U.S. and Allied Intelligence Heard the 9/11 Hijackers Plans from Their Own Mouths

digme

U.S. and Allied Intelligence Heard the 9/11 Hijackers Plans from Their Own Mouths
The 9/11 hijackers were largely unknown prior to that horrible event, right?
Actually, U.S. and allied intelligence services heard a lot from the hijackers’ own mouths prior to 9/11:
* An FBI informant hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000. Specifically, investigators for the Congressional Joint Inquiry discovered that an FBI informant had hosted and even rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House. As the New York Times notes:

Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused the White House on Tuesday of covering up evidence ….
The accusation stems from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s refusal to allow investigators for a Congressional inquiry and the independent Sept. 11 commission to interview an informant, Abdussattar Shaikh, who had been the landlord in San Diego of two Sept. 11 hijackers.

* According to Le Monde, the intelligence services of America’s close ally France and of other governments had infiltrated the highest levels of Al-Qaeda’s camps, and actually listened to the hijackers’ debates about which airlines’ planes should be hijacked, and allied intelligence services also intercepted phone conversations between Al-Qaeda members regarding the attacks

* According to journalist Christopher Ketcham, America’s close ally Israel tracked the hijackers’ every move prior to the attacks, and sent agents to film the attack on the World Trade Centers
* The National Security Agency and the FBI were each independently listening in on the phone calls between the supposed mastermind of the attacks and the lead hijacker. Indeed, the FBI built its own antenna in Madagascar specifically to listen in on the mastermind’s phone calls

* According to various sources, on the day before 9/11, the mastermind told the lead hijacker “tomorrow is zero hour” and gave final approval for the attacks. The NSA intercepted the message that day and the FBI was likely also monitoring the mastermind’s phone calls
* Shortly before 9/11, the NSA also intercepted multiple phone calls to the United States from Bin Laden’s chief of operations

* The CIA and the NSA had been intercepting phone calls by the hijackers for years (see also this)
* According to the Sunday Herald, two days before 9/11, Bin Laden called his stepmother and told her “In two days, you’re going to hear big news and you’re not going to hear from me for a while.” U.S. officials later told CNN that “in recent years they’ve been able to monitor some of bin Laden’s telephone communications with his [step]mother. Bin Laden at the time was using a satellite telephone, and the signals were intercepted and sometimes recorded.”

Indeed, before 9/11, to impress important visitors, NSA analysts would occasionally play audio tapes of bin Laden talking to his stepmother.
* And according to CBS News, at 9:53 a.m on 9/11, just 15 minutes after the hijacked plane had hit the Pentagon, “the National Security Agency, which monitors communications worldwide, intercepted a phone call from one of Osama bin Laden’s operatives in Afghanistan to a phone number in the former Soviet Republic of Georgia”, and secretary of Defense Rumsfeld learned about the intercepted phone call in real-time (if the NSA monitored and transcribed phone calls in real-time on 9/11, that implies that it did so in the months leading up to 9/11 as well)

seannash

whilst this is interesting can i raise a point and hope it doesnt derail the thread.

if indeed this is true does this prove that it was not an inside job?

will proving that they knew the terrorists plotted the 9/11 attacks disprove the no plane theory,controlled demolition theory and the pentagon missile theory?

digme

doesn't really matter how it happened, as what the above shows is people knew it was going to happen,that's enough for me and forget the other sh!t,that's only there to distract you.

seannash

digme wrote: »

doesn't really matter how it happened, as what the above shows is people knew it was going to happen,that's enough for me and forget the other sh!t,that's only there to distract you.

cool,so do you believe that the planes did take down the towers as is documented in this paper.

im not asking for your benefit more for the people who believe it was a controlled explosion.

id also like if the people who do believe it was a controlled demolition to come on here and defend there stance.
this directly contradicts what they believe even if its a sinister motive behind the two of them.

digme

seannash wrote: »

cool,so do you believe that the planes did take down the towers as is documented in this paper.

don't care

seannash wrote: »

im not asking for your benefit more for the people who believe it was a controlled explosion.

seannash wrote: »

id also like if the people who do believe it was a controlled demolition to come on here and defend there stance.
this directly contradicts what they believe even if its a sinister motive behind the two of them.

Again I don't care.Plenty of threads discussing that in here already.
This article shows that they knew it was happening ,all the governments knew.

seannash

digme wrote: »

don't care




Again I don't care.Plenty of threads discussing that in here already.
This article shows that they knew it was happening ,all the governments knew.

Thats cool man.Im not trying to discredit the piece i just think that its weird that around a month ago you posted this

digme wrote: »

I most definitely believe in
9/11 was the work of the us government and if you think otherwise I would question your intelligence.

here the link just so you know i didnt misquote you.Im pretty sure youve said more about it being an inside job but i wont waste my time giving detailed answers when all i get is "i dont care" in response to my questions

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=67335724&highlight=digme#post67335724

meglome

digme wrote: »

doesn't really matter how it happened, as what the above shows is people knew it was going to happen,that's enough for me and forget the other sh!t,that's only there to distract you.

It really does matter.

seannash wrote: »

cool,so do you believe that the planes did take down the towers as is documented in this paper.

im not asking for your benefit more for the people who believe it was a controlled explosion.

id also like if the people who do believe it was a controlled demolition to come on here and defend there stance.
this directly contradicts what they believe even if its a sinister motive behind the two of them.

seannash this is why you and many others have asked what people actually think happened on 911. Because more often than not they tend to believe completely contradictory things. Which it appears to me is why they won't say what they believe.

seannash

meglome wrote: »

It really does matter.



seannash this is why you and many others have asked what people actually think happened on 911. Because more often than not they tend to believe completely contradictory things. Which it appears to me is why they won't say what they believe.

Ill admit i initially came on here fully in support of the conspiracies but as i read and dug a little i concluded for myself what happened.

ive readily admitted when i was wrong and where i was misinformed,theres no shame in it.

if digme initially thought the goverment was behind the attack and now after reviewing this document has changed his mind i dont see why he'd be embarassed to admit it instead of deflecting the questions

meglome

seannash wrote: »

Ill admit i initially came on here fully in support of the conspiracies but as i read and dug a little i concluded for myself what happened.

ive readily admitted when i was wrong and where i was misinformed,theres no shame in it.

if digme initially thought the goverment was behind the attack and now after reviewing this document has changed his mind i dont see why he'd be embarassed to admit it instead of deflecting the questions

I've said it in other threads, most of us leaned a lot about the events of 911 in this forum. I had hadn't much of an idea what happened when i started but I had noticed a lot of the CT talk could easily to shown to be false. So in a way I felt I was championing actual evidence based fact and countering all the people who claimed they wanted truth but obviously didn't. It didn't matter who was right or wrong only that they were actually basing their views on evidence and logic.

The guy who runs 911myths puts it well http://www.911myths.com/html/site_faq.html

Joshua Jones

meglome wrote: »

I've said it in other threads, most of us leaned a lot about the events of 911 in this forum. I had hadn't much of an idea what happened when i started but I had noticed a lot of the CT talk could easily to shown to be false. So in a way I felt I was championing actual evidence based fact and countering all the people who claimed they wanted truth but obviously didn't. It didn't matter who was right or wrong only that they were actually basing their views on evidence and logic.

The guy who runs 911myths puts it well http://www.911myths.com/html/site_faq.html

Could the attacks have been assisted in advance by people within the US? I’m neutral on this. There was plenty of information flying around, so we have two alternatives: a) they didn’t put the pieces together in time, or b) they knew but did nothing about it. I currently see insufficient evidence to form an opinion either way.

Is this conformation bias?.

Brown Bomber

seannash wrote: »

Ill admit i initially came on here fully in support of the conspiracies but as i read and dug a little i concluded for myself what happened.

ive readily admitted when i was wrong and where i was misinformed,theres no shame in it.

if digme initially thought the goverment was behind the attack and now after reviewing this document has changed his mind i dont see why he'd be embarassed to admit it instead of deflecting the questions

I can't speak for digme but I'm pretty sure it is not a case of deflecting questions more he doesn't want to get bogged down in a conversation about the melting point of steel or the wingspan of a 757 or something else tedious along those lines where the "debunkers" bore people into submission.

seannash

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I can't speak for digme but I'm pretty sure it is not a case of deflecting questions more he doesn't want to get bogged down in a conversation about the melting point of steel or the wingspan of a 757 or something else tedious along those lines where the "debunkers" bore people into submission.

Thats cool if he doesnt want to get bogged down in it.
Ive tried to be as diplomatic as i can and ask him to clarify his position on it because i remembered he had previously stated that he believed the US goverment plotted the attack.

He presents what could be a good document(i havent looked into it) showing that it was probably the terrorists and as he as posted it i presume he is in support of it.

im not asking him to get bogged down in pedantic questions im asking him what he believes happened because he is presenting 2 very different scenarios as the real story

I dont think asking clarification is alot to ask

Brown Bomber

seannash wrote: »

Thats cool if he doesnt want to get bogged down in it.
Ive tried to be as diplomatic as i can and ask him to clarify his position on it because i remembered he had previously stated that he believed the US goverment plotted the attack.

He presents what could be a good document(i havent looked into it) showing that it was probably the terrorists and as he as posted it i presume he is in support of it.

im not asking him to get bogged down in pedantic questions im asking him what he believes happened because he is presenting 2 very different scenarios as the real story

I dont think asking clarification is alot to ask

Yeah, I completely get where you are coming from and it's certainly not your fault, in fact you'd be the victim of it in this case, it's just the cumulative effect of posting here. I was just trying to explain.

seannash

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Yeah, I completely get where you are coming from and it's certainly not your fault, in fact you'd be the victim of it in this case, it's just the cumulative effect of posting here. I was just trying to explain.

I understand,like i said when i started out here i would have been in one camp and if i was brave enough to post back then im sure people would have been able to quote me as using conflicting stories.

As new eveidence is presented for both sides people ideas of the events can change and there no shame in saying "I was misinformed previously i now believe xyz"

digme

Sean 9/11 was the work of the us government,my position hasn't changed at all.Meglome you might want a discussion to go a certain way I don't,so to me, it doesn't matter how,the only thing relevant right now is who and why.
Sound Brown Bomber you got that right

meglome

Joshua Jones wrote: »

Is this conformation bias?.

You obviously have no idea what confirmation bias is. It should be the case the extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence but I don't expect that. I'll believe anyone who provides evidence and logic and a bonus will be a consistent story.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I can't speak for digme but I'm pretty sure it is not a case of deflecting questions more he doesn't want to get bogged down in a conversation about the melting point of steel or the wingspan of a 757 or something else tedious along those lines where the "debunkers" bore people into submission.

It appears to be entirely a case of deflecting questions. The devil should be in the details so why be afraid of the details. The details should always add up and give the whole but consistently they don't, they show the opposite to what the CT claims. I don't want to speak for seannash but he came in here with good reasons for believing that 911 was a big conspiracy. He spent time reading what was posted and realised that many offering 'truth' were in fact selectively providing information as long as it agreed with their position. Personally if I want people to agree with me I'll can go into whatever fanboy site for the stuff I'm interested in and we'll all have a big love in, I'd never dream of doing it though.

digme wrote: »

Sean 9/11 was the work of the us government,my position hasn't changed at all.Meglome you might want a discussion to go a certain way I don't,so to me, it doesn't matter how,the only thing relevant right now is who and why.
Sound Brown Bomber you got that right

I've tried to be very clear about this... I don't care what way it goes as long as the info is backed up with evidence. I find it difficult to understand why people who are so sure about their beliefs are reluctant to discuss them in a discussion forum for those things.

seannash

digme wrote: »

Sean 9/11 was the work of the us government,

Thats cool man,so can i ask how does a document which informs us that the US goverment was listening to the terrorists plan the attack mean that the goverment planned the attack?

How does this shift the blame to the goverment.
If this documentation is true then its a conspiracy to let it happen,not to plan it(which in itself is disturbing)

digme

Have you seen the film body of lies?
You can create anything you like and make it look like it was their idea.
The usa are constantly blown up themselves to further their empire.

bytey

seannash wrote: »

Thats cool man,so can i ask how does a document which informs us that the US goverment was listening to the terrorists plan the attack mean that the goverment planned the attack?

How does this shift the blame to the goverment.
If this documentation is true then its a conspiracy to let it happen,not to plan it(which in itself is disturbing)

if you, as a government organisation - stand back and let it happen, you are as guilty as the perpetrator
wallah- inside job

pablo_escobar

we were told iraq officials met with al qaeda in prague, told there were mobile WMD labs in iraq, told saddam was seeking yellow cake in niger to develop a nuke or so-called "dirty bomb" and much more government propaganda like it.

we were told so many lies..but by the time we realise, most people have forgotten all about it..or we'll laugh at the insanity of it all and believe we've done something about it.

look at the 1993 WTC bombing...the FBI had prior knowledge it would happen and did nothing to stop it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXOEO49yDe0