September 11, 2001: Five hours after the 9/11 attacks, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld is already given information that three of the names of the airplane passenger manifests were suspected al-Qaeda operatives. The notes he composes at the time are leaked nearly a year later. He writes he wants the "best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H. [Saddam Hussein] at same time. Not only UBL. [Usama bin Laden] Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not." [CBS, 9/4/02] So clearly the plan to defeat Saddam Hussein's Iraq is planned almost instantly despite a complete lack of evidence showing Iraqi involvement. How can any later evidence pointing to Iraq complicity in 9/11 be trusted? Also, doesn't the fact that three were labeled suspected al-Qaeda operatives so quickly show that the US had files on many of the hijackers before 9/11?
From the Complete 9-11 Timeline by Paul Thompson. A vital online resource for anyone wanting to investigate 911 and the war on terror.
War Without End, Talk online about September 11 and the subsequent War on Terror in an uncensored British forum covering the issues that the media avoid. News, views, controversy, evidence and more. Totally free registration and use of all facilities. No personal information is required to register.
IMPORTANT: YOU MUST BE AGED 18 OR ABOVE TO USE THE FORUM. Even though the forum is uncensored you are reminded that national laws apply when posting material and images. WARNING: Do not enter if you are offended by robust language or images of a graphic nature portraying the realities of war.Al Qaeda - Click Here To Enter - Al Qaeda