Fading Exclamations

By joe! tahmed.
You should be recruited by the Al-Qaeda guys- you have provided brilliant ideas regarding how to be a 9/11 denier.
Unfortunately, you are on the other side of the jehadis.

echo,
I got the reference to the certain `linear` interactor, which is why I responded as I did. Density, I repeat, varies with pressure (though inversely to how it does in the physical world)
ok, so I get what I am `laiq` now. But I never claimed to be a lover, just a student.

PM:193

191 & 192 are about your tete-a-tete with a certain linearly `humorous` interactor. Simplicity and decency do have some angle..if they spell dense, then so be it.

paraphrase:
Every tom dick and harry is now laying claim to be a lover
Now those famed for their finesse in this art are at peril.
Ghalib.

echo:
As I`ve learnt in my own life, salvation is ALWAYS open to ALL.
As for density, doesn`t that, as a rule, change with temperature and pressure?
Bhai sahib, you will have to excuse my digracefully low Urdu proficiency. The second line of the couplet sailed completely over my head. tarjama would be greatly appreciated.
I dont get why, or of what, I am deserving and Urstruly not.
rgds,
PM

PM:
Your sardonic bait seldom fails, but is the catch desirable? Please humour us not, or are you `raising` the bar on `dense`.

PM #187 How can you say I am avoiding the issue when I am in fact saying that it is impossible to respond to your brilliant questions?

Indeed, if you look carefully, in addition to spotting the McDonald`s restaurant on that moon picture, and in addition to you sitting inside that restaurant eating a hamburger with your Moon-Person date, you will also notice that the flag on the moon has the crescent and star on it. And that spaceguy holding the moon in fact is wearing a space-helmet that looks just like that bedsheet that arafat wears on his head. This proves that the first man on the moon was in fact an Arab, and that they have McDonald`s restaurants on the moon, and also it is very windy there.

I would have gone through life totally fooled by US claims to have landed a man on the moon, and on the real culprits behind 9/11, if I did not have you and urstruly - the two Chowk Sardars, if I may say so - asking brilliant questions on chowk??

Laeque PM / Naa-laeque Urstruly

Hr buul havas ney husn prastee sh`iaar kee
ubb abroo-e shaivaa-e, ehl-e nazar gayee!

---

PM Urstruly:
Sometimes it becomes an obligation to understand or explain complex matters in a simple manner.

PM: What Auden wrote was not satire or homily. He stated a fact. Simple, decent folk really help the earth humming and keep it tilted at an appropriate rakish angle. They disaprove of mind-statics. A static-mind, on the other hand, secures against risky thoughts.

---

The simplicity of US politics

Q: Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?
A: Because they had weapons of mass destruction.
Q: But the inspectors didn`t find any weapons of mass destruction.
A: That`s because the Iraqis were hiding them.
Q: And that`s why we invaded Iraq?
A: Yep. Invasions always work better than inspections.
Q: But after we invaded them, we STILL didn`t find any weapons of mass destruction, did we?
A: That`s because the weapons are so well hidden. Don`t worry, we`ll find something, probably right before the 2004 election.
Q: Why did Iraq want all those weapons of mass destruction?
A: To use them in a war, silly.
Q: I`m confused. If they had all those weapons that they planned to use in a war, then why didn`t they use any of those weapons when we went to war with them?
A: Well, obviously they didn`t want anyone to know they had those weapons, so they chose to die by the thousands rather than defend themselves.
Q: That doesn`t make sense. Why would they choose to die if they had all those big weapons with which they could have fought back?
A: It`s a different culture. It`s not supposed to make sense.
Q: I don`t know about you, but I don`t think they had any of those weapons our government said they did.
A: Well, you know, it doesn`t matter whether or not they had those weapons. We had another good reason to invade them anyway.
Q: And what was that?
A: Even if Iraq didn`t have weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, which is another good reason to invade another country.
Q: Why? What does a cruel dictator do that makes it OK to invade his country?
A: Well, for one thing, he tortured his own people.
Q: Kind of like what they do in China?
A: Don`t go comparing China to Iraq. China is a good economic competitor, where millions of people work for slave wages in sweatshops to make U.S. corporations richer.
Q: So if a country lets its people be exploited for American corporate gain, it`s a good country, even if that country tortures people?
A: Right.
Q: Why were people in Iraq being tortured?
A: For political crimes, mostly, like criticizing the government. People who criticized the government in Iraq were sent to prison and tortured.
Q: Isn`t that exactly what happens in China?
A: I told you, China is different.
Q: What`s the difference between China and Iraq?
A: Well, for one thing, Iraq was ruled by the Ba`ath party, while China is Communist.
Q: Didn`t you once tell me Communists were bad?
A: No, just Cuban Communists are bad.
Q: How are the Cuban Communists bad?
A: Well, for one thing, people who criticize the government in Cuba are sent to prison and tortured.
Q: Like in Iraq?
A: Exactly.
Q: And like in China, too?
A: I told you, China`s a good economic competitor. Cuba, on the other hand, is not.
Q: How come Cuba isn`t a good economic competitor?
A: Well, you see, back in the early 1960s, our government passed some laws that made it illegal for Americans to trade or do any business with Cuba until they stopped being Communists and started being capitalists like us.
Q: But if we got rid of those laws, opened up trade with Cuba, and started doing business with them, wouldn`t that help the Cubans become capitalists?
A: Don`t be a smartass.
Q: I didn`t think I was being one.
A: Well, anyway, they also don`t have freedom of religion in Cuba.
Q: Kind of like China and the Falun Gong movement?
A: I told you, stop saying bad things about China. Anyway, Saddam Hussein came to power through a military coup, so he`s not really a legitimate leader anyway.
Q: What`s a military coup?
A: That`s when a military general takes over the government of a country by force, instead of holding free elections like we do in the United States.
Q: Didn`t the ruler of Pakistan come to power by a military coup?
A: You mean General Pervez Musharraf? Uh, yeah, he did, but Pakistan is our friend.
Q: Why is Pakistan our friend if their leader is illegitimate?
A: I never said Pervez Musharraf was illegitimate.
Q: Didn`t you just say a military general who comes to power by forcibly overthrowing the legitimate government of a nation is an illegitimate leader?
A: Only Saddam Hussein. Pervez Musharraf is our friend, because he helped us invade Afghanistan.
Q: Why did we invade Afghanistan?
A: Because of what they did to us on September 11th.
Q: What did Afghanistan do to us on September 11th?
A: Well, on September 11th, nineteen men - fifteen of them Saudi Arabians - hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them into buildings in New York and Washington, killing 3,000 innocent people.
Q: So how did Afghanistan figure into all that?
A: Afghanistan was where those bad men trained, under the oppressive rule of the Taliban.
Q: Aren`t the Taliban those bad radical Islamics who chopped off people`s heads and hands?
A: Yes, that`s exactly who they were. Not only did they chop off people`s heads and hands, but they oppressed women, too.
Q: Didn`t the Bush administration give the Taliban 43 million dollars back in May of 2001?
A: Yes, but that money was a reward because they did such a good job fighting drugs.
Q: Fighting drugs?
A: Yes, the Taliban were very helpful in stopping people from growing opium poppies.
Q: How did they do such a good job?
A: Simple. If people were caught growing opium poppies, the Taliban would have their hands and heads cut off.
Q: So, when the Taliban cut off people`s heads and hands for growing flowers, that was OK, but not if they cut people`s heads and hands off for other reasons?
A: Yes. It`s OK with us if radical Islamic fundamentalists cut off people`s hands for growing flowers, but it`s cruel if they cut off people`s hands for stealing bread.
Q: Don`t they also cut off people`s hands and heads in Saudi Arabia?
A: That`s different. Afghanistan was ruled by a tyrannical patriarchy that oppressed women and forced them to wear burqas whenever they were in public, with death by stoning as the penalty for women who did not comply.
Q: Don`t Saudi women have to wear burqas in public, too?
A: No, Saudi women merely wear a traditional Islamic body covering.
Q: What`s the difference?
A: The traditional Islamic covering worn by Saudi women is a modest yet fashionable garment that covers all of a woman`s body except for her eyes and fingers. The burqa, on the other hand, is an evil tool of patriarchal oppression that covers all of a woman`s body except for her eyes and fingers.
Q: It sounds like the same thing with a different name.
A: Now, don`t go comparing Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are our friends.
Q: But I thought you said 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were from Saudi Arabia.
A: Yes, but they trained in Afghanistan.
Q: Who trained them?
A: A very bad man named Osama bin Laden.
Q: Was he from Afghanistan?
A: Uh, no, he was from Saudi Arabia too. But he was a bad man, a very bad man.
Q: I seem to recall he was our friend once.
A: Only when we helped him and the mujahadeen repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan back in the 1980s.
Q: Who are the Soviets? Was that the Evil Communist Empire Ronald Reagan talked about?
A: There are no more Soviets. The Soviet Union broke up in 1990 or thereabouts, and now they have elections and capitalism like us. We call them Russians now.
Q: So the Soviets - I mean, the Russians - are now our friends?
A: Well, not really. You see, they were our friends for many years after they stopped being Soviets, but then they decided not to support our invasion of Iraq, so we`re mad at them now. We`re also mad at the French and the Germans because they didn`t help us invade Iraq either.
Q: So the French and Germans are evil, too?
A: Not exactly evil, but just bad enough that we had to rename French fries and French toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast.
Q: Do we always rename foods whenever another country doesn`t do what we want them to do?
A: No, we just do that to our friends. Our enemies, we invade.
Q: But wasn`t Iraq one of our friends back in the 1980s?
A: Well, yeah. For a while.
Q: Was Saddam Hussein ruler of Iraq back then?
A: Yes, but at the time he was fighting against Iran, which made him our friend, temporarily.
Q: Why did that make him our friend?
A: Because at that time, Iran was our enemy.
Q: Isn`t that when he gassed the Kurds?
A: Yeah, but since he was fighting against Iran at the time, we looked the other way, to show him we were his friend.
Q: So anyone who fights against one of our enemies automatically becomes our friend?
A: Most of the time, yes.
Q: And anyone who fights against one of our friends is automatically an enemy?
A: Sometimes that`s true, too. However, if American corporations can profit by selling weapons to both sides at the same time, all the better.
Q: Why?
A: Because war is good for the economy, which means war is good for America. Also, since God is on America`s side, anyone who opposes war is a godless unAmerican Communist. Do you understand now why we attacked Iraq?
Q: I think so. We attacked them because God wanted us to, right?
A: Yes.
Q: But how did we know God wanted us to attack Iraq?
A: Well, you see, God personally speaks to George W. Bush and tells him what to do.
Q: So basically, what you`re saying is that we attacked Iraq because George W. Bush hears voices in his head?
A: Yes! You finally understand how the world works. Now close your eyes, make yourself comfortable, and go to sleep. Good night.
Q: Good night, Daddy.

Re: the moon-landing fakes

You can check out one of the faked moon landing stories at http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/moontruth.asp
but be warned though, turns out the faked landing ``evidence`` was itself faked!

I`ve heard of the ``fluttering flag`` hoax before and recall it being comprehensively debunked but unfortunately can`t give you the citation for it.

Tahmed,
I said your humour was improving, but you didn`t havta get carried away, man! I mean, there are only so many corny jokes you can crack before it becomes clear you`re only avoiding the issue.
But don`t bother... with (non)interators like you, who needs RSaxena!

PM #183 You are being too modest when you say you are merely asking questions. Of course urstruly is right: how come the flag on the moon is fluttering when there is no wind on the moon? actually, if you look carefully, you will see what looks like a McDonald`s fast food restaurant on the horizon, and if you use a microscope on that picture you will also notice a chap with PM written on his forehead eating a hamburger.

As for 9/11, OF COURSE your questions are so brilliant that one is left answerless (``speechless`` is too mild a word). No one can respond to your brilliant questions, thus proving that it was all a jewish conspiracy. Indeed, if you use a micrscope on that picture of the plane flying into the WTC, you will notice mohammed ata arguing with a guy wearing a yarmulka, trying to convince him that he should not be flying planes loaded with people into office buildings. If it wasnt for such brilliant questions raised by you and urstruly (and echobooom too), we would all be still thinking that the Arabs did it.

As I said, who needs sardar jokes on chowk, given that we have you.

Re. sigalph #178. and ‘Namecalling’. I was speaking with reference to your comment in #163 that the “Article reminds me of the fact that there are still people who believe that the moon landing never took place.” That wouldn’t happen to amount to terming the writer and other protagonists well, loony, now would it. :) But it’s not exactly name calling, and to that extent, please accept apologies.

Let’s just say I thought you might dismiss questions such as those posed here out of hand mainly because they don’t fit into your scheme of reality and don’t sync with accepted, or more correctly, official ‘knowledge.” Your explanation (“The reason I do not argue with the 9/11 deniers or lunar-landing deniers is the same that I refuse to get into arguments with Holocaust-deniers”) does little but confirm my earlier characterization of your quite curious (or curiously unscientific) method of dismissing contentious issues by simple, though wholly unwarranted, association with established canards. AS if we didn’t ‘get’ your methodology, you continued: “I mean there are still people around who believe that the Pearl Harbor attack was staged by the US and that the Poles attacked Germany to trigger WWII. All the power to them.” Quite compelling, but some of us would just like to discuss the issue at hand, and get answers to the questions being ask.

re. “You cannot argue with faith. Sometimes these beliefs are the only ones such individuals have to wrap their cherished but precarious world-view with. Why should any sane individual give grief to such sorry souls?”

I am in complete agreement with you here! Indeed, you cannot argue with faith. Please remember that it is faith (at least in the sense I think you use the word) that is inimical to questioning and reasoning. Knowledge, on the other hand (without getting into dense epistemology) is only gained through testing hypotheses, which includes refuting allegations and satisfying all criteria as might exist.
Otherwise, sir, I submit that what one claims as ‘knowledge’ is just so much of faith-based stuff bolstered mainly by public opinion.

And it is just plain silly to assume that when one rejects or questions one proposition, he is doing the same to some unrelated others that you imagine he does. Tahmed sahib, are you listening?

Of course it is entirely your prerogative to respond as you may—even to ape apes, if you get my drift—as it is others’ theirs to judge your responses.
rgds,
PM

Tahmed sahib: Your humour is improving, but if you should land yourself a job as a stand-up, don’t give up the day job just yet, ok? And don’t let your misses know about the slightly derogative way you speak of PMS, ok bhai?
rgds,
PM

Urstruly: I remember reading about the ‘flag fluttering’ anomaly elsewhere some time ago; wasn’t basing it on footage from the website your cited. But yes, with one-sixth the earth’s gravitational pull, the stiffness of the flag is still ‘interesting’ to say the least. But, unless the photos on the site have been doctored, I think they provide more than enough incontrovertible proof of the fakeness of the footage.
Let’s sit back now and watch others here extrapolate this to mean that we are saying that this is proof that there has never been a lunar landing. Oh, and also that the Holocaust never happened, and that 4,000 Jews stayed away from work on Sept.11 2001
rgds,
PM

Oh, Tahmed, forgot this...
You wrote: ``The explanations you and urstruly provide...``
Actually, we`re not providing any explanations at all; simply questioning some that you and others seem to have gone for hook line and sinker. Maybe if you didn`t waste so much energy try to distance yourself from anythign that could possibly be misconstrued as an obscurantist leaning, you might actually be able to recognize this simple fact.

In previous post, i meant to write ``Maybe if you didn`t waste so much energy trying to...``
say it, Sux: ``who cares!``

sigalph: Whatever do you mean by `911 deniers` anyway?? care to elaborate jsut a little?

PM: You, being the knowledgeable chap that you are, would also be aware that the pyramids were built by visitors from the star known to scientists as 12NOON from a galaxy known as the SardarGalaxy. These visitors brought along their own architect, about whom little is known to archaeologists other than his name (Sardar-Urs-truly) who is shown in one carving inside the Giza pyramid standing holding a waving flag (scientists believe that the americans got the idea of having a man wave this flag from Sardar-Urs-Truly). With him stands a mysterious figure, who has the words PM carved on his forhead in the carving. Entire PhD theses have been written about the deep meaning of the words PM (Prime Minister? Post Master?? PostMenstrual??)

The explanations you and urstruly provide (along with the strange coincidence of a certain similarity between your names and those of these space aliens) lead me to think that perhaps there is some connection between the two...now what was that theory about 9/11 you (or was it echooboom) was providing again? that it wasnt Arabs but Space Aliens??

re PM 175

I do not engage in name calling(but am beginning to agree with the welcome that RSax had for you). Go find one example where I have used an epithet against someone else. Now, if my message itself sounds insensitive, that`s not name calling.

The reason I do not argue with the 9/11 deniers or lunar-landing deniers is the same that I refuse to get into arguments with Holocaust-deniers for. You cannot argue against faith. I mean there are still people around who believe that the Pearl Harbor attack was staged by the US and that the Poles attacked Germany to trigger WWII. All the power to them. Sometimes these beliefs are the only ones such individuals have to wrap their cherished but precarious world-view with. Why should any sane individual give grief to such sorry souls?

PM

The flag is not fluttering; it is an ordinary flag (had to be light weight because it used to cost about 1 million dollars to send something weighing one pound in the orbit) and as one of the footage relaesed by nasa shows, an astronaut who planted the flag stretched it open and it stays open because there is very little gravity and no wind. So it stays stretched.

Having said that, the question arises is to how long it will remain stretched because there still is gravity on the moon (as a matter of fact t is only six times lesser than that of earth) so the flag must come down after some time.

I think the best explanation of these pictures is that some of the earlier lunar missions failed so they produced these images in the studio setting. Later, either they succeeded to land or their photographic techniques only got better.

HE:
Agree with your post al qaeda circa bef. 9/11 with a small addition. Ayman Al-Zawahiri was well known to Egyptians as a leader of the militant Al Jihad. In fact, he was in a Cairo prison for a long tim.

RSax,
You`re back! Good. Your mom must be better.

Urstruly:
re. Fake Lunar Landing , I guess that`s another layer of soap sigalph will have to rub off his face. Of course, he might jsut choose again ignore all evidence and discredit opponents with namecalling.
The site doesn`t mention another anomoly though.. that of the flag fluttering (gently) in a windless environment.

I think the only possible pragmatic leadership during the current crises, has to come from Europe. The Europeans seem to have the world figured out much better than the Americans and the Arabs. The later two groups are bent upon believing one conspiracy theory, after another. Many Arabs thinks Jews bombed the WTC. And 70% of Americans surveyed actually believe that Al-Qaeda had links with Iraq. Not realizing that in the First Gulf War, Afghanistan actually sent soldiers against Iraq as part of the coalition. And that Saddam and Al-Qaeda hate each other. And that there is about as much proof of Al-Qaeda being associated with Iraq as their is of the Jews bombing the WTC.

When you have populations which are so naively influenced, on world affairs, then people like OBL and Wolfowitz can get whatever they want done.

Iraq, a country, that had nothing to do with terrorism (at least outside its borders), and a country that was supported by the West when it was committing terrorism inside its border, is now turning into a hub of terrorism. If anyone is an Al-Qaeda terrorist, Iraq is the place to be. This is exactly what happened to Afghanistan, when it was invaded.

Other countries are once again, being given the with us or against us ultimatums on Iraq. These countries, like Pakistan, can only handle so many of such ultimatums. They are being given ultimatums by Al-Qaedas on one side, and USA on the other side. It`s a damned if you do, damned if you don`t situation, for them. This will polarize the society.

Al-Qaeda was always hated. But now the USA is probably one of the most disliked, if not the most disliked nation in the world. How did this happen, to a country, which at one time was so highly respected? Yet the supporters of these two groups/nation see nothing wrong in their actions. The Bush supporters still support pre-emptive invasions as will the Al-Qaeda supporters.

A world order based on pre-emptive invasions will not be a very safe place.

In the meanwhile, the main problem, that is the mother of all these problems, i.e Israel/Palestine issue is getting bigger and bigger. Primarily, becuase the Europeans aren`t being allowed to take the leading role. Everything proposed by them, gets vetoed in the UN.

The only sane voice seems to be the Europeans. They know when to support the USA and when not to. They have a lot of clout and get listened to, unlike third world nations. And they have enough influence of Muslims and Jews etc., to not get completely pulled in one direction. And they are not the prime target of the Al-Qaedas of the world.

FAKED MOON LANDING

Why one has to ``beleive`` that moon landing actually happened. Why this matter is not transparent as any matter in science. So either moon landing happened or it didn`t. The forensic evidence based on the photographs provided by nasa itself is of very dubious nature. Could someone please explain the namoly in this pictorial evidence to me:

https://aulis.com/nasa6.htm

[#161 by sigalph235]
[Article reminds me of the fact that there are still people who believe that the moon landing never took place. Some people will always blame every ill on Jews, Zionists, neo-cons, Bush, etc etc. Oh, well. ]

---

Even if the moon landing really did take place, please do understand that practising and pious muslims do not put the blame on Jews, Zionists, neo-cons,Bush, etc etc.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

The puranas of the hindus have explicity and unabashedly mentioned about the moon being the integral part of India. Utoot ung . Their Vimmans ran regular flights then. Are you trying to convince the world that the puranas are wrong? Just to remind you, let todays journals become puranaas, 10/15 thousand years hence, and your nth great-grand siglaph235 would still be ridiculing these puranas-in-waiting.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

There is more to life than logic. Now that is an illogical thought. or is it?
Only questions. only questions. sigalph235.

163:faisaluno

Twin Towers: 9/11 2001 , 8.50am

``Daikh thO, dil kay jaaN sey uthhtaa hai
Yeh dhuaaN saa, kahaaN sey uthhtaa hay``

The stress, in this discussion, is on , `Daikh thO`.

One cannot be, under the circumstance, more succinct or less secure.

re. faisaluno: #163
faisal, I agree with the general tenor of your post: Not completely with these points though:
`` most muslim societies are in need of serious reforms. this is a good a catalyst as any. inconvenient facts should be ignored because it will make the task much harder.
Am not sure what you mean by ``this``. If you are referring to shock and awe tactics used to root the `terrorists` out of their caves, I don`t see how this can have any postiive effect on the Muslim world. And I wonder if the reforms needed in the Islamic world can be effected, or the main issues even addressed, divorced of the issue of American meddling in their internal affairs-- be it Iran, Afghanistan, Egypt, S. Arabia or Pakistan. The US has a record of undermining the democratic process in all these countries, and their (the US`s) militirization of their populace is also well known. Though one does not discount the wholly intrinsic factors responsible for the ugly state of affairs within those nations, one wonders whether these factors would have proved strong enough for the flourishing of ``terrorism`` were it not for the extrinsic ones.
(I parenthesize te word terrorism because it seems that a willingness to kill tens of thousands of civilians and generally bomb the daylights and civil infrastructure out of a city in order to establish startegic (read economic and military) control over a region still does not come under that rubric.)

``- muslims already have a fancy for conspiracy theories and an us against them mentality...``
This mentality is descriptive of any people in a pereived state of war. At other times it is not strong enough to seriously threaten others, and IMO easily amenable to reasoned/friendly suggestion.

``- americans are fighting forces whose actual battle is against muslims on this site. so we should all be willing the americans to succeed in this battle. this however should not stop us from questioning their tactics.``
Even if we accept the premise (Americans fighting forces opposed to `good` Muslims) one must question not only the tactics, but the logic of fighting monsters one has helped create, in a manner as to surely create even more. It wouldn`t be out of place to question the morality, either, of such combat when viewed against the backdrop of knowledge such as the PNAC`s broad objectives.

``- we are never going to find the full truth in terms of how much israelis knew and how much they told the americans. so not much point in wasting time debating this.``
I didn`t know Israeli `invovlvement` was an issue on this board. (I`ve not read the posts betwee #50 and #100). But certainly, it is not unprofitable to dig for answers or even merely ask the questions such as have been asked in #153.
rgds,
PM

....PM is back PMS-ing, as usual..

Request for Clarification from any of the distinguished posters on this board: A standard ``rationale`` provided by the ToD911s (Those in Denial about 911) in effect is that the Arabs are too stupid to be able to aim a plane so it hits the side of a building. Is this (a) An ``explanation`` of their denial, or (b) meant to portray the Arabs as some kind of ``muslim sikhs`` (no offense intended to the sikhs, incidentally) whose stupidity would serve as a rich source of jokes?

Just curious. I would be particularly interested if some chowkie ToD911 would provide further insights into this puzzlement.

re. 161: ``Article reminds me of the fact that there are still people who believe that the moon landing never took place. Some people will always blame every ill on Jews, Zionists, neo-cons, Bush, etc etc. Oh, well.``
Seeking to discredit a position by drawing unrelated `parallels` with well-known canards is an illogical, if easy, approach.
Why don`t you be a good (social) scientist and simply refute the allegations with reason instead? After all, the questions are being asked by many blue-and-red blooded Americans too. You up to it?
P.S. The `not-worthy-of-dignifying` refrain is equally evasive, if convenient.

re. #162:``I guess we need to send a Kemal PAsha to straighten those commie-lib Swedes.``
sshhh, bhaiya! Don`t burden echo with the expsure of such inconvenient contradictions. Heaven forbid-- he might actually be tempted to update his roadmap viz them stinky liberal commie sociopaths..er, I mean socialists.
rgds,
PM

re. faisaluno: #163
faisal, I agree with the general tenor of your post: Not completely with these points though:
`` most muslim societies are in need of serious reforms. this is a good a catalyst as any. inconvenient facts should be ignored because it will make the task much harder.
Am not sure what you mean by ``this``. If you are referring to shock and awe tactics used to root the `terrorists` out of their caves, I don`t see how this can have any postiive effect on the Muslim world. And I wonder if the reforms needed in the Islamic world can be effected, or the main issues even addressed, divorced of the issue of American meddling in their internal affairs-- be it Iran, Afghanistan, Egypt, S. Arabia or Pakistan. The US has a record of undermining the democratic process in all these countries, and their (the US`s) militirization of their populace is also well known. Though one does not discount the wholly intrinsic factors responsible for the ugly state of affairs within those nations, one wonders whether these factors would have proved strong enough for the flourishing of ``terrorism`` were it not for the extrinsic ones.
(I parenthesize te word terrorism because it seems that a willingness to kill tens of thousands of civilians and generally bomb the daylights and civil infrastructure out of a city in order to establish startegic (read economic and military) control over a region still does not come under that rubric.)

``- muslims already have a fancy for conspiracy theories and an us against them mentality...``
This mentality is descriptive of any people in a pereived state of war. At other times it is not strong enough to seriously threaten others, and IMO easily amenable to reasoned/friendly suggestion.

``- americans are fighting forces whose actual battle is against muslims on this site. so we should all be willing the americans to succeed in this battle. this however should not stop us from questioning their tactics.``
Even if we accept the premise (Americans fighting forces opposed to `good` Muslims) one must question not only the tactics, but the logic of fighting monsters one has helped create, in a manner as to surely create even more. It wouldn`t be out of place to question the morality, either, of such combat when viewed against the backdrop of knowledge such as the PNAC`s broad objectives.

``- we are never going to find the full truth in terms of how much israelis knew and how much they told the americans. so not much point in wasting time debating this.``
I didn`t know Israeli `invovlvement` was an issue on this board. (I`ve not read the posts betwee #50 and #100). But certainly, it is not unprofitable to dig for answers or even merely ask the questions such as have been asked in #153.
rgds,
PM

hamidm #110 [``... i go back to pakistan ... i have seen a steady regression over the past two years....... the majority is lunatic and the sane live precariously on the fringe .....``]

This is so very, very frighteningly TRUE. Exactly what I observed and felt this past January. It is a chilling nightmare to realize that the ``culprit of Kargil,`` General Mush in-fact represents a relatively moderate and modern face of the ruling class. Imagine the horror if instead of him Aslam Beg was there, or worse yet, Zina-ul-Haq. And the horror is that these two were not the extreme examples. Even some English-speaking, suit and tie wearing, whiskey drinking, glob trotting executives utter such unbeleivable cross-eyed twisted illogical rubbish that makes the Ayatullah`s sound like secular humanists.

During my month long stay I spoke to dozens, if not hundreds, of people everywhere to get an anecdotal pulse of the public sentiment and the more I saw the bleaker the future seemed to me. Denial, delusion, self-righteousness, self-congratulation, paranoia and cynicism were the predominent themes I saw everywhere. Only a very small minority of clear headed but extremely beseiged and gaged group of people would open up and whisper their starkly sobering opinions and dire prognostications once they felt comfortable and safe.

The picture that emerged was that the genie is out of the bottle and whatever is done now is too little too late and that its just a matter of time before the ``moderates`` are routed out and the extreme element gains control of all aspects of life. I met only two highly placed individulas who saw things as they really were but had learnt to play the game and survive. All others were really into the collective madness with gusto. The only island of common sense and good judgement that I found was among the ladies of the street. Their common sense, practical approach, compassion, tolerence, flexibility, humor, humanity and generocity was the one glimmer of hope I found anywhere from Is-slime-a-bad to La-whore.

...SR

ahmadzai sahib, temporal, tahmed sahib, echo (especially), pm and anyone else who is interested:

there is no doubt in my mind that israelis knew something was cooking way before sep 11. even fox news and abc, stations that are not exactly hotbed of anti-zionist propaganda reported this much. and i actually pasted links to these reports in a post last jan.

http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00001614&channel=civic%20center&start=10&end=19&page=2&chapter=1#replies

to quote from that post, here is what fox news reporter carl cameron had to say about this on a program hosted by brit hume, one of the most prominent rightwing pro-zionist american t.v. news personalities:

“There is no indication that the Israelis were involved in the 9-11 attacks, but investigators suspect that they Israelis may have gathered intelligence about the attacks in advance, and not shared it. A highly placed investigator said there are ``tie-ins.`` But when asked for details, he flatly refused to describe them, saying, ``evidence linking these Israelis to 9-11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It`s classified information.``

“A bigger question, they say, is how could they not have know? Almost a direct quote.”

but having made this point, i say these stories are irrelevant for the following reasons:

- these reports dont absolve arabs for the attack. they only indicate that israelis knew something was up. and osama has openly claimed credit for the attack especially in a video where he is visited by a cleric from saudi arabia.

- muslims already have a fancy for conspiracy theories and an us against them mentality. giving prominence to these stories is going to drive them further out of the mainstream.

- most muslim societies are in need of serious reforms. this is a good a catalyst as any. inconvenient facts should be ignored because it will make the task much harder.

- americans are fighting forces whose actual battle is against muslims on this site. so we should all be willing the americans to succeed in this battle. this however should not stop us from questioning their tactics.

- we are never going to find the full truth in terms of how much israelis knew and how much they told the americans. so not much point in wasting time debating this.

what we should not ignore however is the fact that these stories were not given the play they desrved by american media. this in turn should lead us to question their credibility on other important issues especially on issues relating to islamic countries like s.arabia, iran and pak. (ahmadzai has been making this point). this raises questions of muslims who accept the word of american govt as gospel truth.

re echoboom 155

I guess we need to send a Kemal PAsha to straighten those commie-lib Swedes. BTW, how on earth do you have any `ID` if the person being photographed doesn`t have her face on the ID? If what you say is indeed correct, then I guess the EU and the different states of the US will have to treat Swedish passports and drivers licenses as less-than-par evidences of identity.

Article reminds me of the fact that there are still people who believe that the moon landing never took place. Some people will always blame every ill on Jews, Zionists, neo-cons, Bush, etc etc. Oh, well.

Nothing useful to add to this discussion but I do want to share this URL. Unfortunately, I am too dumb to figure out how to embed hot links in the body of these messages (an ``<`` followed by a href=``URL``> does not work), you`ll have to COPY and PASTE this URL...

http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/

It has some really funny political stuff.

...SR

vereesh: ``Just curious, how many Pakistanis knew about the existence of Osama bin Laden prior to 11th September? I mean, as a force? Are there any articles about him in the Pakistani and/or Afghan media that one can be directed to?``

OBL was probably well-known to the people who ran the war against the USSR through Pakistan. This would include the Army high command in Pakistan and the CIA. He was in fact an ally, until he was dumped of both the USA, after the USSR left, and then subsequently by Pakistan, after Sep 11.

This is what happens when countries create one problem to solve another. I have a feeling that the same thing may happen in Afghanistan again, since the USA has used the Northern Alliance to topple the Taliban. The NA is as evil as the Taliban, if not more. They just don`t have beards and they listen to music, hence the liberal side thinks they are good guys. The RAWA ladies describe them as equally evil.

This is what would have happened in Iraq also, had the USA not been taken on by the rest of the world`s peace marches before the invasion. Saddam would have been replaced by pro-US Iraqi congress led by Mr. Chalabi. And one dictatorship would have been replaced by another.

I personally don`t think OBL is as big a figure as everyone is making him out to be. He is more of a figurehead. Kind of like the guy who does the advertisements for a company. And there was no Al-Qaeda - at least not one that I ever heard of, before it started appearing in the US newspapers. It just popped up from nowhere. According to Eric Margolis, a guy who actually fought in Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda were just the bodyguards of OBL.

OBL is a terrorist. But a small time one. I cannot see how anyone could orchestrate a super-sophisticated operation like the WTC attacks from isolated Afgahnistan`s hills. I don`t even think he has access to electricity in those hills. One cannot even send an email from to Afghanistan. Much less execute something so large. All his satellite phones etc. were being monitored by the Americans, since they make the phone. There is no way they could miss out something like that. He would have had to make hundreds of phone calls etc. to carry out something like that. And while the CIA`s human intelligence is incompotent, they are not that incompotent.

This is also why the Americans refused to provide evidence against OBL, even when the Taliban stated they would hand him over, if evidence was provided. The reason given was that providing evidence would risk a CIA source. What CIA source is that important? And if this CIA source was so good, then why in the world did it not inform the Americans about the planned attack to begin with.

I am sure OBL and Co. were happy the attacks occured. But the actually source and planning happened somewhere else. What kind of a terrorist would deliberately advertise himself? Only a small time one.

The real source, my guess is, lies in Saudi Arabia. Just my guess. I have a feeling they are a group of super sophisticated well-funded individuals who have nothing religious about them. Much like the individuals who flew the airplanes. These hijackers had very little in common with OBL. These individuals are probably businessman, with a very good understanding of the international systems of finance, aviation, govt. etc. Only someone like that could have carried out something so sophisticated.

And I think those folks trained the pilots somewhere in the Middle East. There is no way anyone with only 200 flying hours (and that too on small Cessnas) could have flown the airplane into the WTC and Pentagon (specially the Pentagon). I confirmed that with our local on-site airline captain Mr. NHK. And I know enough about flying to know this as well, since I have more experience than 200 hrs. on a Cessna. And I doubt anyone could keep an Boeing straight and level, in perfect conditions, with an instructor sitting next to him. Much less fly it in unknown airspace, with no radio, during a hijack, with no ground support and radar and hit a building. And the guy who hit the Pentagon must have been a very experienced pilot. Flying that low over a city, and hitting a flat buildling, without ground instruments, in an areas where one has never flown before, takes a lot of experience. Not something one learns in a Cessna, and with only five hours of simulator time in a Boeing. The guy who hit the Pentagon must have been an experienced airline pilot. At least that is what my airline friends have told me.

This is not to say that believe in the, ``Israelis did it`` theory. But a lot of info is missing. Even Gore Vidal agrees.

Including any communication and black box info. NHK could inform us furthur. I dont know how much of that could have survived. But if it did, then why isn`t it being released, when all the other information has been put out in detail, by the govt. For some reason, the US govt. never releases full info on things like this. No evidence of Iraqi WMDs would be released (since there wasn`t any). No evidence of OBL`s involvement in this (since there probably wasn`t any, though a tape with him celebrating it was released after the fact). No evidence from the WTC flights was released (since it probably pointed to some different things, with involvements from maybe Saudi Arabia).

I think the whole world is being turned upside down, for no reason. When the real guys are probably sitting quitely in a Saudi boardroom, having a laugh. Even if Al-Qaeda is busted, it won`t do much, since real terrorist organiztions would never come out in the open this much.

The US would not be in its current mess, had it done the following:

1. Provided the evidence against OBL to the Taliban and gotten OBL in return. Tried him and then punished him, under international law. Now, they are still looking for him.

2. Put pressure on Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to stop supporting Taliban. And itself stopped supporting Taliban and replaced them with a neutral non-Taliban and non-NA internationally controlled force, through UN, like East Timor etc.

3. Not invaded Iraq. Lifted the sanctions. Put massive international pressure on Saddam (not by starving his population, but by starving him). And supported anti-Saddam forces, from the outside. Once these forces were strong enough, then topple Saddam through them, internally. And recognized them as the govt.

4. Gone after the Saudis, and initiated a full change of power there, even if it resulted in an anti-US democracy.

The US, of course, did exactly the opposite. And is now stuck, big time. Probably both, but at least one out of Iraq and Afghanistan, is going to blow up. And we will be back to square one.

I think the USA is one big car bomb away from catastrophe in Iraq. If the US troops are targeted like the UN was, in Iraq, I think the US population is going to start putting pressure on Bush to call them back. And then Iraq will have a vaccum similar to the one faced by Afghanistan after the Soviet invasion.

#157 by veeresh

++
Just curious, how many Pakistanis knew about the existence of Osama bin Laden prior to 11th September? I mean, as a force? Are there any articles about him in the Pakistani and/or Afghan media that one can be directed to?
++

Osama Bin Laden was certainly famous in Pakistan before 9/11 because in 1998 the Americans fired tomahawk cruise missiles at OBL`s camps in Khost. Simultaneously, the Americans fired missiles at two chemical-bomb factories in Sudan (these turned out to be hosptials).

The missiles were fired from an American warship in the Indian ocean and flew through Pakistan`s airspace before hitting Khost in Afghanistan. One of the missiles failed in flight and fell inside Baluchistan (in the desert; no casualties). The Nawaz Sharif govt lodged a protest with the Americans for violating Pakistani airspace without seeking permission first. The Americans told Nawaz that they wanted element of surprise and so didn`t want news of the attack to leak.

Before 1998, OBL became famous for the 1996 attack on U.S. embasses in Kenya and Morrocco (I think).

However, few people had heard his voice or seen his face before 9/11. Almost nobody knew of Al-Qaeda. Certainly nobody had heard of his philosophy and the other folks in his organization (Ayman Al-Zawahiri, etc).

You might want to check out the archives of www.jang-group.com especially for August 1998. That`s when the Americans fired missiles at Khost.

Just curious, how many Pakistanis knew about the existence of Osama bin Laden prior to 11th September? I mean, as a force? Are there any articles about him in the Pakistani and/or Afghan media that one can be directed to?

#153

report is interesting material though I noticed that author is contradicting himself in item 5 and 8...clearly to reach the conclusions he wants to. In item 5 he is saying why Govt does not look into the alledgations about arms carried in by the hijackers based on phone conversations of passengers. In the item 8, he want to discredit the crash theory based on phone calls made by passengers from the Pennsylvania plane. Why trust one calls and discredit the others?

Another great news item to make the collective chaddis of kuffar, mushrikeen, munaafiques, murtids, and munkareens go chaar-jalai.

---

First Veiled Muslim Woman In Swedish TV

The TV announcer

By Yehia Abu Zakariya, IOL Stockholm Correspondent

STOKHOLM, September 1 (IslamOnline.net) - In an unprecedented incident, a
Muslim veiled woman has managed to work as a TV announcer in Sweden and
appear in her Islamic apparel before millions of audiences, talking to them
about different programs, without fearing discrimination or harassment.

This followed the official Swedish TV decision that has been taken lately
to the effect that Sweden respects cultures and religions and that religious
freedom is guaranteed to all under the Swedish law.

With this move, the Swedish TV becomes the first western media organization
that allows a Muslim veiled woman to be an announcer dealing with Christian
audience and talking to them in their language and may tackle subjects
related to their lives.

It is worth noting that the official Swedish TV is far more conservative
than other some Arab media organizations, as porno movies are forbidden and
publicity for different kinds of alcohol is prohibited. It has become
familiar in Sweden to meet veiled women everywhere in work places, like post
offices, hospitals, education institutions and others.

Nadia Gabriel, a Swedish of Palestinian origin, worked in the Swedish TV
with the team of ``Mosaic`` program that deals with the issues of expatriates
living in the Swedish community, before some refer to her veil. Yet, she
fought until her veil was recognized in the Swedish TV by virtue of the
latest decision.

Veiled women face no discrimination problems in Sweden

In an interview with IslamOline.net correspondent Monday, September 1, she
said that she is happy with the decision and that she is committed towards
her veil. She added that she speaks Arabic as fluently as Swedish, which is
her mother tongue as she was born in Sweden.

She pointed out that she will present a program starting 2004 that deals
primarily with kitchen affairs, adding that such programs are very popular
in Sweden.

About her future plans, Gabriel said that she thinks of preparing serious
programs that aim at helping immigrants in Sweden, hoping such programs may
achieve success. She underlined that her veil will not prevent her from
performing her media duties even in the most liberal communities like
Sweden.

According to the laws applicable in Sweden, any veiled woman, who is
exposed to any racial or religious discrimination due to her veil, shall
have the right to sue her employer who treated her badly because of her
veil.

A Swedish Muslim girl had been fired from her job in a large store in
Sweden. She sued her employer and was done justice by the court that handles
discrimination issues. She returned to her job and obtained a good
compensation.

Due to these laws that grant Muslim women the right to wear veils, Sweden
is almost free of the phenomenon of harassing veiled women, contrary to what
happens in Belgium, France and some other western states.

Swedish and non-Swedish women have the right to get official passports and
identity cards, without having to remove their veils, as all government
circles accept veiled women in Sweden without the least annoyance..

---

The Pakis of the civil & military Kennel variety raised in ghettoes known as colonies are still waiting to lick their masters boots.

`` Please Uncle Sam and Brother John Bull! take me anywhich way you want but say some sweet-nothings in english while you do it``--the pleadings of colonial-clones like Mushharraf.

No Answers--Only Questions, Questions and more Questions.
When this happens the Questions ARE the answers.

So even if one gets the answers what is the diddly-do that person or country or President will do about it? Does it have the arsenal or armament to match. Is UN full of moral & ethical gas? How far can anyone go when running on empty?

Just shed a tear , sprinkle salt , enjoy your oysters.

Happy cawing-- in english!

---

Posted on Thu, Sep. 11, 2003

WHY DON`T WE HAVE ANSWERS TO THESE 9/11 QUESTIONS?
By WILLIAM BUNCH
bunchw@phillynews.com


More photos

Firefighter looks out window at Ground Zero. Photo, Jim MacMillan, Daily News


NO EVENT IN recent history has been written about, talked about, or watched and rewatched as much as the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 - two years ago today.

Not only was it the deadliest terrorist strike inside America, but the hijackings and attacks on New York City`s World Trade Center and the Pentagon in Washington were also a seminal event for an information-soaked media age of Internet access and 24- hour news.

So, why after 730 days do we know so little about what really happened that day?

No one knows where the alleged mastermind of the attack is, and none of his accomplices has been convicted of any crime. We`re not even sure if the 19 people identified by the U.S. government as the suicide hijackers are really the right guys.

Who put deadly anthrax in the mail? Where were the jet fighters that were supposed to protect America`s skies that morning? And what was the role of our supposed allies Saudi Arabia and Pakistan?

There are dozens of unanswered questions about the 2001 attacks, but we`ve narrowed them down to 20 - or 9 plus 11.

1. What did National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice tell President Bush about al Qaeda threats against the United States in a still-secret briefing on Aug. 6, 2001?

Rice has suggested in vague terms that the president`s brief - prepared daily by the CIA - included information that morning about Osama bin Laden`s methods of operation - including hijacking. But when the congressional committee probing Sept. 11 asked to see the report, Bush claimed executive privilege and refused to release it.

2. Why did Attorney General John Ashcroft and some Pentagon officials cancel commercial-airline trips before Sept. 11?

On July 26, 2001 - 47 days before the Sept. 11 attacks - CBS News reported that Ashcroft was flying expensive charters rather than commercial flights because of a ``threat assessment`` by the FBI. CBS said, ``Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.`` Newsweek later reported that on Sept. 10, 2001, ``a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns.``

Did either Ashcroft or the Pentagon have advance information about a 9/11-style attack and, if so, why wasn`t this shared with the American public?

3. Who made a small fortune ``shorting`` airline and insurance stocks before Sept. 11?

On Sept. 10, 2001, the trading ratio on United Airlines was 25 times greater than normal at the Pacific Exchange, where traders could buy ``puts,`` high-risk bets that the price of a company`s stock will fall sharply. The next day, two hijacked United jetliners crashed, causing the company`s shares to plummet and ultimately leading the airline into bankruptcy. CBS News later reported that at intelligence agencies, ``alarm bells were sounding over unusual trading in the U.S. stock options market`` on the day before the attacks.

The unusual stock trading suggests that someone with a sophisticated knowledge of finance also had advance information about the impending attack. But two years later, no one has been charged in this matter, and officials have not indicated even if the probe is still open.

4. Are all 19 people identified by the government as participants in the Sept. 11 attacks really the hijackers?

Probably not. Just 10 days after the attacks, a report by the British Broadcasting Corp. said that some of the supposed hijackers identified by the FBI appeared to be alive and well. The BBC story said Abdelaziz al-Omari, named as the pilot who crashed the jet into the World Trade Center`s North Tower, was reported by Saudi authorities to be working as an electrical engineer. He reported his passport had been stolen in Denver in 1995. Saudi officials said it was possible that another three people whose names appear on the FBI list also are alive.

The article, which can be read at Unanswered Questions, makes a persuasive case that another man was posing as Ziad Jarrah, the alleged pilot of hijacked Flight 93, which crashed in Shanksville, Pa. So why did this story line vanish into thin air?

5. Did any of the hijackers smuggle guns on board as reported in calls from both Flight 11 and Flight 93?

Quite possibly. An internal Federal Aviation Administration memo written at 5:30 p.m. on the day of the attacks said that a passenger aboard American Airlines Flight 11 - Israeli-American Daniel Lewin - had been shot to death by a single bullet before the jet slammed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. The FAA insists the memo was a mistaken ``first draft,`` even though the

alleged shooting is described in great detail.

Aboard Flight 93, passenger Thomas Burnett told his wife, Deena, in a 9:27 a.m. cell-phone call: ``The hijackers have already knifed a guy, one of them has a gun, and they are telling us there is a bomb on board.``

Why has this angle of Sept. 11 not been investigated in more detail?

6. Why did the NORAD air defense network fail to intercept the four hijacked jets?

During the depths of the Cold War, Americans went to bed with the somewhat reassuring belief that jet fighters would intercept anyone launching a first strike against the United States. That myth was shattered on 9/11, when four hijacked-jetliners-turned-into-deadly-missiles cruised the American skies with impunity for nearly two hours.

Why did the North American Aerospace Defense Command seem unaware of literally dozens of warnings that hijacked jetliners could be used as weapons? Why does NORAD claim it did not learn that Flight 11 - the first jet to strike the World Trade Center about 8:45 a.m. - had been hijacked until 8:40 a.m., some 25 minutes after the transponder was shut off and an astounding 15 minutes after flight controllers heard a hijacker say, ``We have some planes...``?

Why didn`t the fighters that were finally scrambled at Otis Air Force Base in Massachusetts and Langley Air Force Base in Virginia fly at top, supersonic speeds? Why didn`t fighters immediately take off from Andrews Air Force Base, just

outside Washington, D.C.? Why was nothing done to intercept American Airlines Flight 77, which struck the Pentagon, when officials knew it had been had been hijacked some 47 minutes earlier?

And why has no one been disciplined for the worst breakdown in national defense since Pearl Harbor?

7. Why did President Bush continue reading a story to Florida grade-schoolers for nearly a half-hour during the worst attack on America in its history?

In arguably the greatest understatement in U.S. history, Bush told a questioner at a California town-hall meeting in January 2002 that 9/11 ``was an interesting day.`` Interesting, indeed. In the two years since the attacks, questions have only grown about the president`s bizarre behavior that morning, when he was informed in a Sarasota classroom that America was under attack.

``I couldn`t stop watching the president sitting there, listening to second-graders, while my husband was burning in a building,`` World Trade Center widow Lorie van Auken, a leader of relatives of Sept. 11 victims who have raised questions about the attacks, told Gail Sheehy in the New York Observer.

Why did Bush read a children`s story about a pet goat and stay in the classroom for more than a half-hour after the first plane struck the World Trade Center and roughly 15 minutes after Chief of Staff Andrew Card told him that it had been a deliberate attack? Why didn`t he take more decisive action, and why wasn`t he hustled to a secure area while the attacks were clearly still under way?

Conspiracy advocates have cited these strange lapses as evidence that Bush knew about the attacks ahead of time, but why would anyone with advance knowledge appear so clueless?

For a fascinating read on the subject, go to: An Interesting Day.

8. How did Flight 93 crash in western Pennsylvania?

The most popular version - that heroic passengers who fought with the hijackers successfully stormed the cockpit - has become so widely accepted that people were jarred last month when an Associated Press report seemed to contradict it. The AP story took one line out of a congressional report and wrote that the FBI now believes the hijackers crashed the plane on purpose.

Many were dismayed that the FBI would change its story, but the government had never put out an official story. Some unidentified government officials had first floated the hijackers-crashed-the-plane-on-purpose theory in late 2001.

Based solely on circumstantial evidence from several cell-phone calls made by passengers, most of the public and the mainstream media have come to believe that the plane crashed because of a struggle between the passengers and the hijackers.

Meanwhile, the FBI reportedly has enough hard information about what really happened on Flight 93 to have worked up a flight-simulation video. But that video, the cockpit audio recording and the hard data from the other ``black box,`` the flight data recorder, is still top secret.

The issue symbolizes the government`s continuing refusal to release information about what really happened on Sept. 11. Even some relatives of Flight 93 victims are growing unhappy that more information has not been publicized.

9. Was Zacarias Moussaoui really ``the 20th hijacker``?

Almost certainly not, even though the allegation has been repeated hundreds of times in the media. The Moroccan native, who has been in custody since his August 2001 arrest on immigration charges after he attended a flight-training school in Minneapolis, has admitted that he is a member of al Qaeda and wanted to commit terrorist acts in America. But he arrived here much later than the Sept. 11 hijackers and reportedly had no contacts with them.

The issue is important because some family members of Sept. 11 victims who are seeking information about what happened that day have been turned down because of the ongoing Moussaoui case.

10. Where are the planes` ``black boxes``?

Nothing is more critical to learning about air disasters than the so-called ``black boxes.`` They are the 30-minute audio recordings of cockpit chatter and the fight-data inputs which show the speed, direction and operational condition of the plane, and which are encased in material designed to withstand a high-speed crash. Yet the government has continued to keep a lid of secrecy on the black boxes from Flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon, and from Flight 93.

FBI Director Robert Mueller has said Flight 77`s data recorder provided altitude, speed, headings and other information, but the voice recorder contained nothing useful. Why not? Why not release the information to the public? Why has a docile mainstream media not demanded this information?

And how come none of the four ``indestructible`` black boxes was recovered from the World Trade Center, even as investigators said that a passport belonging to one of the hijackers had been found in the rubble, undamaged, a week after the towers`s collapse?

11. Why were Donald Rumsfeld and other U.S. officials so quick to link Saddam Hussein to the attacks?

CBS News reported that the defense secretary was making notes about invading Iraq even before the fires from Flight 77 had been extinguished on the other side of the Pentagon. Rumsfeld wrote that he wanted ``best info fast. Judge whether good enough [to] hit S.H.`` - Saddam Hussein - ``at the same time. Not only UBL`` - Osama bin Laden. He added: ``Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not.``

Rumsfeld and a number of other Bush administration officials have ties to a once-obscure policy group called the Project for a New American Century. In a 2000 white paper, PNAC - which had long urged an American invasion of Iraq - said that for the United States to assert itself properly as the world`s lone superpower, ``some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor`` - would be required.

That new Pearl Harbor came - two years ago today.

12.Why did 7 World Trade Center collapse?

7 World Trade Center, a 47-story building, was not struck by an aircraft on Sept. 11, yet the building mysteriously collapsed at 5:20 p.m. that afternoon. Apparently debris from the jetliner attacks on the adjacent twin towers started a fire at No. 7. But as the New York Times noted: ``No building like it, a modern, steel-reinforced high-rise, had ever collapsed because of an uncontrolled fire.`` Investigators have speculated that excess diesel

fuel for emergency generators fanned the flames, but the full story may never be known.

Some questions also have lingered about why the two 110-story towers collapsed. But investigators think the burning jet fuel - compounded by paper-and-electronics-laden cubicles and possibly insulation matter - burned long enough, at temperatures exceeding 1,000 degrees, to weaken the structural steel.

13. Why did the Bush administration lie about dangerously high levels of toxins and hazardous particles after the WTC collapse?

Because apparently some White House officials felt that the health of the American economy and Wall Street was more important than the health of New York City residents who lived nearby. For example, on Sept. 16, 2001, a draft press release from the Environmental Protection Agency said: ``Recent samples of dust gathered by OSHA on Water Street showed higher levels of asbestos in EPA tests.`` That was deleted and replaced with this: ``The new samples confirm previous reports that ambient air quality meets OSHA standards and consequently is not a cause for public concern.``

A key figure in the changes was the head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, who - you can`t make this stuff up - is a lawyer who formerly represented the asbestos industry.

In fact, the EPA told workers and residents that it was safe to return to lower Manhattan at a time when some test results had not been analyzed and other key tests had not even been performed. The outcome? Key medical professionals say thousands of New Yorkers have developed respiratory illnesses associated with exposure to the dust. Symptoms include periodic gasping for air, a choking sensation and unusual sensitivity to airborne irritants, apparently from a type of ``occupational asthma`` called Reactive Airways Disease Syndrome.

14. Where is Dick Cheney`s undisclosed location?

We`ll never know, but a widely reported rumor was that it was right here in the Keystone State. The speculation is the vice president spent the days after the attack at Site R, a secretive Cold War-era site, also known as Alternate Joint Communications Center, deep inside Raven Rock Mountain. The mountain is in western Pennsylvania, near Waynesboro.

15. What happened to the more than $1 billion that Americans donated after the attack?

The largest recipient, the American Red Cross, says it already has used $741 million from its Liberty Fund to help more than 55,000 families cope with the death of loved ones, serious injuries, physical and mental health concerns, financial loss, homelessness and other effects of the attacks.

Of that, $596 million was in the form of direct financial assistance to families of those killed or seriously injured, as well as to displaced workers, residents and emergency personnel who were seriously affected. Depending on individual needs, this financial assistance included up to a full year`s living expenses, estate and special-circumstances cash grants, and more.

16. What was the role of Pakistan`s spy agency in the Sept. 11 attacks and the subsequent murder of U.S. journalist Daniel Pearl?

The idea that Pakistan is considered a leading American ally in the war on terror is both ironic and a bit disturbing when one considers that there are proven links between Pakistan`s intelligence agency, the notorious ISI, and the Taliban, as well as likely ties to al Qaeda and bin Laden.

In October 2001, the Wall Street Journal and many reputable news organizations in South Asia reported that the head of the ISI, Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad, was fired after being linked to a $100,000 payment that had been wired to al Qaeda hijacker Mohamed Atta in America to pay for the Sept. 11 attacks. The New York Times said the intelligence service even used al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan to train covert operatives for use in a war of terror against India.

In recent weeks, two troubling reports have emerged. The highly regarded French journalist Bernard-Henri Levy has written that Wall Street Journal reporter Pearl had been murdered by elements of the ISI because he`d learned that al Qaeda ``is largely controlled by the Pakistani secret service`` and that Islamic extremists control the nation`s nuclear weapons. And investigative reporter Gerald Posner writes that bin Laden lieutenant Abu Zubaydah not only revealed a link to top Saudis but also to high-ranking Pakistani air force officer Mushaf Ali Mir. Mir, who is said to have cut protection deals in secret meetings with bin Laden, died earlier this year in a plane crash that also killed his wife and closest confidants.

17. Who killed five Americans with anthrax?

Actually, it`s not clear whether this question should even be on this list. Two years later, it`s not known whether the anthrax-laden letters that killed five Americans from Connecticut to Florida, and targeted some leading Democratic pols and TV news anchors, had anything to do with the Sept. 11 attacks. Indeed, the list of potential suspects - al Qaeda terrorists, Saddam, crackpot U.S. scientists - hasn`t been narrowed down. Our government`s utter cluelessness about a reign of terror that rattled the nation and dominated the headlines in fall 2001 is an investigative failure of epic proportions.

One man, a former Army biomedical researcher named Steven J. Hatfill, has been labeled ``a person of interest`` by the FBI, but nothing definitive has linked Hatfill to the crime. Just this summer, federal investigators drained a Frederick, Md., pond where they speculated the anthrax letters might have been assembled, but tests of soil samples taken after the draining yielded no evidence of biological weapons. And now Hatfill has sued the government for invading his privacy - in a case that may never be solved.

18. What happened to the probe into C-4 explosives found in a Philadelphia bus terminal in fall 2001?

Do you remember this front-page headline from Oct. 20, 2001: ``In Phila. locker, a lethal find; Explosive `would probably have leveled` bus depot.`` You can be forgiven if you don`t. There`s been no mention in local media since late 2001 of the alarming discovery of one-third of a pound of lethal C-4 and 1,000 feet of military detonation cord in a locker at the Greyhound bus terminal in Center City, even though it`s possibly the most direct link between Philadelphia and domestic terrorism.

Investigators conceded a couple of months into their probe that the trail had gone stone-cold. They speculated that the material had been stolen from an Army base and that the culprit, who rented the locker on Sept. 29, 2001, decided that the material was too hot to handle after the Sept. 11 attacks. The truth may never be known.

19. What is in the 28 blacked-out pages of the congressional Sept. 11 report?

It`s not a total mystery. Everyone has acknowledged that the pages contain highly embarrassing information about links between the Sept. 11 hijackers and the government of Saudi Arabia, America`s supposed ally in the Middle East and home to the world`s largest oil reserves. One of those officials is said to be Saudi ambassador Prince Bandar, whose wife, Princess Haifa, indirectly funded at least two of the Sept. 11 terrorists during their time in San Diego. The prince is so close to the Bush family that he`s known, incredibly, as ``Bandar Bush.`` This week, Time reports that just after the Sept. 11 attacks, when U.S. commercial airspace was still closed to our citizens, Bush allowed a jet to stop at 10 U.S. cities to pick up and fly home 140 prominent Saudis, including relatives of bin Laden.

A new must-read book by investigative reporter Posner - ``Why America Slept`` - takes the conspiracy to the highest of levels of the Saudi government. He says a top bin Laden lieutenant, Abu Zubaydah, who was captured in March 2002, stunned investigators when - allegedly given the ``truth serum`` sodium pentothal - fingered three top Saudis. They were Prince Ahmed bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz, the Westernized owner of 2002 Kentucky Derby winner War Emblem; Prince Turki al-Faisal bin Abdul Aziz, the kingdom`s longtime intelligence chief, and Prince Fahd bin Turki bin Saud al-Kabir.

The most incredible part of the story is what happened next. In an eight-day period in late July 2002, Prince Ahmed died at age 43 from a heart attack, Prince Turki died in a car crash and Prince Fahd ``died of thirst.`` Coincidence? What do you think?

20. Where is Osama bin Laden?

Remember how President Bush vowed on Sept. 17, 2001, that he was determined to catch bin Laden ``dead or alive``? Well, the good news is that if he wants bin Laden ``alive,`` there`s still a chance that could happen. Intelligence experts now agree that bin Laden successfully escaped his Tora Bora hideout in Afghanistan back in December 2001 - when the U.S. failed to commit ample manpower to the chase - and that the al Qaeda leader is alive and well, and plotting new attacks.

``We don`t know where he is,`` Army Col. Rodney Davis, spokesman for America`s forces in Afghanistan, said recently. But Newsweek seems to know where to find bin Laden: in the remote, mountainous - and lawless - Kunar province of Afghanistan. The magazine chillingly reported that just five short months ago, bin Laden convened the biggest terror summit since Sept. 11 at a mountain stronghold there. The participants reportedly included three top-ranking representatives from the Taliban, several senior al Qaeda operatives and leaders from radical Islamic groups in Chechnya and Uzbekistan. The topic was carrying out attacks against U.S. interests inside Iraq.

The most chilling aspect of the Newsweek report is that bin Laden has access to biological weapons and is determined to find a way to use them against the United States. A source from the Taliban told the magazine: ``Osama`s next step will be unbelievable.``

But this week, ABC News reported that the hunt for bin Laden has been narrowed to a different area - a 40-square-mile section of the Waziristan region of Pakistan. The report said that local residents suspected of trying to inform Americans about bin Laden`s whereabouts were executed in broad daylight.

ahmedzai #146 I havent heard much about kashmir in the news lately. By that i assume the violence has been down, not increasing. You seem to believe otherwise. How do you know that the violence has increased in kashmir despite cross-border mullahs being restrained by the pakistan government as a result of recent relaxation of tensions between the pakistani and indian governments?

tahmed at 136:

Just like we cannot give the credit to OBL for legitimate Palestinian uprising in the form of rock throwing by children on the military might of Israel, Mullas of Pakistan cannot be given credit for the Kashmiri freedom struggle. OBL and Mullas may have capitalized on the situation, but the real struggle is being waged by indegenous population of those two areas.

Although I appreciate your posts, I cannot agree with you as a matter of principle and in view of the evidence. Since the Mullas are now out of action in Kashmir, the freedom struggle continues with greater intensity is a proof that it was and is indegenous. Even BJP Government had agreed during a cease fire offer to Hizb 2 years ago that 70 % of resistance was indegenous.

temp: will call you if/when i make it there. Please email me your phone number again.
As for the links that didn`t work.. here they are again:
Joe Viall’s website was up for over 18 months before Michael Meacher, William Rivers Pitt or William Bunch started asking these questions.
later..
P.

The sinister arm of zionism and satanism.

---

Journal axes gene research on Jews and Palestinians

Robin McKie, science editor
Sunday November 25, 200: (The Observer) A keynote research paper showing that Middle Eastern Jews and Palestinians are genetically almost identical has been pulled from a leading journal.

Academics who have already received copies of Human Immunology have been urged to rip out the offending pages and throw them away.

Such a drastic act of self-censorship is unprecedented in research publishing and has created widespread disquiet, generating fears that it may involve the suppression of scientific work that questions Biblical dogma.

`I have authored several hundred scientific papers, some for Nature and Science, and this has never happened to me before,` said the article`s lead author, Spanish geneticist Professor Antonio Arnaiz-Villena, of Complutense University in Madrid. `I am stunned.`

British geneticist Sir Walter Bodmer added: `If the journal didn`t like the paper, they shouldn`t have published it in the first place. Why wait until it has appeared before acting like this?`

The journal`s editor, Nicole Sucio-Foca, of Columbia University, New York, claims the article provoked such a welter of complaints over its extreme political writing that she was forced to repudiate it. The article has been removed from Human Immunology`s website, while letters have been written to libraries and universities throughout the world asking them to ignore or `preferably to physically remove the relevant pages`. Arnaiz-Villena has been sacked from the journal`s editorial board.

Dolly Tyan, president of the American Society of Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics, which runs the journal, told subscribers that the society is `offended and embarrassed`.

The paper, `The Origin of Palestinians and their Genetic Relatedness with other Mediterranean Populations`, involved studying genetic variations in immune system genes among people in the Middle East.

In common with earlier studies, the team found no data to support the idea that Jewish people were genetically distinct from other people in the region. In doing so, the team`s research challenges claims that Jews are a special, chosen people and that Judaism can only be inherited.

Jews and Palestinians in the Middle East share a very similar gene pool and must be considered closely related and not genetically separate, the authors state. Rivalry between the two races is therefore based `in cultural and religious, but not in genetic differences`, they conclude.

But the journal, having accepted the paper earlier this year, now claims the article was politically biased and was written using `inappropriate` remarks about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Its editor told the journal Nature last week that she was threatened by mass resignations from members if she did not retract the article.

Arnaiz-Villena says he has not seen a single one of the accusations made against him, despite being promised the opportunity to look at the letters sent to the journal.

He accepts he used terms in the article that laid him open to criticism. There is one reference to Jewish `colonists` living in the Gaza strip, and another that refers to Palestinian people living in `concentration` camps.

`Perhaps I should have used the words settlers instead of colonists, but really, what is the difference?` he said.

`And clearly, I should have said refugee, not concentration, camps, but given that I was referring to settlements outside of Israel - in Syria and Lebanon - that scarcely makes me anti-Jewish. References to the history of the region, the ones that are supposed to be politically offensive, were taken from the Encyclopaedia Britannica, and other text books.`

In the wake of the journal`s actions, and claims of mass protests about the article, several scientists have now written to the society to support Arnaiz-Villena and to protest about their heavy-handedness.

One of them said: `If Arnaiz-Villena had found evidence that Jewish people were genetically very special, instead of ordinary, you can be sure no one would have objected to the phrases he used in his article. This is a very sad business.

On a positive note, there is an article in the washington post today that recognizes the charity work being done local muslims (mostly pakistanis) in the greater washington metro area. They say it is better to give than to receive (and much better to give charity than to whine about being profiled at the airport).

Collecting Food, Fostering Solidarity
Md. Muslim Volunteers Gather Tons of Goods for Area Pantries
By Nurith C. Aizenman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 15, 2003; Page B03


The fliers distributed to more than 30,000 Maryland homes by Muslim civic groups across the Washington region last weekend contained a simple plea for non-perishable goods for an upcoming food drive.

But the Muslim volunteers who circled through their communities to pick up contributions yesterday said they hoped their neighbors had also gotten the unwritten message: ``We are one of you. We want to be a part of this country,`` said Ellicott City pediatrician Naseem Khan.

Like many of the several hundred participants, Khan said her involvement in the food drive was largely a response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

``Suddenly you realize that the impact of that act was reflected on Muslims at large,`` she said. Now, she added, ``it`s like a drive in me`` to make clear just how contrary the attacks were to the principles of Islam.

The most effective way for Muslims to do that is to get more involved in their communities, said Anwer Hasan, president of the Howard County Muslim Foundation and an organizer of the drive.

``Actions speak louder than words,`` he noted. ``And when you reach out to your neighbors, they see you as a mainstream person who believes in giving to the needy and helping to build a stronger America.``

Initiated last year by the Howard County Muslim Foundation, the food drive was also held yesterday by related groups in Baltimore city and Montgomery, Prince George`s and Baltimore counties. Members brought the contributions they collected to festive picnics in each county, where they mingled with friends and a host of political leaders, including Montgomery County Executive Douglas M. Duncan (D) and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) at the Germantown picnic, and Howard County Executive James N. Robey (D) and Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) at the Ellicott City event.

By early evening, organizers estimated that volunteers had collected more than 22,000 pounds of supplies for local food banks.

Irfan Malik, a member of the Howard group, said the foundations had chosen to do the food drive in mid-September because food banks, which tend to receive most of their contributions during the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays, often run low on supplies this time of year.

But early yesterday, as Malik and his two teenage sons drove through Ellicott City past house after house festooned with American flags, he said it also seemed appropriate to be holding the event just three days after the second anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Like Malik, a telecommunications engineer, many of the Howard Muslim foundation`s members are foreign-born professionals who became U.S. citizens years ago. Wearing a polo shirt and seated behind the wheel of his dark blue Chevrolet Suburban van, Malik looked the picture of a suburban American dad. And he said that participating in local charities had been a milestone in his journey from immigrant to American.

``As immigrants, our first focus was on sending help to our native countries,`` he said. ``But now we`re getting to the point where we`re saying, `Okay, that`s good to do, but let`s also start doing stuff to help here` `` [in the United States].

Nazar at 138:

I never get angry. I am a non-emotional person always making my decision on statistical and scientific data, documentry or circumstantial evidence.

I would admit however, that I took the liberty of seeing you as a person in a state of hopelessness over our being Muslims, because we are facing so many problems. If that is not the case, I apologize.

Rest assured that 9/11 has opened the eyes of many a Muslim countries. The lax attitude has gone. Governments like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, who were under pressure in yesteryears, are cracking down on extremists. The only problem as I see it is that people like you who are all out to curb extremist tendencies are also against the very people who can be able to do without yielding or compromising with extremists. And the leaderships you support are the ones who will give in to the minority extremist demands for their popularity at the very word go. I hope you get my point here.

THE VIDEO THAT PROVES 9-11 WAS NOT A SURPRISE
An Interesting Day: President Bush`s Movements and Actions on 9-11

You may have heard the strange story of how George Bush claimed to have seen the first plane hit the World Trade Tower on a television in Booker Elementary School before going into a classroom to hear some children read. This is a strange story because there was no video of the first impact until a day later, when a video shot by a documentary film crew that captured the first impact surfaced.


Still stranger was Bush`s reaction on being told of the second impact by Andy Card. There was none. Bush simply went on with the school visit and listened to children reading about a pet goat. For twenty minutes.
But far more telling than Bush`s reaction is that of Mr. Card himself who, as can be seen in the above clip, steps in to inform Bush of the second impact (without mentioning the fact that more hijacked planes were in the air), then immediately steps back without waiting for a reply. Bush`s job is to make decisions. How does Mr. Card know that Bush will not make one then and there?

What damns the Bush administration is not what is in this video, but what SHOULD be in the video and is not. Ostensibly, Bush and Card are reacting to a surprise attack, but Bush does not act surprised, and Andy Card does not act like a man delivering an unexpected piece of news but instead is merely delivering a progress report to which he already knows Bush will not h