live with your disrespect, I truly will.

Why can't I be skeptical of you?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Are you denying your own eyes?
.Your BS internet buddies have NEVER produced ANY proof of ANY metallurgic, gaseous or physical properties of the incredible fantasies you champion here. You, being sucked into these BS fairy tales
renders everything else you post as unimportant, worthless or basically spam. In that sense, that's kind of a shame because you do have vast knowledge in certain areas that is beneficial when sharing with others.

[TheDave]

Do i have to give my ignore Gaff and he goes away speech?

He is a nut, focused on spreading his fairy tales. He has yet to bring a single coherent argument to the table, yet runs around telling everyone how blind they are... This has gone way beyond pathetic.

[baja]

Wags and mhgaffney, this could take a while.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Wags and mhgaffney, this could take a while.It's over before it started, as usual.

[mhgaffney]

Wags and mhgaffney, this could take a while.

Unfortunately, time is in short supply.

Beerslugger didn't bother to read the paper I posted at the top of this thread -- so he hasn't even seen the CNN photos. That's par for the course with many on this board.

The CNN footage is the real deal. There's no mistake about it. I cited in the notes the pertinent web address -- where the CNN footage is archived. Anyone can go there -- after first registering with CNN IMAGE SOURCE -- which is the name of the archive -- and view the material.

It is not easy to activate the video -- from the site -- but at least you can see the thumbnails -- one for every scene -- and confirm that this footage was filmed on 911 at the White House. CNN has appropriately labeled it and filed it.

The scenes show the White House evacuation in progress -- mayhem on the sidewalks as staffers flee -- the old exec office building -- Lafayette Part -- the arrival of two red fire engines -- SSecret Service agernts on the White HOuse roof -- It's all there

Then the camera pans up and catches the E-4B against a blue sky. As I said, there is no mistake.

As for the Vanadium, the high concentrations were announced by Dr Cahill, professor emeritus at UC Davis several years ago. I posted the original article last year on this board -- but will happily do so again. This first article is more general -- and refers to metal particulates. Other follow up papers more specifically mention the vanadium.

You'll notice that Cahill goes evern further -- saying the levels recorded were the higehst his gteam had measured ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD -- not just in the US.


Trade Center Debris Pile Was a Chemical Factory, Says New Study

September 10, 2003

http://delta.ucdavis.edu/WTC.htm

At Ground Zero in New York City, UC Davis Professor Emeritus Thomas Cahill describes his air-quality findings to reporters on Feb. 23, 2002, just before testifying at an EPA investigative hearing in Manhattan. (Sylvia Wright/UC Davis News Service file photo)

The fuming World Trade Center debris pile was a chemical factory that exhaled pollutants in particularly dangerous forms that could penetrate deep into the lungs of workers at Ground Zero, says a new study by UC Davis air-quality experts.

The new work helps explain the very fine particles and extraordinarily high concentrations found by an earlier UC Davis study, the first to identify very fine metallic aerosols in unprecedented amounts from Ground Zero. It will be essential to understanding the growing record of health problems.

The conditions would have been "brutal" for people working at Ground Zero without respirators and slightly less so for those working or living in immediately adjacent buildings, said the study's lead author, Thomas Cahill, a UC Davis professor emeritus of physics and atmospheric science and research professor in engineering.

"Now that we have a model of how the debris pile worked, it gives us a much better idea of what the people working on and near the pile were actually breathing," Cahill said. "Our first report was based on particles that we collected one mile away. This report gives a reasonable estimate of what type of pollutants were actually present at Ground Zero.

"The debris pile acted like a chemical factory. It cooked together the components of the buildings and their contents, including enormous numbers of computers, and gave off gases of toxic metals, acids and organics for at least six weeks."

Cahill, an international authority on the constituents and transport of airborne particles, will summarize the new study today (Sept. 10) at the national meeting of the American Chemical Society, being held this year in New York City.

Cahill heads the UC Davis DELTA Group (for Detection and Evaluation of Long-range Transport of Aerosols), a collaborative association of scientists at several universities and national laboratories. The DELTA Group has made detailed studies of small airborne particles, called aerosols, from the trade-center collapse, 1991 Gulf War oil fires, volcanic eruptions and global dust storms, and has most recently finished a massive 21-site study of Asian aerosols for the National Science Foundation.

The new study reinforces and extends conclusions that DELTA Group reached in February 2002 in what is still the most extensive analysis of the dust and smoke from the hot collapse piles after the trade center collapse.

In the 2002 report, DELTA researchers described their analysis of over 8,000 air samples collected Oct. 2-30, 2001, on a rooftop at 201 Varick St., one mile north-northeast of the trade center complex.

They detailed very high levels of very fine airborne particles -- particles that pre-Sept. 11 EPA summaries had showed could raise a person's risk of lung damage and heart attacks. That analysis has been accepted for publication in the peer-reviewed journal Aerosol Science and Technology.

Now the researchers have added analyses of samples collected through May 2002, and constructed a timeline with physical and chemical explanations for the results.

The new study also confirms, Cahill said, that the very fine particles observed were almost totally from the trade center debris pile and not from other upwind sources, such as power plants and the diesel trucks used to haul away the debris.

When the trade center towers burned and collapsed, tons of concrete, glass, furniture, carpets, insulation, computers and paper were reduced to enormous, oxygen-poor debris piles that slowly burned until Dec. 19, 2001.

In that hot pile, some of the debris' constituent elements combined with organic matter and abundant chlorine from papers and plastics, and then escaped to the surface as metal-rich gases. These then either burned or chemically decomposed into very fine particles capable of penetrating deeply into human lungs.

In the trade-center air samples, Cahill identified four classes of particles that have been named by the EPA as likely to harm human health:

1. Fine and very fine transition metals, which interfere with lung chemistry.
2. Acids, in this case sulfuric acid, which attack cilia and lung cells directly.
3. Very fine, un-dissolvable (insoluble) particles, in this case glass, which travel through the lungs to the bloodstream and heart.
4. High-temperature organic matter, many components of which are known to be carcinogens.

"For each of these four classes of pollutant, we recorded the highest levels we have ever seen in over 7,000 measurements we have made of very fine air pollution throughout the world, including Kuwait and China," Cahill said.

Cahill's co-authors on the new study are: assistant research engineer Steve Cliff, professor Jim Shackelford and researchers Mike Dunlap and Mike Meier, all of UC Davis; Kevin Perry, assistant professor of meteorology at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City.


I will now look for the other paper detailing the vanadium levels -- and re post.

Beerslugger will have to face reality -- or else slug down even more beers to drown every last glimmer of it.

[mhgaffney]

Science briefs:

Trade Center air laden with
very fine particles, DELTA scientists find

http://calag.ucop.edu/0203MJ/briefs.html

The UC Davis DELTA Group took air samples about a mile from the World Trade Center in early October 2001, several weeks after the towers collapsed. They identified high levels of coarse particles, above, which included powdered concrete and glass with a coating of combustion products, in size range of 5 to 12 micrometers diameter. Very fine particles were found at levels not previously seen in ambient air samples.

By Michael Dunlop and Aaron Broumas.

In the most thorough analysis yet of the dust and smoke blown through lower Manhattan after the collapse of the World Trade Center, UC Davis scientists identified unprecedented clouds of very fine particles, which can be riskier to human health than larger, coarse particles.

"The air from Ground Zero was laden with extremely high amounts of very small particles, probably associated with high temperatures in the underground debris pile," says Thomas Cahill, UC Davis professor emeritus of physics and atmospheric sciences. "Normally, in New York City and in most of the world, situations like this just don't exist."

Cahill heads the UC Davis DELTA Group (Detection and Evaluation of Long-range Transport of Aerosols), a collaborative association of aerosol scientists at several universities and national laboratories, which monitors atmospheric conditions associated with global warming, weather, disasters and other events.

The DELTA Group collected air samples at therequest of the U.S. Department of Energy from Oct. 2 through mid-December, with a rooftop air monitor about 1 mile north-northeast of Ground Zero. The results for October were released in early February, and Cahill testified at an investigative hearing before the national ombuds-person for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Feb. 23.

The samples were collected continuously in eight separate-size modes from coarse (12 micrometers diameter) to ultra-fine (0.09 micrometers diameter), and were analyzed for dozens of substances that are likely to be associated with burning office buildings.

Coarse particles are typically filtered by the nose or coughed out of the throat and upper lungs, but they can irritate the mucous membranes and aggravate pre-existing breathing problems such as asthma. Very fine particles, however, can travel deep into human lungs, and are typically removed from the lungs through the bloodstream and heart, increasing the possibility of more serious health impacts.

In the largest spike, the DELTA Group analysis found 58 micrograms per cubic meter of very fine particles in one 45-minute period "an extremely high peak," Cahill says. "Even on the worst air days in Beijing, downwind from coal-fired power plants, or in the Kuwaiti oil fires, we did not see these levels of very fine particulates."

Virtually all the air samples from the trade center site also carried high concentrations of coarse particles. "These particles simply should not be there," Cahill says. "It had rained, sometimes heavily, on 6 days in the prior 3 weeks. That rain should have settled these coarse particles." The finding suggests that coarse particles were being continually generated from the hot debris pile.

Some metals in the very fine mode, such as vanadium, were found at the highest levels ever recorded in air in the United States. Although some asbestos was used in the buildings for fireproofing and in floor tiles, the DELTA group found very few asbestos fibers, even in the very fine particles.

All evidence indicates that ambient air in New York City is no longer influenced by the World Trade Center collapse, especially since the fires are out and the debris pile has cooled, Cahill says. However, the presence of large amounts of very fine particles as late as October means that the cleanup of indoor air should be undertaken carefully, he warns. Very fine particles penetrate crevices and fabrics in a way that normal dust doesn't, and they are easily resuspended, which can re-expose the room's occupants.

[mhgaffney]

So the clowns and knee jerks on this board can either face facts -- or go drink themselves into oblivion.

Probably they will do the latter -- but I will continue to hope and pray for a miracle.

That's what it's gonna take to save our country -- and the planet.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

So the clowns and knee jerks on this board can either face facts -- or go drink themselves into oblivion.
Probably they will do the latter -- but I will continue to hope and pray for a miracle.
That's what it's gonna take to save our country -- and the planet.What is it that moves you to try and convince a very few number of people here compared to the vast number of political boards out there of your Internet conspiracy theories?

[mhgaffney]

What is it that moves you to try and convince a very few number of people here compared to the vast number of political boards out there of your Internet conspiracy theories?

I am no more a conspiracy theorist -- than you are.

If you buy into the official story about what happpened on 911 -- then YOU are a conspiracy theorist.

I simply disagree about the who.

Since 911 we are ALL conspiracy theorists. To think anything different is dishonest.

But I've learned to expect this.

[W*GS]

gaffney, you keep going over ground that's been covered - and you have some sort of amnesia that keeps you from remembering.

See

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=1572273&postcount=80

and

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=1572262&postcount=79

as well as the surrounding articles.

[W*GS]

So the clowns and knee jerks on this board can either face facts -- or go drink themselves into oblivion.

I'm neither a clown nor a knee-jerk - and I don't drink.

Probably they will do the latter -- but I will continue to hope and pray for a miracle.

More like a lobotomy to believe your series of whackitudes...

Red-mercury-powered-pure-fusion mini-nukes brought down WTC1 and WTC2; WTC7 was demolished by controlled demolition; there was molten steel caused by thermite/thermate in the WTC; OBL is just a patsy; remote-controlled jets were used; there weren't really al-Qaeda hijackers on any of the planes...

Did I miss any of the big ones?

That's what it's gonna take to save our country -- and the planet.

There's a wide gulf between adhering to your 9/11 whackitude and being enthralled by the Bush administration. It's not an either/or choice.

[W*GS]

See also

http://www.randi.org/forumlive/showthread.php?p=2809707

[baja]

Wags and mhgaffney, this could take a while.

see what I mean...

[theAPAOps5]

None of those pictures were conclusive. Even if it was it means a E-4B was scrambled which is expected. We were in a National Emergency.

[W*GS]

And one more:

http://www.sawyerhome.net/whatilearned.html

[Bronco Bob]

So the clowns and knee jerks on this board can either face facts -- or go drink themselves into oblivion.

Probably they will do the latter -- but I will continue to hope and pray for a miracle.

That's what it's gonna take to save our country -- and the planet.


You are the internet version of the wild-eyed, ill-kept, bearded old man
mumbling gibberish about the end of the earth on a busy downtown street
corner in any large city anywhere on Earth.

It's not our fault if you don't realize it.

[Bronco Bob]

One more question. Was the 1993 bombing of the WTC also part
of the 2001 WTC Bush conspiracy? Did Bush already know he would
win the 2000 election, so he set up the 1993 attack on the WTC
so people would think terrorist did that one, and thus more easily
believe terrorists also pulled off the 2001 WTC attack?

[baja]

You are the internet version of the wild-eyed, ill-kept, bearded old man
mumbling gibberish about the end of the earth on a busy downtown street
corner in any large city anywhere on Earth.

It's not our fault if you don't realize it.

I think mhgaffney brings up some very good questions.

[Bronco Bob]

I think mhgaffney brings up some very good questions.

My problem is with his answers to them.

[baja]

Yes some of the theories are out there but the questions due remain.

[W*GS]

And another one:

http://www.urban75.org/info/conspiraloons.html

[The Lone Bolt]

What is it that moves you to try and convince a very few number of people here compared to the vast number of political boards out there of your Internet conspiracy theories?

Seriously Gaff, when are you going to take this debate to the professionals and academics who are the real experts on these subjects? Isn't it more important that you convince them instead of us laypeople? Or are you focusing your arguments on us because you figure we could be more easily swayed?

[mhgaffney]

Seriously Gaff, when are you going to take this debate to the professionals and academics who are the real experts on these subjects? Isn't it more important that you convince them instead of us laypeople? Or are you focusing your arguments on us because you figure we could be more easily swayed?

The answer has several parts.

One is that mustn't leave it to the physicists and academics because these folks have largely betrayed us. Most science funding today comes from uncle Sam -- and anyone who does not toe the line is out. I will post a detailed paper soon describing cases of American scientists with integrity who found themselves on the receiving end of a McCarthy era witch hunt -- and never again received federal grant monies. Some, such as J Robert Oppenheimer, saw their reputations tarnished -- for doping what I've been doing: opposing the next generation of weapons.

I should add that we owe these brave men and women a great deal -- for speaking the truth about the dangers of radiation when uncle Sam wanted to shut them up -- and in a number of cases succeeded by making a few examples.

I and some others have already shown that the "real" experts at the NIST conducted a politically pre-determined fake investigation -- the outcome of which was decided even before they started. I don't call that a real investigation.

I also post on this board because there are precious few places left in America where real debate can happen. This board -- like it or not -- is one. As Michio Kushi put it "A free press is a great thing -- if you happen to own one."

Finally, I am humble enough to recognize that many brains are better than one. I have learned things from posters on this board -- even from people who totally disagree with me.

[mhgaffney]

One more question. Was the 1993 bombing of the WTC also part
of the 2001 WTC Bush conspiracy? Did Bush already know he would
win the 2000 election, so he set up the 1993 attack on the WTC
so people would think terrorist did that one, and thus more easily
believe terrorists also pulled off the 2001 WTC attack?

Come on Bob, put on your thinking cap.

I have stated many times I am politically an independent -- not a Democrap -- and certainly not a Clinton fan.

I have taken Clinton to the woodshed for failing to lead this country and the world after the Cold War ended into a new kind of world at peace. Instead, Clinton surrendered to the militarists at the Pentagon.

Look, many of the people who gave us 911 were already around in the Clinton era. This was not solely a Bush caper. This was an extra legal black covert operation involving a number a sectors. The Bush neo cons were merely one -- but certainly a dominant one.

It was a conservative Republican -- an ex Navy friend of mine -- who first explained to me why the Oklahoma City bombing had to be an inside job -- done by elements here in the good ol US of A. The more I checked it out the more I had to agree.

The damage done to the federal building was vastly greater than what a bomb in a van parked outside the building could have caused. The damage was massive -- pointing to bombs inside the building. And indeed -- the local Okla City TV networks reported that a federal bomb squad had disarmed at least one large bomb inside the federal center that never went off. So who planted that bomb? Obviously NOT Tim McVeigh -- who fits the profile of a patsy to perfection. BTW, these local reports never made it into the national media. The story was stuffed and never made it out of OKlahoma.

As for the 1993 WTC attack -- there is plenty of evidence of FBI involvement. Check it out and you will find I am correct. We know this in part because one of the "assets" protected himself with a concealed tape recorder and captured some incriminating conversation with his FBI handlers.

The point in all of this is that some people want to reconfigure America. They want the Constitution to go away. They want a police state -- out of narrow selfish interests having to do with controlling the flow of resources and cash. To do that you have to fool the people in order to control them.

Most of the posters hereabouts -- are easy pickings.

[ant1999e]

Let's get back on topic. I think Gaff is on to something. In the past three days, the E-4B has flown over my house twice. I think something is going down. Could the government be planning an attack on me? What should I do Gaff?

[W*GS]

Remember, folks - gaffney thinks aliens landed near Roswell... Seriously.

[ant1999e]

Remember, folks - gaffney thinks aliens landed near Roswell... Seriously.

What a load of crap. Aliens didn't land at Roswell, they crashed.

[The Lone Bolt]

The answer has several parts.

One is that mustn't leave it to the physicists and academics because these folks have largely betrayed us. Most science funding today comes from uncle Sam -- and anyone who does not toe the line is out. I will post a detailed paper soon describing cases of American scientists with integrity who found themselves on the receiving end of a McCarthy era witch hunt -- and never again received federal grant monies. Some, such as J Robert Oppenheimer, saw their reputations tarnished -- for doping what I've been doing: opposing the next generation of weapons.

I should add that we owe these brave men and women a great deal -- for speaking the truth about the dangers of radiation when uncle Sam wanted to shut them up -- and in a number of cases succeeded by making a few examples.

I and some others have already shown that the "real" experts at the NIST conducted a politically pre-determined fake investigation -- the outcome of which was decided even before they started. I don't call that a real investigation.

I also post on this board because there are precious few places left in America where real debate can happen. This board -- like it or not -- is one. As Michio Kushi put it "A free press is a great thing -- if you happen to own one."

Finally, I am humble enough to recognize that many brains are better than one. I have learned things from posters on this board -- even from people who totally disagree with me.



So essentially your reason is that all of the scientists, qualified professionals, and academics with relevant backgrounds disagree with you only because they are all corrupt or afraid of "the truth"? How have you come to this conclusion? Have you spoken with any of these people? Is it possible that the real reason they disagree with you is that they have a legitimate counterargument? How do you know if you are unwilling to debate the issues with them?

It seems to me that you have a convenient reason to avoid debate with people who are far more knowedgable than anyone here on the subjects you continually bring up.