Book says China involved in 9-11 attacks -- Beijing used bin Laden to assault U.S., claims author

WorldNetDaily ^ | 12/15/01 | Gordon Thomas

[rdb3]

Why, yes, of course.

[truthandlife]

BUMP for those who have not read

[Paul Ross]

The W-88 in a shipping container is a complete waste of technology. Anyways, we can now detect this type of incursion if we get serious with detection apparatus, which includes not just geiger counters, but 'sniffers' that are extrordinarily sensitive. Meanwhile, your fear of their being W-88s in containters is misplaced. Its compactness is optimized for MISSILE DELIVERY. China already knows how to build powerful H-Bombs. What the W-88 gives them is the potential to MIRV successfully, and gain a potential for a huge pre-emptive counter-force missile fleet. It's design also uses much less bomb-grade uranium or 'SNM' special nuclear material and hence allows them to proliferate on the cheap. Both the Soviet Union and the US had originally done it the hard way.

[spycatcher]

You aren't thinking like the Chinese though. China is probably using the small design technology to perfect a backpack nuke for terrorist use on American cities.

[zog]

--here's one possibility. Obviously the chinese knew that the taliban air defense was dismal. However, the US was going to be using close to it's top available hardware. My theory is that they collected as much elint as they could in the opening stages of the war, and used the ruse of supplying the taliban as an excuse to have themselves and their gear on the ground over there in afghanistan, at least initially. There's wargaming type intel, then there's the real mc coy, and the real mc coy is always more valuable.

[zog]

--why are the russians selling the chinese advanced weaponry if they fear the chinese so much? Why are the russians selling islamic states advanced weaponry, if they are having problems with islamic terrorists? Why are we building up the manufacturing facilities of china if china is a threat to us? Those and some other questions are all part of this mess, and in my opinion there is no one single correct answer to any of them.

[Paul Ross]

Good grief, what are YOU smoking? You are so off-base on WHO did the heavy lifting against the Taliban and Al Quaeda it is beyond comprehension. 'Warped' would be too charitable a description...

We practiced our own version of asymmetric warfare. What you called 'Some bombs', with precision coordinates from our Special Forces designator units were the devastating key to this war and was the only thing that allowed the Northern Alliance to move out of its defensive crouch to aggressively shoot the wounded and collect the other bombed-out prisoners fleeing their 'impregnable fortresses'.

[Demidog]

The Taliban wasn't the target.

[piasa]

Well, there is no evidence presented that clearly puts them at the helm of 9/11.

Nor was there a need for it, as our target is not 'Afghanistan' nor the Afghan people, but rather the occupiers of that land. If we wanted to kill Afghans we'd have better luck if we bonbed the refugee camps that have been on the Paki border for the last several years.

But even if so, the nation of Afghanistan is not related to Al Quaeda.

Quite correct; Afghanistan hasn't had a real Afghan government in years. It was basically a state in near chaos being run by nutcases for the benefit of people who aren't even Afghans.

In fact if you want to allow for this kind of sloppy logic, we need to start bombing Canada, England, Germany and The U.S. because all allowed Al Quaeda to operate within their borders.

We have not 'allowed' them to operate here, except in that civil liberty advocates have been uncannilly good at preventing law enforcement from doing anything about it, and the last administration didn't push real hard since it felt more threatened by the likes of Billy Gram. The US government has nonetheless been actively following members of these groups here with the ultimate goal of trying to get enough on the suspects to pin them. The squatter-government of Afghanistan- the only one in power at the time- was made up of terrorists and so was in no way even attempting to hunt down or keep an eye on known terrorists. It was indeed protecting them in every way and was making no effort to prevent known terrorists from going back and forth as they pleased, to buy arms, to confiscate property for training camps, etc. It was also executing people who opposed al Qeada and Taliban rules, and permitting its officials to plunder the country at will.

The nation of China clearly brought down one of our planes.

The nation of China let a pilot hotdog too close, in an effort to get us to give ground and not fly just outside of its territorial waters. Ours came down after the accident and the Chinese pilot went chumming. While it MIGHT have been a calculated trade on China's part, there is no evidence to support the idea that the Chinese pilot was trying to physically hit the plane. If the Chinese had really wanted the plane they could have taken it out on many of the previous flights where their flyboy tried to play chicken. There was no need to wait until several opportunities had passed.

If we weren't bullies, then we could have easily attacked China justifiably.

What does 'bullying' have to do with it? If we were bullying, we could have taken on China over the issue. It would still be stupid if we did so, since we have no reason to believe they were doing anything else other than trying to ruffle our feathers. Such confrontations are not 'acts of war' but are just part of the risk of flying such missions on the edge of international waters.

Why didn't we? Because we don't like the odds.

We didn't go after China because China didn't fly planes fully loaded with fuel into the WTC, killing roughly 3000 people. Al Qeada did do so, and Al Qeada's well-known leader was using Afghanistan as a base with the knowledge of the Taliban, who were for all practical purposes the closest thing to 'government' that Afghanistan had. What is more, the Taliban were in no way interested in turning over bin Laden or even investigating bin Laden and his ilk, even when his people voiced their enthusiasm and support for what happened.

Now, why didn't China just attack the WTC instead of using Al Qaeda surrogates? If they were involved, maybe they didn't do it directly because they are gutless cowards? Or maybe because they wanted no part of it or had no part of it, after all? THe fact is, we don't know if they were in it or not, nor do we know if the chinese jet/EP-3 collision was intentional, or just a sloppy effort at intimidation.

All that aside, it is ALWAYS smart to pick your targets and weigh your actions using cost/benefit analysis. It is NOT wise to charge into anything just because you feel 'righteous' or feel a need to avoid looking like a wimp. Those who think smart live long and happy lives, free to fight under their terms and not the enemy's, and will prosper amid all the daisies pushed up by people who used testicles in place of brains.

As Patton said, 'it's not your duty to die for your country- it's your duty to make other poor dumb SOBs die for theirs.' Let the failed nations and philosophies and all their dead call us bullies if they can. It matters not if they cry from their graves.

[UWhusky]

Pardon my ignorance, but what is a W-88 ?