latest false flag attack?

[juan]

On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 14:04:14 -0700
Mirimir <mirimir at riseup.net> wrote:

> On 09/11/2018 01:04 PM, juan wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 07:06:13 -0700
> > Mirimir <mirimir at riseup.net> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>
> >> I have no serious doubt that the attackers were Saudi.
> > 
> > 	why? that's just cheap pentagon propaganda. You are 'skeptical' about obvious facts, ignore others  but have 'no serious doubt' about that bit? 
> > 
> > 	look 
> > 	"Hijack 'suspects' alive and well" 
> > 	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm
> 
> Thanks :) Now that I see that, I do vaguely remember it. But you know,
> 17 years ago :( But OK, we don't know for sure that they were Saudis.

	
	Don't know 'for sure'? Why do you keep assuming the 'saudis' were involved and not the US military directly. 



> 
> >> I just wonder who orchestrated the attack.
> > 
> > 
> > 	only one actor could have directed and carried the attack - the US military. 
> 
> What's the evidence for that? Lots of planes were hijacked over the
> years, from US airports. 

	And? Also, there was no plane at the pentagon. You keep ignoring that? 



> It's just that none of the hijackers knew how
> to fly them. 

	right, the point has been made that 9/11 alleged hijackers could have hit the towers with a jumbo like they allegedly did. So you see, the 'official' conspiracy about hijackers is bullshit. 


> So why is it impossible that a bunch of guys could have
> gone to flight schools, and then hijacked some planes?


	it's not impossible. Doesn't mean it's true though. What is impossible is that they were able to hit the towers with minimal or no experience flying big jets. 

	And Why would they go to 'fly schools' in the US? It would have made more sense to learn how to fly big jets in saudi arabia or elsewhere. 




> 
> > 	razers comment about 'racism' is just mind numbingly retarding trolling. The actual reason why a bunch of arabs with 'boxcuters' couldn't do it is because the plan required direct access to places that only US military agents can have and the ability to cover their tracks that only the US military has.
> > 
> > 
> > 	and notice that the chances of razer being a US government troll are very very high. 
> 
> I have no opinion. But it is a truism that those with extreme opinions
> tend to be government agents ;)


	nonsense - on the other hand anti libertarian assholes like razer or james parroting US war propaganda are very likely to be govt agents. 

	it has nothing to do with being 'extreme'(whatever you mean by that) and everything to do with being anti freedom, pro military like razer and james. 

	

> 
> >> I mean, nobody questions that it wasn't Japanese planes that attacked
> >> Pearl Harbor. And that the Japanese military planned it. But it's pretty
> >> clear that the US manipulated the Japanese into attacking, to create a
> >> pretext for entering WWII. Which most Americans had been opposing.
> >>
> >> So anyway, the two stories seem very similar to me.
> 
> So what's your opinion of the standard Pearl Harbor story?


	that yes, the japanese may well have been tricked or pushed into attacking pearl harbour but that doesn't mean that's the only option sombody wanting an excuse for war has.

	Actors who want war can partially use other people, or they can do the attacks themsleves  like in 9/11 or the gulf of tonkin - you know stuff like that planed in operation northwoods, etc.

	botton line :  the only actor with the capabilities, the motive and who obviously profited from the 9/11 inside job is the US govcorp by means of the US military.