U.S. Drone Bases now on East African targeting missions

[delet...]

http://online.wsj.co...2923076634.html

 

 

to prevent piracy, apparently.

 

every time I read the first post in this thread, I think of predator drones being used to target some kid downloading the latest kanye west album. Come to think of it, not such a bad idea...are you listening RIAA?

 

yeah, even if the kid paid for the album. Take the fucker out.

[Guest theSun]

http://online.wsj.co...2923076634.html

 

 

to prevent piracy, apparently.

 

every time I read the first post in this thread, I think of predator drones being used to target some kid downloading the latest kanye west album. Come to think of it, not such a bad idea...are you listening RIAA?

 

yeah, even if the kid paid for the album. Take the fucker out.

 

after i clicked the link and saw the location, i was like "hmm that's a strange place to set up network monitoring"

 

classic piracy ftw

 

edit - wtf spellcheck

[joshuatxuk]

"They did create al qaeda. And nowadays if functions as a shadow puppet, rather than a real entity. But whatever." (delet..., 2011)

 

i edited the quote so it'll be convenient to use in academic papers people might be writing in the future.

 

lol

 

O no, not the Seychelles!

 

There goes the neighborhood...

 

They've been there since 09' operating from the airport but now there's a permanent base in the works. It's all just expansion of Horn of Africa operations.

 

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/09/new-drone-bases/

 

^ good overview

[awepittance]

i just read about half of Chengod's ace in the hole, which is the book 'The Looming Tower' and while its a much more fleshed out and sourced detailed account of the stuff leading up to 9/11 (also covered in Power of nightmares) it represents them in a much scarier and boogeyman like light

All the previous history about Bin Laden and Zawahari i find very interesting, but once again just like all the 'detailed accounts of what happened on 9/11' its a bunch of disparate and often not connected elements that are just as flimsy as the 9/11 commission report's findings. What i'm looking for is actual evidence that 19 hijackers committed these crimes, not found in this book. There is still zero evidence to this day that would hold up in a court of law tying Bin Laden or anybody in his circle to the actual crime. ZERO

 

To say the Al Qaeda existed before 9/11 sure it did, the name has existed since the 1993 WTC bombing trial that took place i think in 1999. If you can find me some sort of proof that they used the name previously to that i'd like to see it.

 

but to say that Al Qaeda exists anywhere NEAR the form that the US government wants us to believe it does (that it has bases operating in hundreds of countries, that it employs sleeper cells and those are who carried out 9/11, etc) is completely baseless to the point of hilarity.

 

 

this growing story about Richard Blee and how Richard Clarke has admitted that the CIA tried to recruit some of the hijackers and today have continued to covered it up is really amazing info that needs to get around more

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl6w1YaZdf8&feature=player_embedded

 

this completely and utterly destroys the false idea that 'oh my god we didnt see this coming' of course we fucking did, and the closest we've come to a former administration member almost literally saying they let it happen on purpose (just not using those exact words)

[eugene]

i don't know what the u.s says, but is it really that difficult for an organization with a strong ideology to spread its word to the willing listeners around the world along with some practical instructions ? heck, even me and some buddy were contemplating making some improvised explosives according to instructions from the internet in the late 90s..

it sounds absolutely reasonable for a jihadist organization to operate in many different countries.

[SR4]

i don't know what the u.s says, but is it really that difficult for an organization with a strong ideology to spread its word to the willing listeners around the world along with some practical instructions ? heck, even me and some buddy were contemplating making some improvised explosives according to instructions from the internet in the late 90s..

it sounds absolutely reasonable for a jihadist organization to operate in many different countries.

 

 

look, no doubt Bin Laden was financing other groups to carry out jihadist activities. But that doesn't mean he controlled these organizations. Some crazy funding other crazies does not equal a high-tech sprawling terror empire.

 

Or, if it does, I will play devil's advocate and then go ahead and say Woodrow Wilson was the head of the KKK, and Prescott Bush was the head of the Nazi party. Sound ridiculous? It is.

[awepittance]

I love how the continually expanding looming circle of terrorism is the perfect psychological trap to just feedback loop yourself with fear. It's one of the best feedback delays i've used actually, it has a really nice wow/flutter tape emulation mode as well as a nice highpass filter

[awepittance]

i don't know what the u.s says, but is it really that difficult for an organization with a strong ideology to spread its word to the willing listeners around the world along with some practical instructions ? heck, even me and some buddy were contemplating making some improvised explosives according to instructions from the internet in the late 90s..

it sounds absolutely reasonable for a jihadist organization to operate in many different countries.

 

 

look, no doubt Bin Laden was financing other groups to carry out jihadist activities. But that doesn't mean he controlled these organizations. Some crazy funding other crazies does not equal a high-tech sprawling terror empire.

 

Or, if it does, I will play devil's advocate and then go ahead and say Woodrow Wilson was the head of the KKK, and Prescott Bush was the head of the Nazi party. Sound ridiculous? It is.

 

to me its the same kind of child like logic as saying that God controls everything, of course if you use circular logic you can come up with a convincing argument about how god is omniscient and causes all the world's disasters too, but when applied to a logical thought process it implodes

 

just the way Bin Laden's death is celebrated was designed as a catharsis for those who still believe in the bizarre black and white easy to perceive (through a distorted lens) world view that good and evil are extremely real concepts, and good must fight evil and destroy it. Pretty sad if you ask me, but no one does ask me i just rant anyways :)

[delet...]

Oh it's depressing beyond sad. But yea...

[lumpenprol]

just the way Bin Laden's death is celebrated was designed as a catharsis for those who still believe in the bizarre black and white easy to perceive (through a distorted lens) world view that good and evil are extremely real concepts, and good must fight evil and destroy it. Pretty sad if you ask me, but no one does ask me i just rant anyways :)

 

oh c'mon, do you think the subtle cockiness Obama displayed when he announced Bin Laden had been killed was 100% scripted? I think he was genuinely stoked they got him. Sure, the unveiling of the event to the public was staged, just like every other govt. press conference.

 

I agree with the rest of the sentence. But what do you mean "designed"? The govt. didn't order American idiots to say "fuck yeah", beat their chests, hold candles, or whatever else they did.

[eugene]

i don't know what the u.s says, but is it really that difficult for an organization with a strong ideology to spread its word to the willing listeners around the world along with some practical instructions ? heck, even me and some buddy were contemplating making some improvised explosives according to instructions from the internet in the late 90s..

it sounds absolutely reasonable for a jihadist organization to operate in many different countries.

 

 

look, no doubt Bin Laden was financing other groups to carry out jihadist activities. But that doesn't mean he controlled these organizations. Some crazy funding other crazies does not equal a high-tech sprawling terror empire.

 

Or, if it does, I will play devil's advocate and then go ahead and say Woodrow Wilson was the head of the KKK, and Prescott Bush was the head of the Nazi party. Sound ridiculous? It is.

 

to me its the same kind of child like logic as saying that God controls everything, of course if you use circular logic you can come up with a convincing argument about how god is omniscient and causes all the world's disasters too, but when applied to a logical thought process it implodes

 

just the way Bin Laden's death is celebrated was designed as a catharsis for those who still believe in the bizarre black and white easy to perceive (through a distorted lens) world view that good and evil are extremely real concepts, and good must fight evil and destroy it. Pretty sad if you ask me, but no one does ask me i just rant anyways :)

i wasn't saying anything regarding one man directly controlling hundreds of cells in different counties from some hi-tec cave, i was merely bewildered at your disbelief at the possibility of sleeper cells, besides i called al qaeda an organization but it's more accurate to call it an ideology i believe, interestingly enough i even remember something regarding our buddies from the south, hamas, having some kind of an armed quarrel with al qaeda influenced group in gaza.

[chenGOD]

i just read about half of Chengod's ace in the hole, which is the book 'The Looming Tower' and while its a much more fleshed out and sourced detailed account of the stuff leading up to 9/11 (also covered in Power of nightmares) it represents them in a much scarier and boogeyman like light

All the previous history about Bin Laden and Zawahari i find very interesting, but once again just like all the 'detailed accounts of what happened on 9/11' its a bunch of disparate and often not connected elements that are just as flimsy as the 9/11 commission report's findings. What i'm looking for is actual evidence that 19 hijackers committed these crimes, not found in this book. There is still zero evidence to this day that would hold up in a court of law tying Bin Laden or anybody in his circle to the actual crime. ZERO

 

To say the Al Qaeda existed before 9/11 sure it did, the name has existed since the 1993 WTC bombing trial that took place i think in 1999. If you can find me some sort of proof that they used the name previously to that i'd like to see it.

 

but to say that Al Qaeda exists anywhere NEAR the form that the US government wants us to believe it does (that it has bases operating in hundreds of countries, that it employs sleeper cells and those are who carried out 9/11, etc) is completely baseless to the point of hilarity.

 

 

this growing story about Richard Blee and how Richard Clarke has admitted that the CIA tried to recruit some of the hijackers and today have continued to covered it up is really amazing info that needs to get around more

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl6w1YaZdf8&feature=player_embedded

 

this completely and utterly destroys the false idea that 'oh my god we didnt see this coming' of course we fucking did, and the closest we've come to a former administration member almost literally saying they let it happen on purpose (just not using those exact words)

 

Jeez you weren't nearly as condescending in your PM.

 

So just so I understand your disconnect - you think that Blee and Clarke tried to recruit the hijackers, but there weren't any hijackers who actually did the attacks?

 

Wright does not make al-Qaeda out to be all powerful or anything of the sort - he documents them as never having more than 1,000 members world-wide. If those kinds of numbers scare you, watch out for the Shriners! He simply identifies the processes that went on.

If you keep reading, there are two witnesses who identify the hijackers. Both of the witnesses had very strong ties to al-Qaeda (Abu Jandal had been Bin Laden's bodyguard).

 

My question is - ok, you've got a guy who's done hundreds of interviews, has done thorough research, shows you his sources in a bibliography, identifies his quote sources - especially from interviews etc.. he's given a very credible account. After all that, you still can't believe that it's possible that al-Qaeda had operations in various places around the world? If you're going to present that video as evidence, then you have to allow for the phone call which originated in Malaysia, and led to the meeting in Malaysia (which Wright discusses in detail in his book by the way). Is that not an indication that they might have had personnel in Malaysia?

 

If you keep reading, Wright says outright that the CIA blocked the FBI and allowed the 9/11 plot to proceed (p.386 of the paperback edition). Additionally, Wright lays out the regulations that legally prevented agencies from sharing information.

 

Now Clarke lays out an argument as to why the CIA might have done this - namely they were trying to recruit the agents. Is this the first time you've heard of double agents?

It's entirely different from saying "the CIA piloted remote drones into the buildings" or something like that. The idea that it's a failed CIA operatiopn is much more plausible - especially when you have someone like Cofer Black, stuck in Cold War operations mode, as the head of the Counter-terrorist group in the CIA. I know, it's not as exciting to think that someone fucked up.

[awepittance]

just the way Bin Laden's death is celebrated was designed as a catharsis for those who still believe in the bizarre black and white easy to perceive (through a distorted lens) world view that good and evil are extremely real concepts, and good must fight evil and destroy it. Pretty sad if you ask me, but no one does ask me i just rant anyways :)

 

oh c'mon, do you think the subtle cockiness Obama displayed when he announced Bin Laden had been killed was 100% scripted? I think he was genuinely stoked they got him. Sure, the unveiling of the event to the public was staged, just like every other govt. press conference.

 

I agree with the rest of the sentence. But what do you mean "designed"? The govt. didn't order American idiots to say "fuck yeah", beat their chests, hold candles, or whatever else they did.

 

the government didn't have to order American's to beat their chest, but by assassinating him if they really even did i think was partially done as a form of a emotional catharsis, for those who were involved in and and for the American public itself.

[awepittance]

So just so I understand your disconnect - you think that Blee and Clarke tried to recruit the hijackers, but there weren't any hijackers who actually did the attacks?

 

i implied neither. what Richard Clarke is saying is that with George Tenant's knowledge and full complicity, over 100 CIA agents were aware of the attempts to recruit a member from 'Al-Qaeda' about 4 months previous to 9/11. His responsibility in the Bush administration was to see upcoming terrorist threats and gauge them, the information was intentionally obstructed from him and his department. I think that this does dovetail into the incompetence theory, but lays out much more specifically exactly how information was withheld, which in my mind is a bombshell. It also has eerily similar vibes to it that remind me of Oswald's Russian intelligence background. After watching the movie again recently, i looked into all the theories regarding the oswald double agent theory, it's pretty interesting shit honestly

 

 

My question is - ok, you've got a guy who's done hundreds of interviews, has done thorough research, shows you his sources in a bibliography, identifies his quote sources - especially from interviews etc.. he's given a very credible account. After all that, you still can't believe it?

 

i don't believe that it seals the deal, far from it. I believe a good portion of the book, it's very well sourced as you say, but just like all post 9/11 writings on Bin Laden it's heavily relying on government sources. and all of the evidence that actually ties these so-called hijackers to the crime itself or to bin laden is not evidence that would be held up in court, a good majority of it was gotten through torture

[chenGOD]

Over 100? Clarke says about 50.

 

Wright explains where he gets much of his testimony from, and how he attempts to ground it on a reliable foundation. The testimony I'm referring to was not obtained through torture - they were interviews conducted by Soufan with Quso and Abu Jandal, in Yemen. This is before the torture confessions.

 

And it seems that the information about Padilla and the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks came out before the waterboarding:

http://www.npr.org/2011/09/13/140401483/an-interrogator-writes-the-inside-story-of-9-11

[awepittance]

to me evidence means something will actually prove a case in court, they never actually had any real evidence against Padilla. I think that entire thing was completely manufactured, and the way they've handled the case furthers that theory even more. How they got sued basically for indefinitely holding Padilla without charges, so they then charged him with some sort of blanket terrorism charge to get out of the lawsuit. The fact that the author would hype up the 'dirty bomber' manufactured Padilla story makes me question his entire agenda of writing the book. Why would he prop up a clearly false story?

 

Jose Padilla and how the US justice system functions

the Padilla verdict

 

I also really would expect something beyond eye witness testimony to tie these people to the attacks that was procured in an interrogation situation in Yemen. At least release the black boxes that recorded the entire event on all 4 planes, oh whoops never mind they claim that all of them were unrecoverable.

[awepittance]

Over 100? Clarke says about 50.

 

 

darn next time ill be more careful with the numbers, so those who want to address my argument can not so easily ignore my points

[awepittance]

namely they were trying to recruit the agents. Is this the first time you've heard of double agents?

 

no, it is not chengod, check above what i say about the similarities of several of the 9/11 hijackers with Oswald, intelligence language training, CIA payroll, addresses listed as US government facilities. Very interesting if you ask me and never even remotely explained by the book The looming Tower (unless it's explained somewhere in the 2nd half).

 

anyways I can guarantee you it's the first time the American public has heard that there were double agents in play on 9/11 who may have been on the CIA payroll. If that's not important information to you personally, i cant disagree with that. The american public however has the right to know the extent in which their government failed them or was possibly complicit in the actual attacks. This is what's most important to me. I am not a criminal investigator, i just know that over time more pieces of the puzzle are revealed that completely contradict the findings of the 9/11 report and what we understand as the narrative of what happened that day. For some reason 9/11 still has a heavy taboo surrounding it, which makes it hard for certain people to see it questioned. I think in time it's going to be a lot more acceptable to question this event

 

it's not as exciting to think that someone fucked up.

 

it's just not believable to me, maybe if you grew up here you would have the necessary level of cynicism to meet me at this juncture.

 

but to characterize what i believe as 'exciting' i think is actually kind of offensive, i just don't take the government at face value, that it was a simple accident to make a fuckup this large. Why does one have to resort to saying that my point of view is titillating and this is why i am inclined to believe it? I could level the same kind of underhanded insult towards you and say that you want to believe in this perception Al Qaeda so badly because you are fearful, but i don't.

[chenGOD]

Oh so when you say "I can't help but think that this is probably the best and most thorough book out there that gives one comfort for their 9/11 'blowback' theory." it's not condescending and patronizing, but when I say that conspiracy theories are exciting it's insulting. Gotcha.

I believe that al Qaeda is an organization that has participated in terrorist activities because it has been documented (like the attack on the USS Cole and the first WTC bombing). I am not fearful because I understand that the chances of me being harmed in a terrorist event are much smaller than say, being struck by a car.

You don't take the government at face value, and that's fine - you shouldn't. Originally I was very skeptical about al Qaeda's involvement in the attacks, and thought strongly it was an inside job. However, after reading about the events, I feel that the idea of it being more than gross incompetence and negligence combined with bureaucratic intransigence is a much more plausible theory.

 

If you note Clarke's argument what he says is - "this is a possibility". It's not a definite thing - the only thing he has that is definite is that some information was withheld from him. Reasons why it might have been withheld from him are pure conjecture. The double agents in play are simply conjecture.

Here's a theory for you - maybe Clarke is a double agent - he's spreading Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt at the behest of those who organized the event. After all in June of 2001 Clarke called a meeting with agency officials and said that something big was gonna go down soon.

[awepittance]