28 Pages - missing 9/11 evidence

[Ex Observer]

Avvanovva SABC, CrappyNomark, for your troubles and because it annoys you. Although you're not bothered, are you?

Everyone seems to be so eagerly intent on heaping their "witty and erudite" brainless opprobrium on the OP that hardly any of the "ARRSE Twatterati" have actually mentioned the subject of the thread.

So why haven't the missing 28 pages been made public? More to the point: why were they excluded from the final 9/11 Report in the first place? Another question: why are the Saudis so concerned that they're willing to potentially jeapordise their state finances to prevent publication?

What do we know? Immediately after 9/11, various Saudis (including a number of bin Ladens) were whisked out of the US in spite of a total ban on flying. Then it was said that all that happened before the ban. When that was rubbished, it was said that it happened after the ban was lifted. So what's true and what's false? And what's being hidden and why?

MsG

Bugsy mate, Christ knows. As for the Saudis it could be some low ranking bloke trying to sort out a potential problem, thinking ahead and possibly getting it wrong.

As for the "missing" pages? I work for an insurance company and prepare their documents. When we do web versions we remove blank pages and compress pages with just a few lines of text on them, because the customer doesn't want to waste paper and ink on pointless pages. So 28 missing pages? Might I suggest compression and "This page is intentionally blank."

 

[Helm]

Buggy. It's because the OP much like you is a one trick no mark of no use to man nor beast. Knock yourself out and sabc this too you pointless lying walt

 

[theoriginalphantom]

Bugsy mate, Christ knows. As for the Saudis it could be some low ranking bloke trying to sort out a potential problem, thinking ahead and possibly getting it wrong.

As for the "missing" pages? I work for an insurance company and prepare their documents. When we do web versions we remove blank pages and compress pages with just a few lines of text on them, because the customer doesn't want to waste paper and ink on pointless pages. So 28 missing pages? Might I suggest compression and "This page is intentionally blank."

There you go being sensible AND taking the focus away from the OP who, you may have noticed, has a bit of an obsession with a particular subject.

 

[Ex Observer]

There you go being sensible AND taking the focus away from the OP who, you may have noticed, has a bit of an obsession with a particular subject.

I wouldn't know who the OP is. I've got about four posters on ignore so I assume it's one of them.

 

[DaManBugs]

If English isn’t your native language, then forget the following, (Bobby’s) Helm(et) – and note the subtlety in that, fella!

Buggy. It's because the OP much like you is a one trick no mark of no use to man nor beast. Knock yourself out and sabc this too you pointless lying walt

Correction:
"It’s because the OP, much like you, is a one-trick, no-mark (and?) of no use to man or beast. Knock yourself out and SABC this (post?) too. You pointless, lying walt."

Notice any differences there, (Bobby’s) Helm(et)? *snigger*

If English IS your native language, you might want to do some improving there, fella!

And in your pathetic and desperate eagerness to positively project what a “rufty-tufty” fella you are by dealing out primitive insults, you entirely forgot to mention the original intention of the thread. Which leads to the conclusion that it might actually be intellectually beyond you. However, with your standard of English, that’s no surprise.

MsG

 

[DaManBugs]

Bugsy mate, Christ knows. As for the Saudis it could be some low ranking bloke trying to sort out a potential problem, thinking ahead and possibly getting it wrong.

As for the "missing" pages? I work for an insurance company and prepare their documents. When we do web versions we remove blank pages and compress pages with just a few lines of text on them, because the customer doesn't want to waste paper and ink on pointless pages. So 28 missing pages? Might I suggest compression and "This page is intentionally blank."

Sorry, but I just don't buy that, although I can certainly see your point being in the language business myself and often having to deal with "blank pages". The original report was some 12,000 pages long - which were subsequently "condensed" to about 600 pages. I had copies of both the "original" report and the condensed version, since I had to translate them into German and Italian for the respective authorities as part of my job, and there were no "blank pages" in either of them.

That leads me to believe that certain omissions were part of the original parcel and when some members of the commission voiced their doubts about the veracity of the report, it became known that vital/important information had been withheld. So what was that "vital/important information" and why was it withheld?

Further "anomalies": when Condoleeza Rice (as Secretary of National Security) was subpoenaed to appear before the 9/11 Commission, permission was refused by the Cheney/Bush gobment - even though they had no authority whatsoever to do so. They only "allowed" her appearance after they were reassured that she would not have to give evidence on oath. Furthermore, when both Cheney and Bush were similarly subpoenaed, they initially refused and only acquiesced when they were assured that they could appear together, they wouldn't have to take an oath, nor would their evidence be officially recorded.

And all that against the background of the Cheney/Bush gobment vehemently refusing to hold an official investigation into the by far most devastating terrorist tragedy in the history of the US. Grounds for certain "suspicions"? Maybe.

MsG

MsG

 

[Gun_Brickie]

Sorry, but I just don't buy that, although I can certainly see your point being in the language business myself and often having to deal with "blank pages". The original report was some 12,000 pages long - which were subsequently "condensed" to about 600 pages. I had copies of both the "original" report and the condensed version, since I had to translate them into German and Italian for the respective authorities as part of my job, and there were no "blank pages" in either of them.

That leads me to believe that certain omissions were part of the original parcel and when some members of the commission voiced their doubts about the veracity of the report, it became known that vital/important information had been withheld. So what was that "vital/important information" and why was it withheld?

Further "anomalies": when Condoleeza Rice (as Secretary of National Security) was subpoenaed to appear before the 9/11 Commission, permission was refused by the Cheney/Bush gobment - even though they had no authority whatsoever to do so. They only "allowed" her appearance after they were reassured that she would not have to give evidence on oath. Furthermore, when both Cheney and Bush were similarly subpoenaed, they initially refused and only acquiesced when they were assured that they could appear together, they wouldn't have to take an oath, nor would their evidence be officially recorded.

And all that against the background of the Cheney/Bush gobment vehemently refusing to hold an official investigation into the by far most devastating terrorist tragedy in the history of the US. Grounds for certain "suspicions"? Maybe.

MsG

MsG

 

[No_Direction]

Yay. It's the bugsy 'look at meeeeee' dance.


-.-

 

[pc supa]

Sorry, but I just don't buy that, although I can certainly see your point being in the language business myself and often having to deal with "blank pages". The original report was some 12,000 pages long - which were subsequently "condensed" to about 600 pages. I had copies of both the "original" report and the condensed version, since I had to translate them into German and Italian for the respective authorities as part of my job, and there were no "blank pages" in either of them.

That leads me to believe that certain omissions were part of the original parcel and when some members of the commission voiced their doubts about the veracity of the report, it became known that vital/important information had been withheld. So what was that "vital/important information" and why was it withheld?

Further "anomalies": when Condoleeza Rice (as Secretary of National Security) was subpoenaed to appear before the 9/11 Commission, permission was refused by the Cheney/Bush gobment - even though they had no authority whatsoever to do so. They only "allowed" her appearance after they were reassured that she would not have to give evidence on oath. Furthermore, when both Cheney and Bush were similarly subpoenaed, they initially refused and only acquiesced when they were assured that they could appear together, they wouldn't have to take an oath, nor would their evidence be officially recorded.

And all that against the background of the Cheney/Bush gobment vehemently refusing to hold an official investigation into the by far most devastating terrorist tragedy in the history of the US. Grounds for certain "suspicions"? Maybe.

MsG

MsG

You had all those pages, yet you still couldnt post a few stats for porridge gun like you had promised you would.Probably because you aint bothered one little bit, no siree, not bothered.

 

[DannyDiehard]

Might I suggest that No 4 mk 1 gets together with paging @DannyDiehard paging @DannyDiehard

It would help if you have some dits about Kent Police though. (If you haven't I can supply some.)

How kind of you ACAB. I wonder if you can recall two betrayed drugs warrant raids in 1997/98 in Thanet ?

A leak from within Kent Police betrayed the raids to the targets.

As a regular reader you will know that DD has been helping National Crime Agency with their Lawrence case corruption inquiry. The Head of Organised Crime dept CPS has written to the NCA and to the current Lawrence murder inquiry on the subject of duties of disclosure. The failed Kent Police drugs warrant raids feature in the correspondence. And another notorious drugs and murder case is also mentioned.

The CPS has a duty of disclosure after conviction. Of course next to be mentioned will be the 1996 murder of 6th Thanet Gun Range member Ken Speakman at Ramsgate. And whether CPS duties were also in that case undermined by police.

As you know the question arose, at the time of the failed drugs warrant raids, of the anabolic steroid scene in Kent Police. And whether the leak from within plod (a steroid abuser) was in debt and in the control of drugs criminals. And of course whether the Pc Hills ("Thanet street warrior" who broke handcuffed prisoner neck) and Pc Bluestone (family murderer) cases were steroid fuelled.

You probably know that two blackmarket anabolic steroids were used in the manufacture of ecstacy and roidy Kent cop is the main suspect for betraying drugs raids. I think one of the targets may be planning to move overseas at this time ?

The question is whether this was anything to do with the UDA drugs criminals based at Margate.

If you are bright enough ACAB you would be able to work out what this has to do with Chilcott Inquiry.

 

[jimmys_best_mate]

If you are bright enough ACAB you would be able to work out what this has to do with Chilcott Inquiry.

Absolutely fuck all. You broken brained fucking cunt.

 

[greyfergie]

Sorry, but I just don't buy that, although I can certainly see your point being in the language business myself and often having to deal with "blank pages". The original report was some 12,000 pages long - which were subsequently "condensed" to about 600 pages. I had copies of both the "original" report and the condensed version, since I had to translate them into German and Italian for the respective authorities as part of my job, and there were no "blank pages" in either of them.

That leads me to believe that certain omissions were part of the original parcel and when some members of the commission voiced their doubts about the veracity of the report, it became known that vital/important information had been withheld. So what was that "vital/important information" and why was it withheld?

Further "anomalies": when Condoleeza Rice (as Secretary of National Security) was subpoenaed to appear before the 9/11 Commission, permission was refused by the Cheney/Bush gobment - even though they had no authority whatsoever to do so. They only "allowed" her appearance after they were reassured that she would not have to give evidence on oath. Furthermore, when both Cheney and Bush were similarly subpoenaed, they initially refused and only acquiesced when they were assured that they could appear together, they wouldn't have to take an oath, nor would their evidence be officially recorded.

And all that against the background of the Cheney/Bush gobment vehemently refusing to hold an official investigation into the by far most devastating terrorist tragedy in the history of the US. Grounds for certain "suspicions"? Maybe.

MsG

MsG

Memememememememememememememememememememememememememememememememememememememememememememememememe

MsG

 

[Bris]

With Bugsy, No4 and DannyDieHard all in one thread, it's time for the inaugural 'Cunt-off Olympics'.

Who will win? Who will lose? Who will slip into a turps-fuelled coma?

I actually think Bugsy will come out of this as the most sane. Worryingly.

 

[HappyNomad]

With Bugsy, No4 and DannyDieHard all in one thread, it's time for the inaugural '****-off Olympics'.

Who will win? Who will lose? Who will slip into a turps-fuelled coma?

I actually think Bugsy will come out of this as the most sane. Worryingly.

Fuck me... If Bugsy ever got arrested, then based on his demonstrated mental age and ability, they'd lock the cunt up in the station crèche.

At least the other two have a general (if somewhat far fetched) theme whereas Bugsy makes up easily discredited shit about everything he can think of. Must be the pounding his brain took during his career as a (world champion) boxing liar.

Time for another cluster bombing of SABCs yet Bugsy?

 

[Bris]

Hey, Bugsy - I'm cheering for you to lose - the other two are clearly more mental than you!

 

[Bris]

So, Bugsy has come in with an early smattering of SABC, will No4 fight back with a plethora of Dislikes? Smart money is on DannyDieHard to maintain his stoic silence?

 

[No.4 Mk.1]

As you know the question arose, at the time of the failed drugs warrant raids, of the anabolic steroid scene in Kent Police.

Is this right @ACAB ? It could explain so much...

Common side effects with anabolic steroids may include:

• Altered mood, irritability, increased aggression,....

**** me... If Bugsy ever got arrested, then based on his demonstrated mental age and ability, they'd lock the **** up in the station crèche.

At least the other two have a general (if somewhat far fetched) theme whereas Bugsy makes up easily discredited shit about everything he can think of. Must be the pounding his brain took during his career as a (world champion) boxing liar.

Time for another cluster bombing of SABCs yet Bugsy?

Oy! I'm King of the conspiraloon stuff round here - haven't you seen my holiday snaps with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?

FFS, what does a man have to do round here to get some attention? Oh yeah, tell the truth...

 

[Old Stab]

Oy! I'm King of the conspiraloon stuff round here -

For once I think most of ARRSE agrees with you there.

 

[No_Direction]

FFS, what does a man have to do round here to get some attention? Oh yeah, tell the truth...

Bugsy's doing pretty well on the attention front, albeit very negative attention, and he rarely utters a word of truth.

He's a smackhead too you know..

 

[Seadog]

Sorry, but I just don't buy that, although I can certainly see your point being in the language business myself and often having to deal with "blank pages". The original report was some 12,000 pages long - which were subsequently "condensed" to about 600 pages. I had copies of both the "original" report and the condensed version, since I had to translate them into German and Italian for the respective authorities as part of my job, and there were no "blank pages" in either of them.

I seem to recall this translation boast from your previous posting on matters 9/11. No mention of such technical work on your online CV, just dishwasher manuals.

I and others, some of us are professional engineers, feel you belong in a group of 'University of Google' alumni who believe the organic Rankine cycle is environmentally friendly student transport made from sustainable bamboo. You have, over the years on ARRSE, demonstrated that you are not nearly as informed or smart as you think you are. Stand fast your command of German, I respect that.

And while I'm at it; if you're going to slag someone's English, don't call him 'fella' and leave out 'gobment'. It's been done.....over and over. It isn't funny, it isn't clever and it isn't English.