9/11 conspiracies

Which makes more sense... That our outdated, bureaucratic, risk-
averse intelligence system was unable to put together pieces to
prevent an attack from highly secretive and elusive terrorist
organization... or that a hawkish, pro-business president would
intentionally allow devastating attacks on the US centers of defense
and business simply for a small short-term profit?

One thing that seems like a common thread for conspiracy junkies is
the unwavering belief in the total infallibility of the US federal
government. If one really believes that our government is run by
omniscient, omnipotent, all-intelligent leaders, then I suppose one
logically assumes that a disaster like this HAS to have been known
and planned by those in power. To me, it seems there are much
simpler and sensible explanations without deifying GWB and friends.
Yes, there are still a lot of unanswered questions, but some of the
proposed answers I have read here are really bizarre.

It isn't necessarily an either or option . For one our outdated,
bureaucratic, risk-
averse intelligence system has been infiltrated that when the knowledge did
get passed through by agents it was deliberately jumbled or simply stored
away. Or that a few opportunist within these agencies saw how to cash in and
get more budget money also. The pieces were there even if you look at the
last bombing attempt where the plans were found among his papers. This also
explains how the anthrax people have avoided being caught by being insiders.
It looks to me that what we have is not a Mole but a Mole Hill.
The amount of money being spent that adds up to a 70 billion dollar
deficit is way more that small short-term profit. this is the arts budget
for the next 466 years.
The connection between members of the cia to the massive stock trading
is quite impressive.
Does it makes sense the bid Laden would spend years of secret planing only
to tip off the US by doing this type of stock deal?
Anyway with the 40 missiles that did not explode on the assault on his
train camp he was able to sale to red china for 1 million each. Sounds like
just the money he needed to pull this off.

kpeck77 wrote:

> Which makes more sense... That our outdated, bureaucratic, risk-
> averse intelligence system was unable to put together pieces to
> prevent an attack from highly secretive and elusive terrorist
> organization... or that a hawkish, pro-business president would
> intentionally allow devastating attacks on the US centers of defense
> and business simply for a small short-term profit?
>
> O

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

--- In metatuning@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
> It isn't necessarily an either or option . For one our outdated,
> bureaucratic, risk-
> averse intelligence system has been infiltrated that when the
knowledge did
> get passed through by agents it was deliberately jumbled or simply
stored
> away. Or that a few opportunist within these agencies saw how to
cash in and
> get more budget money also.

OK, that's a different and (slightly) more plausible explanation than
the one that says GWB masterminded the whole thing. Hard to keep
track of all the different theories :)

> It looks to me that what we have is not a Mole but a Mole Hill.
> The amount of money being spent that adds up to a 70 billion
dollar
> deficit is way more that small short-term profit.

I still find it very difficult to believe that anyone would
orchestrate an attack like 9-11 just for money. I mean, even
assuming the people in question had no emotions and no conscience.
There is a lot more money to be made on Wall Street in a good economy
with a strong bull market than by launching an attack on the main
financial center. The profit that any individual could make in an
attack would not be worth the long-term aftereffects. The people who
carried out the attacks wanted to damage the US economy so it would
be harder to make money. Anyone with a lot of money tied up in the
market would be completely idiotic to do such a thing.

> The connection between members of the cia to the massive stock
trading
> is quite impressive.

What connection?? I read the article at FTW and there is NOTHING
that suggests to me that US government insiders were behind the
options trades (even giving the benefit of the doubt that the
information in the article is 100% correct). So some guy at the CIA
used to work for Brown. Brown is one of the biggest online trading
companies with many thousands of accounts. Those trades could easily
have come from anybody anywhere!

> Does it makes sense the bid Laden would spend years of secret
planing only
> to tip off the US by doing this type of stock deal?

Who says OBL personally executed or approved the options trades? The
most obvious guess would seem to be either one of the hijackers or
one of their confidants, possibly without anyone else's approval.

> kpeck77 wrote:
>
> > Which makes more sense... That our outdated, bureaucratic, risk-
> > averse intelligence system was unable to put together pieces to
> > prevent an attack from highly secretive and elusive terrorist
> > organization... or that a hawkish, pro-business president would
> > intentionally allow devastating attacks on the US centers of
defense
> > and business simply for a small short-term profit?
> >

kpeck77 wrote:

>
>
> I still find it very difficult to believe that anyone would
> orchestrate an attack like 9-11 just for money.

I think those that made money from it didn't necessarily orchestrate it, but
saw an opportunity and used it!

>

> The profit that any individual could make in an
> attack would not be worth the long-term aftereffects.

the commodities market dropped before the JFK hit and those who made money
seem to get away with it

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

> From: "kpeck77" <kris.peck@...>
> To: <metatuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 8:09 AM
> Subject: [metatuning] Re: 9/11 conspiracies
>
>
> I still find it very difficult to believe that anyone would
> orchestrate an attack like 9-11 just for money. I mean, even
> assuming the people in question had no emotions and no conscience.
> There is a lot more money to be made on Wall Street in a good economy
> with a strong bull market than by launching an attack on the main
> financial center. The profit that any individual could make in an
> attack would not be worth the long-term aftereffects. The people who
> carried out the attacks wanted to damage the US economy so it would
> be harder to make money. Anyone with a lot of money tied up in the
> market would be completely idiotic to do such a thing.

if we're talking about a conspiracy, then it's not a matter
of the amount of money any individual might make, but rather
the amount that all those involved might make.

if you think really hard about the incredibly huge amounts
of money now being earned (by many different companies and
the individuals involved) as a result of the whole arms
build-up which is being portrayed as a direct result of the
9/11 attacks ( -- to cite only one example having a local impact
here in San Diego, think of the MULTI-HUNDRED-*B*ILLION DOLLAR
contract with Lockheed-Martin), you might change your opinion.

the destruction of the World Trade Center did indeed result
in the loss of several thousand lives and several billion
dollars of business, but that's a tiny drop in the bucket
compared to the income the Bush administration is now
generating by building warships, planes, and bombs.

never mind the unbelievable waste of money on this junk...
let's just hope that something happens that will prevent
these yahoos from actually USING all this crap to kill
millions of more lives, whether here or abroad.

-monz

Kris and all,

It's hard to believe, but it looks like Kraig is right
-- today's Wall Street Journal fornt page reports that
two FBI agents have been indicted for using classified
information to help their investor buddies get rich
short-selling stocks. This is obviously just the tip of
the iceberg. This activity -- US Government agents
manipulating the markets for profit -- is no longer a
conspiracy theory; it looks like it's well on its way
to being a documented fact.

- Jeff