questioning911's blog

Al Qaeda's Great Escape: Too Good to Be True?

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan Oct. 11, 2006 — In July 2005, when four al Qaeda prisoners slipped past guards at a high-security detention center at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, and then traversed half the country without getting caught, many found it hard to believe.

There are signs that even Osama bin Laden may have found the news of their breakout from a base that's home to 12,000 U.S. strained credulity.

Since then, two of the escapees seem to have become de facto spokesmen for al Qaeda: Libyan Abu Yahya al-Libi most recently appeared in a video tribute to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the slain leader of the Iraqi insurgency.

Saudi national Abu Nasser al-Qahtani, in the meantime, has been recorded delivering a speech to followers along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, and then leading a nighttime attack on a coalition army base.

All told, the escapees have starred in or made cameo appearances in more than five al Qaeda videos.

So it's strange that bin Laden and his No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, have never made a statement praising their stunning breakout or even rubbing Washington's nose in the fact that it happened.

It's a glaring absence in a year in which the two top al Qaeda leaders have issued an unprecedented 15 statements, paying tribute, for example, to al-Zarqawi (who was often considered a potential rival to bin Laden) and Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah (despite his adherence to the Shiite sect of Islam, which al Qaeda despises).

Scott Ritter on Iran

This is not 100% 9/11 related but I found it excellent.

Target Iran: The Truth About the White House’s Plans for Regime Change
Scott Ritter interviewed by
Amy Goodman
October 18, 2006

Democracy Now! Printer Friendly Version
EMail Article to a Friend
AMY GOODMAN: A new book by former weapons inspector, Scott Ritter, claims the Bush administration is determined to wage war against Iran. In Target Iran: The Truth About the White House’s Plans for Regime Change, Scott Ritter examines the administration’s regime change policy and the potential of Iran to threaten U.S. national security interests. He writes, “The path the United States has currently embarked on regarding Iran is a path that will inevitably lead to war. Such a course of action will make even the historical mistake we made in Iraq pale by comparison,” he writes. Scott Ritter joins us in the studio now. Welcome to Democracy Now!

SCOTT RITTER: Well, thanks.

AMY GOODMAN: What do you think is the key to understand about Iran right now, about the U.S., well, about your title targeting -- Target Iran?

SCOTT RITTER: Well, the most important thing is to understand the reality that Iran is squarely in the crosshairs as a target of the Bush administration, in particular, as a target of the Bush administration as it deals -- as it relates to the National Security Strategy of the United States. You see, this isn’t a hypothetical debate among political analysts, foreign policy specialists. Read the 2006 version of the National Security Strategy, where Iran is named sixteen times as the number one threat to the national security of the United States of America, because in the same document, it embraces the notion of pre-emptive wars of aggression as a legitimate means of dealing with such threats. It also recertifies the Bush administration doctrine of regional transformation globally, but in this case particularly in the Middle East. So, we’re not talking about hypotheticals here, regardless of all the discussion the Bush administration would like you to believe there is about diplomacy. There is no diplomacy, as was the case with Iraq. Diplomacy is but a smokescreen to disguise the ultimate objective of regime change.

Make sure you use paper balot to vote if you can

especially if the diebold machines in your county do not have a paper trail

The Diebold Memos' Smoking Gun
Volusia County Memos Disclose Election 2000 Vote Fraud

By Alastair Thompson
Read The Book…Support The Cause - Order Your Copy Today

"DELAND, Fla., Nov. 11 - Something very strange happened on election night to Deborah Tannenbaum, a Democratic Party official in Volusia County. At 10 p.m., she called the county elections department and learned that Al Gore was leading George W. Bush 83,000 votes to 62,000. But when she checked the county's Web site for an update half an hour later, she found a startling development: Gore's count had dropped by 16,000 votes, while an obscure Socialist candidate had picked up 10,000--all because of a single precinct with only 600 voters."
- Washington Post Sunday , November 12, 2000 ; Page A22
Yes. Something very strange happened in Volusia County on election night November 2000, the night that first Gore won Florida, then Bush, and then as everybody can so well remember there was a tie.

Something strange indeed. But what exactly? In the above report ( click for full version), written days after the election, hotshot Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank goes on to attribute the strange 16,022 negative vote tally from Volusia's precinct 216 to an apparently innocent cause.

After reading the Jersey's girls reply, I researched this Agent

Harry Samit is a Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent based out of the FBI Field Office in Minneapolis, Minnesota. He is a former United States Navy naval aviator, Naval Intelligence Officer, and a certified private pilot. He is most noted for arresting Zacarias Moussaoui on August 16, 2001.

Samit became aware of Moussaoui because of Clancy Prevost [1], a certified flight instructor at the Pan-Am International Flight Academy in Eagan, Minnesota. Moussaoui had enrolled for training in a 747-400 simulator at the school on August 13 but his behavior during instruction alarmed Prevost, who did not believe that Moussaoui was just a wealthy individual interested in flying jumbo jets. At Prevost's urging, the flight school contacted the Minneapolis FBI Field Office, and Samit was one of the special agents assigned to investigate Moussaoui.

Moussaoui was arrested by Samit for a visa violation on August 16 but, because the arrest was effected outside the Residence Inn where Moussaoui had been staying, Samit had no legal right to search the hotel room and its contents without Moussaoui's consent. Moussaoui denied consent, so Samit could only search Moussaoui and his car. Samit found a small knife in Moussaoui's left pocket and another knife in the car.[2]

2004 Election Fraud

A Corrupted Election
Despite what you may have heard, the exit polls were right
By Steve Freeman and Josh Mitteldorf

Recall the Election Day exit polls that suggested John Kerry had won a convincing victory? The media readily dismissed those polls and little has been heard about them since.

Many Americans, however, were suspicious. Although President Bush prevailed by 3 million votes in the official, tallied vote count, exit polls had projected a margin of victory of 5 million votes for Kerry. This unexplained 8 million vote discrepancy between the election night exit polls and the official count should raise a Chinese May Day of red flags.

The U.S. voting system is more vulnerable to manipulation than most Americans realize. Technologies such as electronic voting machines provide no confirmation that votes are counted as cast, and highly partisan election officials have the power to suppress votes and otherwise distort the count.

Exit polls are highly accurate. They remove most of the sources of potential polling error by identifying actual voters and asking them immediately afterward who they had voted for.

The reliability of exit polls is so generally accepted that the Bush administration helped pay for them during recent elections in Georgia, Belarus and Ukraine. Testifying before the House Committee on International Relations Dec. 7, John Tefft, deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, explained that the Bush administration funded exit polls because they were one of the “ways that would help to expose large-scale fraud.” Tefft pointed to the discrepancy between exit polls and the official vote count to argue that the Nov. 22 Ukraine election was stolen.

Question for Willie Rodriguez

When you saw the burning man come out of the elevator shaft :

- Was it an elevator that went all the way to the top? I'm told (by debunkers) that two elevators went from bottom to top in the building. (the rest were apparently split vertically into three sections)

- Did you smell kerosene? Again, a debunker told me he talked to you and you told him you did smell kerosene.


'Smoking Gun' of Controlled Demolition?

The debunkers have come up with excuses for many observed factors of CD


Squibs --> Pressurised Gas
Freefall speed --> Not enough resistance; Observed speed is a bit slower than free fall
Sulphur --> Present in building materials
Black smoke --> Burning plastic
Molten Metal --> Burning Fuel (yeah right)
Curved Steel --> Burning Fuel (yeah right)

However, this picture cannot be refuted that easily.

The angular cut could have NEVER occurred naturally. It would have BUCKLED under natural pressure. To CUT the column in a NEAT STRAIGHT LINE requires something other than gravity. Not to mention the charred edges.

Maybe this should be used as a primary line of defence for CD. I can't think of any way to explain an angular cut.