You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #29: RE Flatulo Why was UBL blabbing [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
rschop Donating Member (493 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. RE Flatulo Why was UBL blabbing
Edited on Sat May-10-08 03:11 PM by rschop
In this case he was providing inspiration to the new group of jihadists being trained at Tarnack Farms. By hinting at a huge attack inside of the US that would kill thousands he was demonstrating al Qaeda's claim to be the most maniacal and aggressive terrorist organization in the world.

The al Qaeda terrorists did not have a formal organizational chart or even a formal organization, but maintained their position as the most important terrorist organization in the world by hinting at future attacks and then actually carrying these attacks out.

Hinting at these attacks was always the al Qaeada way of doing business. UBL and al Qaeda in fact had issued the now famous Fatwa in February 23, 1998, a Fatwa published world wide, that clearly indicated that he intended and was determined to attack the US directly.

The CIA had come to the conclusion in 1998 that in fact this Fatwa had been a public declaration of war against the US, this information was given to President Clinton in 1999.

This declaration in fact had been written by Sheik Radmen, the blind cleric who had been in charge of the first bombing of the WTC Towers in 1993. In fact it turns out that Radmen was the spiritual leader of the al Qaeda terrorist organization.

If you knew the al Qaeada terrorist had declared war on the US in 1998, and that this was 10 years after they had started the al Qaeda terrorist organization, then it was inconceivable that you could not conclude that this meant that they were going to attack a huge target inside of the US, a target that had to be a huge symbolic target. The WTC Towers were just such a target, in fact the target that was clearly the most important target among all of the targets that could have been selected. When the USS Cole was attacked 9 months after an attempt was made to attack the USS The Sullivans at the exact same location, it was then completely obvious at that point to any one who could think at all that the al Qaead terrorist would go back after any target they have missed the first time, and therefore they were defiantly going back after the WCT Towers again.

Rick Rescorla the security chief for Morgan Stanley at the WTC Towers was so thoroughly convinced that the al Qaeda terrorists were going to return and attack the WTC Towers again but this time with hijacked aircraft that he held regular drills for all of the employees of MS so they would know what to do in the next attack.

The CIA claim that they did not know what the target or approximate dates of the attacks on 9/11 has no credibility especially when the information above is combined with all of the other information that the CIA had, especially the fact that they knew on June 12, 2001 that KSM was in charge of this operation, and knew the fact that the he had helped finance the first attack on the WTC Towers, and the fact that the basic plans for attacks on 9/11 were found on one of his associates computers, an associate who had taken part in the planning of the Bojinka plot.

The new book "Prior Knowledge of 9/11" has detailed on all of this information.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC