Paul.L, how about telling us why you think the local CIA station chief met Osama bin Laden at the American Hospital in Dubai in July 2001 at time, when he 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 that killed 224 people?

Why do you think he was allowed by Pakistan, a supposed US ally to leave a hospital after the September 11 attack?

"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."
(http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO311A.html)

---

Your hysterical personal attack on Aaron Russo is, of course, unsurprising.

I don't agree with all of Russo's ideas, but he seemed to me to be honest, decent and well-meaning.

I don't see what motives Russo would have had to invent the entire story. Clearly Nicholas Rockefeller had hoped to recruit his friend to his side as Russo explained in a more complete version of the interview.

In Russo's case, he had miscalculated, but perhaps not altogether, as yet, disastrously as a compliant newsmedia has obviously succeeded in preventing Russo's testimony from becoming more widely known.

Daggett, the "Al Qaeda" name has as much to do with the FBI as
anyone. Its about a simple name for a whole lot of diverse
radical islamist groups, most of whose names few in the West
could even remember. Their ideology is similar, but it is
not as if there is one major group, with bin Laden at the top,
as many Westerners think.

In other words, Al Qaeda is an ideological, political movement
of radical Islamists, with people like Syd Qutb as their
ideological drivers. bin Laden simply became their pin up
boy and mascot, as he was writing out the big cheques.

Of course the CIA encouraged these Islamists to fight against
the Russians. Nobody is denying that. Only the tables turned
on the CIA, when Qutb, through his bad experiences in the US,
convinced others that they should be the target, in fact all
in the "evil West".

Unless you understand the ideological background behind these
Islamist movements, you won't understand why 911 happened.

Sorry, but one eyewitness or one filmaker who clearly would
make money from all this, is not really convincing evidence.

But then you clearly have not shown the ability of good judgement,
no wonder that you fall for this rubbish.

*If Gertrude wants to believe
in her conspiracy theories about MLA and Elders etc, frankly it’s not worth my time, to even bother. ….
*Meantime, I wish you and Gertrude or you and Dickie, every happiness
together :)
by Yabby,

Ah Yabby
Naughty boy, talking about me in my absence.


It’s a matter of record each time I have raised issues, or put up an argument,( any argument) about MLA or Elders , AWB Landmark etc you ‘ignored’ it and changed the subject .

Of course you claim Gertrude doesn’t know what she’s talking about etc….

This is despite the the following people have us.
1 Head of Elders
2 Heads of MLA Live Exports (including a call from the MLA head in ME Ian Ross
3 Your buddy Peter AWB
4 The Minister for Agricultures advisor for Rudd ALP two weeks pre election.

Now before I go on, pls remember all of the above contacted us not the other way around. - But you ‘still insist I have no idea about these people.

You’re entitled to your opinion but let me ask you what ‘direct contact have YOU had with MLA heads Elders AWB, Landmark etc by comparison pls Yabby.

Saying you honestly think Gertrude is away with the fairies and calling me a liar are two different things.

Are you calling me a liar Yabby? If not why would I not be able to make an informed opinion after dealing direct with heads?

Why indeed would you ask people to accept your version but reject ours when you offer no proof I am incorrect.

*So please go out and generate some exports*….l

I am Yabby and certain people don’t like it.


Human interest,
Our organisation works with ALL regional area and especially aboriginal people.
It isn’t possible to separate people from Animals and I think the Animal organisations feel people need to also be aware animals suffer as much as people- often more.

Paleif

says >> It isn’t possible to separate people from Animals and I think the Animal organisations feel people need to also be aware animals suffer as much as people- often more.

Whoa steady their buddy, are you seriously suggesting that animals and humans should have the same rights?

should we be required to produce evidence that cows have been bad, before we can execute them?

It easily possible to separate humans from animals, unless your a complete nutter.

I have nothing against reducing/eliminating the uneccesary suffering of animals, but lets no pretend that animals are as important as people. We don't eat people.

Dagget

You say >> “Your hysterical personal attack on Aaron Russo is, of course, unsurprising.

Hysterical? You’re the one who believes in a global conspiracy in which the number of non conspirators are in the minority.

You say >> “In Russo's case, he had miscalculated, but perhaps not altogether, as yet, disastrously as a compliant newsmedia has obviously succeeded in preventing Russo's testimony from becoming more widely known.”

The news media are in on it as well? Who isn’t involved dagget, or can’t you be sure, after all anyone could be a conspirator.

It has clearly never occurred to you that the reputable news media don’t publish this type of nonsense, the type that you would often see in NEXUS, because they understand that it is absolute rubbish. They also rarely report on UFO sightings, fairies, pixies, trolls or ghosts.

Most normal educated people look at the evidence of 9/11 and come to the conclusion that there is NOTHING in the conspiracy stories which holds up. That’s why the news media don’t report it, not because they are in LEAGUE with the govt.

When a person like Russo claims to have been told something by someone, the character and history of that person are obviously important factors when deciding whether you can take them at their word. Clearly with Russo, taking his word for it (especially when he is claiming such outlandish things) would be a step TOO far for any normal person

You say >> “. Clearly Nicholas Rockefeller had hoped to recruit his friend to his side as Russo explained in a more complete version of the interview.”

I see; that’s how this complex conspiracy worked. THEY just walked up to people and told them the truth. And then if they (Russo) didn’t join, THEY (the conspirators) just went and looked somewhere else for help? Really?

As for the Osama fantasy, I’ll have to leave that for a later time, but please keep digging a hole for yourself on that issue. The ASSumptions which underpin your “evidence” really do make an ASS out of you and they.

What Paul.L is trying to do is deal with every argument I put in isolation and hope that people lose sight of the totality.

Then, at the appropriate time he makes sweeping pronouncements such as:

"All you have presented so far is

"1) it looked like a controlled demolition
"2) people heard noises which sounded like explosions
"3) george bush acted funny
"4) someone said they saw molten metal"

... knowing full well that that that, even as dishonestly put as it is, this is far from 'all' that I have presented.

In regard to Aaron Russo's statement, obviously it would count for little if we considered it in considered it in complete isolation from everything else, but I remind everyone that this is in addition to mountains of other evidence of others appearing to have been given advanced warning of the attacks.

On top of that his statements eloquently confirm the judgement that many other informed and credentialed people have come to on this matter, so I again urge others to view the testimony of the late Aaron Russo at http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=LZjKKUEHTKk

I remind others of the many highly credentialed and authoritative people who challenge the official 9/11 explanation at http://www.911truthgroups.org/911Truth101/Step2ProminentSupporters/tabid/633/Default.aspx http://us-amnesia.blogspot.com/2007/05/excerpt-debunking-911-debunking-experts.html

---

Paul.L wrote:

"Regarding the 'mountain of evidence' supposedly collected by the 9/11 truth movement, the debunking sites thoroughly explain why the evidence is either entirely consistent with the official explanation ..."

"Thoroughly explaine(d)", Paul.L?

With statements like:

"What? The fast removal of debris is evidence that the buildings were demolished? Really?"

"Molly the dog was running as a candidate for the 2008 presidential election. Should we take her seriously as well?"

?

Perhaps you yourself could give a practical demonstration here of how "the evidence" is "entirely consistent with the official explanation" by addressing all of the evidence I have put, rather than just focusing on those parts which are relatively easy to superficially counter with specious arguments.

How about explaining Barry Jennings' evidence of explosions in WTC7 or the videotaped firefighters' evidence at http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=SXD3bAbZCow

?