I want to know why Senators Kyl, Goss, and Graham were meeting with Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad on 9/11 in Washington D.C. I want to know why Tenet, Goss, and I believe Graham went to visit him and Musharraf in Pakistan weeks before 9/11. I want to know why Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad had Omar Sheikh wire transfer $100,000 to Mohammad Atta. I want to know why Omar Sheikh is the prime suspect in the murder of Daniel Pearl. I want to know why Porter Goss and Bob Graham were in charge of the Congressional Investigation into 9/11. I want to know why none of this appeared in the 9/11 Report. I think the allegations of bribery are very strong. I want it investigated.

I don't really see the potential in the Pakistan bribery, ect. It would just be a 'maybe we got the wrong or not all of the Islamic countries that did 911". The CIA's intimate( to put it mildly) relationship with the ISI would be ignored just like their relationship to Bin Laden in Afganistan and muslim terrorists in Kosovo. Lobbying for good PR is standard procedure whether the allegations are true or not. The wire transfer to Atta ( which was once strong but now seems minor or even possibly planted disinfo) and the meeting on 911 with ISI could all be explained away without touching the larger truths, it might even direct the MSM questioning of 911 in a comfortable but wrong direction.

Just some thoughts (I'll play with you Jon. (smile)
I think you have some larger ideas about this, ...spell them out....I'd love to hear them.

"The wire transfer to Atta ( which was once strong but now seems minor or even possibly planted disinfo) and the meeting on 911 with ISI could all be explained away without touching the larger truths, it might even direct the MSM questioning of 911 in a comfortable but wrong direction."

I don't agree. That's a DIRECT link to the United States Government for 9/11, and it was omitted in the 9/11 Report.

And if that's "Disinfo", then so is Michael Meacher. Michael Meacher is not "Disinfo".

Call me crazy, I'm going to sleep.

Jon,
Your not crazy.....I respect your opinion thats why I want to have this debate.........Good night.

1
Today i hit one out of the ballpark
i was behind a vechicle that had a couple of "join the army" bumper stickers,at a red light, i got out of my car with the "confronting the evidence" DVD in my hands walked up to the drivers side and handed him the DVD, that i had burnt,it turned out this soldier was in army greens on with 2 bars on each of his shoulders,a captain, looked him in the eye and told him this is proof that the Bush/PNAC adminstration PLANNED and ORCHESTRATED 911, thats all i had time to say to him....
peace,pw

When you said ballpark pw, I thought you were talking about the Vice President. Any day that Cheney gets booed throwing out the first pitch at a ballgame, can't be all bad.

Speaking of Pakistan, I wonder who was behind that bombing today.

lets get them to release the pentagon tapes

This Zacarias Moussaoui trial is so disgusting & Roveian that it's making me ill. At the death penalty phase of Moussaoui’s “trial”, the American “sheeple” are finally offered an al Qaeda scapegoat to blame 9/11 on.

The gov't sensationalizes & reinforces the "official story" of 9/11 while the schizophrenic Moroccan dude shouts death to America & burn all Pentagon, etc., right on cue (after years of U.S. custody/torture + stun belt to make sure). All this, plus the real perpetrators get their alibi corroborated. Truly sickening.

they have pictures of flight 93 wreckage on cnn right now.. labeled as 'government exhibit':

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/04/12/moussaoui.trial/index.html

"I still don't see how this directly links the US government to 911."

At least 4 members of our Government, one who was the CIA Director, one who is currently the CIA Director, and two Senators, one retired, met with a man who helped to fund 9/11 in the weeks prior to, and on the day of 9/11.

I can't think of any more direct connection than that.

"Jon, is this an example of what Edmonds was saying when she said 911 would make a lot more sense "when you look at it like an international drug ring"?"

I don't know if that's what she was referring to specifically... I think she was talking more of the State Dept's dealings with the world, and other illegalities our Government partakes in...

"Look at Bushes recent trip to India to see where our long term allegences are. Its not in Pakistan."

Really?

U.S. Gives Pakistan 8 Military Aircraft Free Of Charge

U.S. Approves Sale of Missiles to Pakistan

US 'to offer F-16s to Pakistan'

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060320-7.html

"it is a positive development for America to be a friend of Pakistan"

"President Musharraf is a friend to the United States."

The United States becoming friendly, or maintaining a friendship with 9/11 co-conspirators is a BIG story. The wire transfer is not "Disinfo".

Incidentally, Hopsicker also said Able Danger stumbled across protected Heroin Trafficking. Where's the follow up on that? Where's the proof of that?

I'm not taking anything away from Hopsicker's work, but to say that the wire transfer is "Disinfo" is ridiculous.

Big breaking news re: Cheney/Bush lied about WMD. Good layout on HuffPo here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

"Look at Bushes recent trip to India to see where our long term allegences are. Its not in Pakistan."

US has a history of playing both sides, why would we stop now?

US has a history of playing both sides, why would we stop now?
OP

I agree they are playing both sides,( which isn't such a bad idea considering their pointing nukes at each other) but my point was that in the long term picture, India is more important then Pakistan, and we could demonize them and drop them if needed.

The United States becoming friendly, or maintaining a friendship with 9/11 co-conspirators is a BIG story. The wire transfer is not "Disinfo".
Jon Gold

I didn't say it "was'" disinfo, I said "or even possibly planted disinfo". I don't know, but for the reasons stated above I find the wire transfer suspicious. (do you have any links to back it up other than the original news story from India(Asia times, Ithink.) We should be always reavaluating and questioning our 'accepted' facts.

The fact that members of the pakistani military have had continuing relationships with the Taliban and muslim extremists is not controversal or Big news. I have seen it expressed many times in the MSM when Pakistan became our new ally in the War on Terror.

If the pakistani connection is exposed it could easily be blamed on rouge elements of the Pak. government that had acknowledged ties to the Taliban. Our government could always claim that the meeting was to inform them that they needed to remove those elements in the government and help us in the war on Afganistan.
If the 911 commision didn't mention it , they could easily say it was to protect our relationship with the "good" government members of Pakistan because they're cooperation was essential to getting BinLaden and the whole war on terror. It was in our national interest!!!!

You asked for feedback on the Pakistan angle, and I'm offering it with humility.

"I didn't say it "was'" disinfo, I said "or even possibly planted disinfo". I don't know, but for the reasons stated above I find the wire transfer suspicious. (do you have any links to back it up other than the original news story from India(Asia times, I think.) We should be always reavaluating and questioning our 'accepted' facts."

Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad was sacked after the Wall Street Journal reported the Wire Transfer. Early the next year, Daniel Pearl's head was chopped off by Omar Sheikh, the man who wire transferred the $100,000 to Mohammad Atta. Daniel Pearl worked for the Wall Street Journal.

"The fact that members of the pakistani military have had continuing relationships with the Taliban and muslim extremists is not controversal or Big news. I have seen it expressed many times in the MSM when Pakistan became our new ally in the War on Terror."

No, but their involvement in 9/11 is. Which has NEVER been expressed on the MSM.

"If the pakistani connection is exposed it could easily be blamed on rouge elements of the Pak. government that had acknowledged ties to the Taliban. Our government could always claim that the meeting was to inform them that they needed to remove those elements in the government and help us in the war on Afganistan."

Those meetings took place before 9/11, and before the war in Afghanistan was announced.

"If the 911 commision didn't mention it , they could easily say it was to protect our relationship with the "good" government members of Pakistan because they're cooperation was essential to getting BinLaden and the whole war on terror. It was in our national interest!!!!"

Is that answer good enough for you? It isn't for me.

"You asked for feedback on the Pakistan angle, and I'm offering it with humility."

Thanks.

And on top of all of that, we have the bribery allegations which coincide with the fact that NONE of Pakistan's involvement was mentioned. Hmmmm... you want to talk about something suspicious, THERE'S something suspicious.

Is that answer good enough for you? It isn't for me.

No, its not god eneogh for me, but alot of people, even ones that I cautiously respect, think the 911 commision was "good enough" for them, even after its omissions and distortions have become obvious.

I don't want a second investigation that could end up another cover up without touching the larger issues and players. I'm sure we could get a lot these people to embrace an investigation of Pakistan and wipe their hands clean of the whole "911 unanswered questions". They could show themselves as dedicated to getting to the Truth of 911 but not even touch the more explosive issues and questions.

"Not questions about 911 again, we've had two investigations....its time to move on.' They will say...

But Thank you for your insightful response. I believe we should use this forum to intelligently debate where to direct our energy most effectively.

Do you envision a way in which an investigation of Pakistan's role would force, and I mean force, them to tackle the larger questions because they will avoid them at all cost if possible.

I'm not asking for an investigation into 9/11 at the moment, I'm asking for an investigation into the bribery allegations... which would, in and of itself, open the door WIDE OPEN into the ridiculousness of the Commission, and how we shouldn't believe word one of what they said.

which would, in and of itself, open the door WIDE OPEN into the ridiculousness of the Commission, and how we shouldn't believe word one of what they said.
Jon Gold

I'm not sure if the door would be WIDE OPEN, there are a lot of feet that would jam the door before it became too open and let in too much light.
But I do believe it is an angle we should pursue, in concert with our other efforts.