"Xymphora was the first to identify Grossman - anyone else you can think of, xymph?"he responds here (thnx xymph):
"Frankly, I am still having trouble getting my mind around a Turkish connection to September 11. Any reference to Turkey is conspicuous by its absence. You could understand Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, or Afghanistan, but Turkey comes completely out of left field... Sibel Edmonds is the sole source for any Turkish connection, and it is difficult to imagine any official Turkish reason to attack the United States.that's more polite than he usually is on this issue ;-)
[]
Of course, no one can rule out the fact that individuals working for Turkey may have had another agenda. The Turkish ultra-nationalist fascist mafia controls much of the drug trade to Europe, and must have been hurting because the Taliban had restricted the flow of Afghan heroin. The Turkish mafia would have had a motive to assist the neocons in creating the ‘Pearl Harbor’ that would lead to an attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan. In fact, the heroin trade has been completely restored (and then some). Could there have been some kind of neocon/Turkish mafia deal, coordinated through Turkish employees in the United States, whereby the Turkish mafia assisted in pulling off 9–11 in return for a promise of an attack against the Taliban? Could be. However, there is no evidence for it whatsoever except for vague allegations of possible FBI investigations made by one, uncorroborated, whistleblower.
As usual, I need to find a good reason for people to take big risks, and I just don’t see it. In the absence of any other evidence, and the possibility that Edmonds simply misunderstood what the FBI was investigating, I remain unconvinced of the Turkish angle."
my oft-repeated personal view is that this has a whole lot more to do with personal finances than any national-interest, or geo-strategic, argument. sibel has also repeatedly made the same claim. (I'd argue against her if she yelled ISRAEL or OIL or any of those other catch-alls)
Sibel points to this article by Giraldi as the closest thing to her story. Note how it's all about personal enrichment. I'd argue strenuously against the emphasis Giraldi puts on the miniscule bribes to Feith & Perle. I suspect that those contracts were simply necessary to justify whatever contact occured between the participants.
So when xymph says: "I remain unconvinced of the Turkish angle" - i agree - apart from:
a) it appears that there may have been some Turkish individuals involved, and
b) the people who are profiting from this enterprise, for one reason or other, decided to white-ant an organization which happens to be Turkish in name (ATC), and/or
c) because of some weird confluence of (historical and/or geographical and/or other) events, congress is willing to bank-roll arms sales which happen to be called 'Turkish' via which certain relevant people are able to enrich themselves.
14 comments:
Part of the problem with something like this, something of this scope, is having to overcome disbelief, yours and your audience's. At least twice a day I read something and start to think "you've got to be joking", although not so much anymore.
Re: the players and their motivations. I wonder if their all of a piece. Is it one big interconnected group or a number of smaller (still large) factions at work (use of present tense deliberate). Is there a common purpose here, or a number of individual agendass the whole mess promotes?
Further, I wonder if the cast of characters has remained constant throughout or changed, discarding some and admitting other interested parties later.
Looking at what we've already got, there doesn't seem to be a constant theme except power. Oil, money, information, control are all means to that end, but are all the players playing for the same pieces of the same pies?
Maybe it's my inherent disbelief in the scope of this but are we missing the trees for the forest?
I'm with you lukery that I don't think that the actions of those that are involved with this conspiracy are reflecting the general views of the Turkish government and many other factions which might look to stay away from this, much like many in our government would want to stay away from the American factions involved with this criminal enterprise.
I wonder if all of the motivation of all of these conspirators are purely financial though. Just like we have the PNAC crowd using American Empire motivating them perhaps as much as money, I wonder if some of the Turkish elements are part of the Grey Wolves which might have motivated them to bribe Hastert, etc. too with their other interests at work too. Certainly not all Turks have the same non-financial goals that the Grey Wolves do that put them more directly opposite Armenians, etc. but I'm guessing that groups like the Grey Wolves' agendas might be fostered by some of these individuals too.
don: "...having to overcome disbelief, yours and your audience's..."
i agree. i start with sibel's case and presume the facts to be true and try to work from there. there's no particular reason why i presume sibel's case to be true - but she does give us enough to work with, and i try to build out from there.
don: "Is there a common purpose here, or a number of individual agendass the whole mess promotes?"
larisa (and sibel) uses what seems to be a useful analogy - of competing mafia families - so each have their own particular interests, and the players can change within each family.
don: "are all the players playing for the same pieces of the same pies?"
i think that they all have their own games - but they seem to have some interest in keeping the game going - for one reason or other, and some of the games and players overlap as well. perhaps to extend the analogy, one mafia family in a particular city might be involved in drug-running and a protection racket, and another family might be involved in prostitution and also a protection racket.
but you are right - we need to look for the trees
calipendence: "Grey Wolves which might have motivated them to bribe Hastert, etc. too with their other interests at work too"
yeah - i think there are probably some non-financial interests involved - but personally i find it easier to put those aside (for the time being) because the ideologues seem much more difficult to understand (particularly because there are so many competing tides).
money as a common denominator seems to be as good as any to try to organise our thoughts
It was apparently a non-existent Turkish Cargo Co. that phoned authorities about the WTC impact on 9/11.
It was apparently a non-existent Turkish Cargo Co. that phoned authorities about the WTC impact on 9/11.
I'm skeptical of this site. While there may be information there pertinent to a serious 9/11 investigation (they do have a Grove article), there are some items noted that stink of misinformation (such as the A-3 (or anything other than a 757) hit the Pentagon idea debunked elsewhere). For that matter, the transcript on the page in question (provocatively titled "Did a Turkish Cargo Jet Hit WTC 1?") didn't give me the impression of a "Turkish Cargo" plane used on WTC1. As for a call source...?
AFAIK, no solid evidence exists that the 4 planes used on 9/11 were other than the 4 flights we know of, although I'm certainly open to a correction.
to extend the analogy, one mafia family in a particular city might be involved in drug-running and a protection racket, and another family might be involved in prostitution and also a protection racket.
LOL
Under the circumstances, very appropriate metaphors...
re the Turkish cargo thing - i didnt even get it
re appropriate metaphors - protection????? are you kidding?!!?
re appropriate metaphors - protection????? are you kidding?!!?
Just give us all your rights and freedoms and tax dollars and don't rock the boat and we'll keep you nice and safe and secure from and the NSA and FBI and DHS, not to mention the terrorists (who aren't working for/with us, trust us)...
It's not overt, but it's a protection racket.
i can almost smell the freedom!
(wait - am i allowed to do that? i meant to ask permission first. sorry)
re the Turkish cargo thing - i didnt even get it
The transcript references a call to NY EMS mentioning Turkish Cargo on the 22nd floor of one of the WTC towers. I don't quite get the reference, either, other than that the company is Turkish. Other than that, it's quite a jump to suggest the use of a TC plane in the attack.
In all fairness, I shouldn't be critical of the site as a whole, but I do question the veracity and providence of some of the information presented. Too much has been written on planted misinformation in psyops not to be.
"Any reference to Turkey is conspicuous by its absence. You could understand Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, or Afghanistan, but Turkey comes completely out of left field... Sibel Edmonds is the sole source for any Turkish connection, and it is difficult to imagine any official Turkish reason to attack the United States."
As far as I can recall, Sibel has never implied that Turkey or other Turkish countries were involved with al-Qaeda out of motivation of wanting to attack the United States. She has also never come even close to implying that 9-11 was an 'inside job', in fact, from many of her past statements I have concluded just the opposite- that it was incompetence and willful ignorance on the part of US officials that led to 9-11.
What SHE HAS implied is that Turkey and other Central Asian countries had and may still have an economic link to Bin Laden's organization through the heroin and illicit arms trade. She has specifically said in the first interview with Scott Horton that "semi-legit" organizations may be ideologically opposed to al-Qaeda, but that they are linked to them "simply for monetary reasons".
What Xymphora fails to take into account is that before 9-11, Bin Laden was not taken very seriously by the United States, and that it in some conflicts such as Bosnia, al Qaeda was fighting on the same side of the US. So groups in Turkey would not have been very worried about a "crackdown".
After 9-11, I imagine the Turks have gone to great lengths to distance themselves from Bin Laden's organization. But before 9-11, they probably didn't give it a second thought. Al Qaeda was viewed as a nuisance by most US officials outside the counterterrorism world, and not the "global threat" they are considered today.
As you can see, I don't buy into the "inside job" theory, though I am trying to keep an open mind on the subject.
miguel - good points as always. when you say "willful ignorance on the part of US officials that led to 9-11" - does that make you a LIHOPer?
i'm still trying to get a grip on where i am on this - i suspect there's a different story line which is neither 'inside job' nor the official story.
larisa: "Either way, It's really the same group of people that we already know about - and the same things that we already know about - namely - it's in the genre of the Dubai money transfer to Atta - it's sort of a similar kind of thing. So it doesn't really take the story away from where it is now - however, there are people who overlap..."
i'm not exactly sure what that means - but i wouldnt be surprised if the truth is in there somewhere. i think if we take Evil Osama outta the narrative then we might get closer to a usable theory.
if i get time, i'll try to put all of sibel's 911 quotes and try to make some sense of it.
Post a Comment