krs
|
posted on September 19, 2001 06:33:11 AM new
You gotta' crawl before you can walk.
WASHINGTON - U.S. military leaders proposed in 1962 a secret plan
to commit terrorist acts against Americans and blame Cuba to create a
pretext for invasion and the ouster of Communist leader Fidel Castro,
according to a new book about the National Security Agency.
"We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami
area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington," said one document
reportedly prepared by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "We could blow up a
U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," the document says.
"Casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of
indignation."
The plan is laid out in documents signed by the five Joint Chiefs but never
carried out, according to writer James Bamford in "Body of Secrets." The
new history of the Fort Meade-based eavesdropping agency is being
released today by Doubleday.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/bal-te.md.nsa24apr24.story
|
gravid
|
posted on September 19, 2001 06:48:18 AM new
Well sure - they have lied about foreign powers before - like the Gulf of Tonklin thing with Vietnam.
Trouble applying it to New York would be I don't think they could get 20 suicide hijackers. You need genuine religeous fanaticism for that.
|
julie321
|
posted on September 19, 2001 07:04:28 AM new
-quote-
You need genuine religeous fanaticism for that.
-end quote-
There aren't any of those in the US ... 
|
gravid
|
posted on September 19, 2001 07:23:40 AM new
Point taken - but show me a line of reasoning that would induce 20 people to fly to their death. To provoke a war with Afganistan? What is the religeous pay back? - and wouldn't there be a doubt it would work? In which case it would be a terrible price for a failure.
Throw out a scenerio here.
|
donny
|
posted on September 19, 2001 07:39:00 AM new
I don't know that I'd put anything past anybody. I don't believe that this was a U.S. setup, but, on the other hand, I wouldn't be totally shocked if I ever found out later it was.
I can't see how this would have been set up, but one thing keeps bothering me. I've heard it before, in passing, and I heard a CNN guy say it again yesterday, in passing.
He said that one of the WTC hijackers' passports was found 3 blocks from the site of the WTC crash. I find this absolutely incredible. They're picking out pieces of people, and this passport that the hijacker was carrying somehow survived, intact, to be found 3 blocks away? They haven't found the black boxes yet, that have signals in them, yet they found this flimsy passport?
|
julie321
|
posted on September 19, 2001 07:50:09 AM new
Gravid,
In truth, I wasn't trying to make a clever point. In fact, I do not truely believe in many popular government based conspiracy theories. I just found your statement interesting, especially considering that one fanatic (not nec. religious) and his groupies have committed terrorism on his home soil against his fellow americans for his own cause. Do I think the US government could carry out and then cover up such a horrible act? No, not on its own soil.
|
krs
|
posted on September 19, 2001 07:53:52 AM new
The speed of the discovery of the car in Boston, complete with flight instructions in Arabic. They had that within two hours I think it was, of all the cars there and without knowing who had taken over the planes for sure? Has anyone heard whether the flight training schools in Florida teach in Arabic and supply classroom materials in the language of their students?
The emphasis placed on the discovery of the fuel consumption calculators. What's to calculate? The planes were gassed up to make California. Maybe that's why they were left in the car.
Gavid, if you think it unlikely that anyone could come up with twenty fanatics champing at the bit to die for the Will and Glory of Allah you haven't paid attention.
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 19, 2001 08:19:22 AM new
Was all this a "Wag the Dog" thing?
I really don't think so. If it is, they've done a better job than I would think they could.
Are we getting some "disinformation" from the government right now... Yes, no doubt.
[ edited by Microbes on Sep 19, 2001 08:20 AM ]
|
Pocono
|
posted on September 19, 2001 08:30:27 AM new
YOUR NOT GONNA BELIEVE THIS!!!
I was just abducted by aliens in a black helicopter who claim that the U.S. has NEVER stepped foot on the moon, and that Elvis is indeed alive and well and has been spotted at a Burger King in Topeka, Kansas... whoa! this is incredible news!
|
gravid
|
posted on September 19, 2001 10:35:29 AM new
krs - I was responding to julie321 intimation that it could be some domestic religeous nuts. I just don't see that being possible as the payback is too uncertain to get 20 US nut cases into those planes. I really think they were foreign Islamic extremists. The idea of them being say right wing fundementalist Christians bent on moving the country to destroy Islam is just too convoluted. Fanatic have to see a direct pay back not a convoluted scheme.
I am sure you could get 20 military types to do a special ops on it but not a straight 100% suicide run.
|
therpowen
|
posted on September 19, 2001 11:13:41 AM new
While I certainly do not believe that it was a US Government operation, and I also don't believe that the Government could find 20 religious fanatics within this country to carry out such a mission, I do have no doubt that the US intelligence agencies have the capability of finding 20 people who could have the idea implanted in them.
They learned much about brainwashing techniques from the VC and their allies.
therp
|
Femme
|
posted on September 19, 2001 11:26:37 AM new
Pocono, you silly boy.
That couldn't have been Elvis at Burger King.
They don't serve fried peanut butter and banana sandwiches. 
|
uaru
|
posted on September 19, 2001 11:33:40 AM new
You guys are a bunch of rookies when it comes to conspiracy theories. Am I the only one with a current catalog of conspiracy theories? Why not apply conspiracy theory 23-2b* it works rather well and nobody is able to offer proof to dispute it.
*Conspiracy theory 23-2b states: when an act of war is declared through a surprise attack, the conspirator is the attacked nation. While the attack was carried out by another organization or nation, the attack was allowed to happen rather that be stopped, to generate support for the government, allow for military buildups, institute increased domestic surveillance, gain national support in a war, or divert the nations attention from other issues.
I'm not paranoid enough to believe that theory, but it is one of the best sellers, trust me.
|
sulyn1950
|
posted on September 19, 2001 11:47:38 AM new
uaru-It is plausible. The government has always maintained we have the best agencies for national security in the world, yet we are to believe that none of them had a peep, clue, hint, this was going to happen before it happened? If that is indeed true (maybe they just didn't take what they heard seriously) it doesn't make me feel so "nationally" secure.
|
uaru
|
posted on September 19, 2001 11:56:21 AM new
It is plausible.
Like I said it is one of the best sellers. Conspiracy Theory 23-2b is a very popular model that has been used for over a 100 years. All required is a modest amount of paranoia, and the belief that a large number of people are able to keep complete silence while committing the most sinister of acts.
You'll find nobody able to offer proof to the contray on that theory, it's a thing of beauty.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on September 19, 2001 12:00:07 PM new
I think of it in the same way as the police would handle a murder-in-the-making. There might be a million clues pointing towards a would-be murderer, but until he makes a move, he can't actually be called a murderer. Even if he was watched like a hawk, nobody would know for sure when or how he would commit his act. So maybe the government knew plenty but couldn't act because nothing had been commited.
|
sulyn1950
|
posted on September 19, 2001 12:19:31 PM new
Well-I am not really a history person. My dad is though, and so the History channel is his favorite. I remember hearing that in WWII the English (I think) cracked a German code and knew that some town was going to be bombed, to warn the people would mean to acknowledge the code had been cracked and they wanted that to remain a secret for the perceived long term good. So, the town was bombed and "innocents" whom maybe could have been saved were lost. The conclusion was this is just part of war. It's not clean and it's not painless nor is it pure. Your either going to be the champion or the goat.
[ edited by sulyn1950 on Sep 19, 2001 12:21 PM ]
|
uaru
|
posted on September 19, 2001 12:46:43 PM new
the town was bombed and "innocents" whom maybe could have been saved were lost. The conclusion was this is just part of war.
Yes, that is true.
"Ultra" was the code name for the operation that had broken the German code. The town bombed was Coventry. While the British didn't defend the town, they did set up a 'air raid drill' that occurred right before the town was bombed to limit the casualties. There was also a German ship carrying British prisoners, when British planes attacked it by accident they didn't call them off less the Germans became suspicious that their codes had been broken. Also the routes and times of all the German supply ships in the Mediterranean were known, rather than the British just sinking them by submarine they'd make sure a reconnaissance flight would fly over them hours before the subs would attack them, tricking the German's into believing the ships were sunk only because they had been spotted by aircraft.
|
gravid
|
posted on September 19, 2001 12:50:46 PM new
It would be more believable if you add a bit of incompetance and assume they did not know the towers would collapse.
Then you have a scene like the Star Trek movie where the Klingon commander slips in close to the Federation starship and tells his gunner - disable their engines!
He fires and instead of disabling their engines the whole ship disintegrates in a flash of light into scraps.
He apologizes profusely - a lucky shot!
Ooops...
[ edited by gravid on Sep 19, 2001 12:52 PM ]
|
Antiquary
|
posted on September 19, 2001 02:07:43 PM new
In the history of western culture at least, Socrates would probably be seen as the first conspiracy theorist.
Though it didn't begin there, especially since Watergate, the public has had at least a mild distrust of government. Almost everyone that I know, liberal or conservative, shares that feeling, the strength of which is somewhat influenced by the individual's political persuasion and the degree to which the orientation of the current power structure seems to align with that of the individual. The degree to which the fear generated by the terrorist attacks will lead to an end to questioning and speculation remains uncertain. Regardless, the immediate state of the country sheds light on the often-quoted idea that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.
|
krs
|
posted on September 19, 2001 05:34:06 PM new
Lee Oswald didn't kill John Kennedy. Even the U.S. Congress acknowledged that fifteen years after the fact though it should never have taken that long. Anyone who reads the Warren report closely cannot but come away incredulous that such a document was even presented to the U.S. public as plausible, and astounded that it was and still is accepted as factual by the mass of the public opinion. The public are nothing if not gullible and ALL of the political players know that and make use of it.
|
uaru
|
posted on September 19, 2001 06:08:25 PM new
krs Lee Oswald didn't kill John Kennedy. Even the U.S. Congress acknowledged that fifteen years after the fact though it should never have taken that long.
Congress exonerated Oswald? That's a news story that slipped by me. Sure thought I'd have remembered that one.
I'd sooner debate the existence of God that rehash the Kennedy assassination (more chance of finding proof everyone agrees on.)
|
krs
|
posted on September 20, 2001 05:03:16 AM new
You COULD look it up....
|
bayingbowsers
|
posted on April 16, 2002 06:33:16 PM new
Gee, I thought I say this in here before. Operation Northwoods: re-get it while it's hot.
|
gravid
|
posted on April 16, 2002 06:46:27 PM new
It does look at it from some different angles.
Of course all you can see is our similar character defects.
I am sure you learned very early in school that the line of authority stretched unbroken from your classroom teacher to the President, and none were to be doubted or questioned. Perhaps with a priest sandwitched somewhere in the organizational chart along with hall monitors and crossing guards.
|
nycyn
|
posted on April 16, 2002 06:57:22 PM new
-quote-
You need genuine religeous fanaticism for that.
-end quote-
There aren't any of those in the US ...
Except the abortion clinic killers.
If there is an internal conspiracy around 9-11, one part of it is to generate support of hate of NY'ers, as per my recent experience upstairs.
I clearly need a wife to put me to bed.
'nite.
|
krs
|
posted on April 16, 2002 09:27:46 PM new
Might need two priests, Gravid, one for a spare.
|
gravid
|
posted on April 16, 2002 09:39:42 PM new
nycyn - a new thought for me that
krs - frightening me again - I'll see you one priest and raise a TV preacher!
|
mlecher
|
posted on April 17, 2002 06:04:17 AM new
These secret plans and acts appear before and after every conflict...
Was the Lusitania an innoccent passenger liner or was there munitions stored in its holds. And did the US gov't secretly leak that information to the Germans!?!
Was the cutoff of oil to the Japanese designed to force them to attack Pearl Harbor? Was the information and plans for the attack leaked to the japanese. And why did the smartest military minds of the time decide to bring an entire Ocean's fleet into one spot on the same day. And did the gov't know of the impending attack!?!
How many others can you think of??? How many can you make up?
|
gravid
|
posted on April 17, 2002 07:27:27 AM new
Even as far back as the Mexican war.
There was no pressing need to pursue that war , and shades of today, Polk asked Congress not to declare a formal war.
Is there ever any reason to declare or pursue a war when American territory is not at risk or Americans as a class targeted?
In other words for philosophical or economic reasons?
|
