View Full Forums : WTC7 - Witness conflicts official report


Swiftfox
06-20-2007, 05:36 PM
9/11 Bombshell: WTC7 Security Official Details Explosions Inside Building
Says bombs were going off in 7 before either tower collpased

Infowars Network | June 19, 2007
S. Watson

The Alex Jones show today welcomed Loose Change creators Dylan Avery and Jason Burmas to discuss an exclusive interview they have conducted with an individual with high level security clearance who was inside the Office of Emergency Management in World Trade Center 7 and has descibed and detailed explosions inside the building prior to the collapse of any of the buildings at ground zero on 9/11.

The interview, to be featured in the forthcoming Final Cut of Loose Change is currently under wraps but the creators have allowed some details to leak purely to protect themselves and the individual involved who has asked to remain anonymous until the film is released.

While details remain scant for obvious reasons, we can reveal that the individual concerned was asked to report to building seven with a city official after the first attack on the North tower but before the second plane hit the South Tower and before their eventual collapse, in order to provide the official with access to different floors of the building.

The city official he was escorting was attempting to reach Rudy Guiliani, who he had determined was inside building 7 at that time. According to Avery and Burmas this official now works for Guiliani partners.

The individual was also asked to provide access to the Office Of Emergency Management on the 23rd floor of the building, this was the so called "bunker" that was built inside WTC7 on the orders of Rudy Guiliani.



When he got there he found the office evacuated and after making some calls was told to leave immediately.

It was at this point that he witnessed a bomb going off inside the building:

"We subsequently went to the stairwell and were going down the stairs, when we reached the sixth floor, the landing that we were standing on gave way, there was an explosion and the landing gave way. I was left there hanging, I had to climb back up and now had to walk back up to the eighth floor. After getting to the eighth floor everything was dark."

The individual in a second clip detailed hearing further explosions and then described what he saw when he got down to the lobby:

"It was totally destroyed, it looked like King Kong had been through it and stepped on it and it was so destroyed i didn't know where I was. It was so destroyed that had to take me out through a hole in the wall, a makeshift hole I believe the fire department made to get me out."

He was then told by firefighters to get twenty blocks away from the area because explosions were going off all over the World Trade Center complex.

The key to this information is that the individual testifies this all happened BEFORE either tower collapsed, thus building 7 was at that point completely undamaged from any falling debris or resulting fires. It also means that explosions were witnessed in WTC7 up to eight hours before its collapse at around 5.30pm.

listen to the clips here (http://prisonplanet.com/audio/190607clips2.mp3)

Avery and Burmas, who played the two short clips of the interview prior to further analysis and more clips to be played on their own GCN radio show later tonight at 7pm CST, further described how the individual had witnessed dead bodies in the lobby of 7 and was told by the police not to look at them.

This is vital information be cause it is in direct conflict with the official claim that no one was killed inside building 7. The 9/11 Commission report did not even mention building, yet here we have a key witness who told them he saw dead people inside the building after explosions had gutted the lower level.

What makes all this information even more explosive is the fact that this individual was interviewed by the 9/11 Commission as they conducted their so called investigation.

The fact that the building was not even mentioned in the report in light of this information thus becomes chilling and indicates that officials have lied in stating that they have not come into contact with evidence of explosive devices within the buildings.

Avery and Burmas successfully contacted the individual after discovering a TV interview he did on 9/11 while they were trawling through news footage from the day in research for the Final Cut.

Avery says that he can and will prove beyond any shadow of doubt that the individual was in building 7 on 9/11 and that what he is saying is accurate.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, I still believe 911 was an inside job.

Anka
06-20-2007, 06:28 PM
Someone close this forum, quick!

Tudamorf
06-20-2007, 06:38 PM
Well, that settles that, how can you argue with hearsay from an unnamed mystery witness, delivered by two conspiracy theory lunatics? <img src=http://lag9.com/rolleyes.gif>

Swiftfox
06-20-2007, 07:35 PM
I'm sure it won't be so easy to brush off later. We'll have to wait and see. The source will be releasing his name at some point as the interview will be in Loose change final cut.

Madie of Wind Riders
06-20-2007, 09:31 PM
Holy!! You still at this WTC7 thing Swift? ROFL there is something to be said about sticktoitavness I guess :wiggle:

Gunny Burlfoot
06-21-2007, 12:06 AM
He's still on this, and my best (and still funny) link still works :)

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons

The author admits he's into the "conspiracy" mythologies, but he balks at "Loose Change":

The ironic part is that I'm a huge conspiracy nut, and even I can't stomach this b******t. For example, I believe that there is a small, reptile-like creature called Chupacabra that sucks the blood of goats in Mexico. Area 51? Hell yes. Roswell? Pass me the Kool-Aid. But "Loose Change" elevates b******t to an artform. Watching this video is like being bukakked with stupid.

Avery and Burmas have no credibility on 9/11 causes, and neither does anyone associated with them.

Their "theory" is that the US government had no problem brutally murdering 3,000 innocent citizens, but just somehow couldn't or wouldn't detect and eliminate two college students with a video camera who threatened to expose their entire masterminded plot. Uh-huh.

Sorry. The only way Avery's theory might have validity is that we'd be reading it published posthumously.

Read the entire article. The author posts links at the end to more technical refutations of "Loose Change".

Swiftfox
06-21-2007, 12:23 AM
I understand why you can't believe it. You are the minority in your belief. The Official version is a conspiracy theory, your tinfoil hat is in the mail.

Fenlayen
06-21-2007, 01:08 AM
You are the minority in your belief.

Wow delusional much :lmao: :lmao:

Thicket Tundrabog
06-21-2007, 07:49 AM
You are the minority in your belief.

Absolutely hilarious. :blow:

B_Delacroix
06-21-2007, 07:57 AM
The final cartoon on Gunny's linked sight pretty much sums it up.

Have a nice day.

Swiftfox
06-21-2007, 08:35 AM
LOL multiple poles including a couple zogby poles show that 60-80% of americans believe there was government involvement. If you go to other countries it is even higher. If you are less than 50% than you are the minority.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/poll_only_16_percent_believe_gov_on_911.htm

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/13469 , 16% believe the government was telling the truth. I think this would be the category you are in.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14727720/ 63% believe in government involvement

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stop Belittling the Theories About September 11
by Bill Christison
Source: dissidentvoice.org
August 14, 2006

However horrendous the crimes of two of the world’s great liars and terrorists in Gaza and Lebanon, it is imperative that we not let the deeds of Ehud Olmert and George W. Bush distract us from another recent event.

The U.S. alliance with Israel and the power of the lobby that lets Israel so easily influence U.S. foreign policy have been major factors in allowing the monstrous slaughter of innocent civilians in Gaza and Lebanon. What is happening in these lands may also encourage Olmert and Bush to start new hostilities in Syria and heavy, possibly nuclear, bombings in Iran — and this entire mess of neocon pottage may lead to a new World War and clashes of civilizations and religious fundamentalisms that these two wretched politicians seem quite literally to want to impose on the rest of us. It’s a tough case to make that anything else going on in the world — anywhere — could possibly be of equal importance.

But on July 29 and 30, and then again on August 1, something else happened that increasing numbers of people believe is of equal importance. On these dates C-SPAN rebroadcast a panel discussion, held originally in late June, sponsored by an organization called the American Scholars’ Symposium to discuss what really happened on September 11, 2001. Held in Los Angeles, the meeting lasted two days, and the C-SPAN rebroadcast covered one almost two-hour wrap-up session. The meeting was attended by 1,200 people interested in hearing something other than the official story of 9/11. The TV audience was evidently large enough to spur C-SPAN to broadcast the panel discussion five separate times in four days.

Even a month late, this is a lot of airtime for stories that many people call conspiracy theories — and for which many others use nastier descriptions. It is possible that the head of C-SPAN, Brian Lamb, so strongly disbelieves the conspiracy theories that he felt giving them ample publicity would discredit them further. It is equally possible, however, that Lamb, who seems honestly to believe in presenting various sides of most issues as fairly as he can (although not always giving every side equal time), tried to do exactly that on the many legitimate questions raised about what actually happened on September 11. In any event, C-SPAN has made a major effort to bring information on the principal theories about 9/11 to the mainstream U.S. media. Lamb cannot be blamed for the coincidence that recent heavy military activity in Gaza and Lebanon is nearly drowning out his efforts.

Let’s address the real issues here. Why is it important that we not let the so-called conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 be drowned out? After spending the better part of the last five years treating these theories with utmost skepticism, I have devoted serious time to actually studying them in recent months, and have also carefully watched several videos that are available on the subject. I have come to believe that significant parts of the 9/11 theories are true, and that therefore significant parts of the “official story” put out by the U.S. government and the 9/11 Commission are false. I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. The items below highlight the major questions surrounding 9/11 but do not constitute a detailed recounting of the evidence available.

ONE: An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. Hard physical evidence supports this conclusion; among other things, the hole in the Pentagon was considerably smaller than an airliner would create. The building was thus presumably hit by something smaller, possibly a missile, or a drone or, less possibly, a smaller manned aircraft. Absolutely no information is available on what happened to the original aircraft (American Airlines Flight 77), the crew, the “hijackers,” and the passengers. The “official story,” as it appeared in The 9/11 Commission Report simply says, “At 9:37:46, American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, traveling at approximately 530 miles per hour. All on board, as well as many civilians and military personnel in the building, were killed.” This allows readers to assume that pieces of the aircraft and some bodies of passengers were found in the rubble of the crash, but information so far released by the government does not show that such evidence was in fact found. The story put out by the Pentagon is that the plane and its passengers were incinerated; yet video footage of offices in the Pentagon situated at the edge of the hole clearly shows office furniture undamaged. The size of the hole in the Pentagon wall still remains as valid evidence and so far seems irrefutable.

TWO: The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them. A plane did not hit Building 7 of the Center, which also collapsed. All three were most probably destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings before 9/11. A substantial volume of evidence shows that typical residues and byproducts from such demolition charges were present in the three buildings after they collapsed. The quality of the research done on this subject is quite impressive.

If the judgments made on Points ONE and TWO above are correct, they raise many “Who done it” questions and strongly suggest that some unnamed persons or groups either inside or with ties to the government were actively creating a “Pearl Harbor” event, most likely to gain public support for the aggressive foreign policies that followed — policies that would, first, “transform” the entire Middle East, and second, expand U.S. global domination.

These first two points provide the strongest evidence available that the “official story” of 9/11 is not true. If the government could prove this evidence false, and its own story on these points correct, all the other data and speculation supporting the conspiracy theories would be undermined. It has provided no such proof and no answers to growing questions.

Other, less important points supporting the theories include the following.

THREE: For at least one hour and 45 minutes after the hijacking of the first aircraft was known, U.S. air defense authorities failed to take meaningful action. This strikes some “conspiracy theorists” as valid evidence that the U.S. Air Force was deliberately restrained from acting. Maybe so, but my own skepticism tells me that the inefficiency of U.S. defense forces is likely to be just as plausible an explanation.

FOUR: Some of the theorists believe that the 19 named hijackers were not actually the hijackers. One claim is that the names of the hijackers were not on the manifests of any of the four aircraft.

FIVE: None of the 19 hijackers’ bodies were ever autopsied (since they were allegedly totally destroyed in the crashes, including even the people in the Pennsylvania crash).

SIX: At least five of the alleged hijackers (or persons with identical names) have since turned up alive in the Middle East. Nonetheless, the FBI has never bothered to re-investigate or revise the list of hijackers. Does this suggest that the FBI knows that no one in the administration is interested in reopening any further investigations?

SEVEN: Numerous pilots have allegedly told the theorists that none of the 19 hijackers could have flown the airliners well enough to hit the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon with as much accuracy as was displayed. The debate on this issue simply raises more doubt about the government’s charge that the people it has named as hijackers are the real hijackers.

EIGHT: No one, except possibly government investigators who are not talking, has seen the plane that went down in Pennsylvania. Some of the conspiracy theorists suggest that it was deliberately destroyed before it hit the ground; others suggest that the plane actually landed in Cleveland and that passengers then were whisked away to some unknown destination. What happened to them at that point is simply a large question mark that makes it more difficult to believe this particular scenario.

NINE: Machinations in the U.S. stock market in the days before 9/11 suggest that some inside players in the market knew or suspected that United and American Airlines stock would soon drop. Two of the four of the aircraft involved in 9/11 were, or course, United planes and the other two were American Airlines planes.

It should be reemphasized that these items do not make up a complete list of all the charges made by the theorists, but they are a good sample. Anyone interested in perhaps the best summary of these charges should watch the video “Loose Change.”

To repeat, points ONE and TWO above are the most important. If something other than an airliner actually did hit the Pentagon on 9/11, and if the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center actually were dropped to the ground by controlled demolitions rather than by anything connected to the hijackings, the untrue stories peddled by The 9/11 Commission Report are clearly susceptible of being turned into major political issues.

A Scripps Howard News Service/Ohio University poll taken from July 6 to 24, 2006 concluded that “more than a third [36 percent] of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them, so that the United States could go to war in the Middle East.” The poll also found that “16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed.”

A poll done by the Zogby polling organization two months earlier, between May 12 and 16, 2006, and using questions worded somewhat differently, suggested even more strongly that the issue could become a “big one” if aggressively publicized. This poll concluded that 42 percent of Americans believed there had indeed been a cover-up of the true events of 9/11, and an additional 10 percent of Americans were “unsure.” The co-author of the poll, W. David Kubiak, stated that, “despite years of relentless media promotion, whitewash, and 9/11 Commission propaganda, the official 9/11 story still can’t even muster 50 percent popular support.”

Whichever of these polls is closer to the truth, it would seem that there is considerable support for making a major political issue of the subject.

This should be worked on at two different levels. At the first level, the objective should be long-term, centered on making a maximum effort to find out who the individuals and groups are that carried out the attacks in New York and Washington. Then, these people should be tried in an international court and, if possible, convicted and punished for causing so many deaths. Such a trial, accompanied by actual change in U.S. policies, would show that some people on this globe are at least trying to move closer to more just and decent behavior in human relationships around the world.

At the second level, the short term, the task should be to immediately set to work as hard as is humanly possible to defeat in this year’s congressional election any candidate who refuses to support a no-holds-barred investigation of 9/11 by the Congress or a high-level international court. No more evidence than is now available is needed in order to begin this process.

A manageable volume of carefully collected and analyzed evidence is already at hand on both items ONE and TWO above. Such evidence should be used right now to buttress charges that elements within the Bush administration, as well as possibly other groups foreign or domestic, were involved in a massive fraud against the American people, a fraud that has led to many thousands of deaths.

This charge of fraud, if proven, involves a much greater crime against the American people and people of the world than any other charges of fraud connected to the run-up to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. It is a charge that we should not sweep under the rug because what is happening in Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, Syria, and Iran seems more pressing and overwhelming. It is a charge that is more important because it is related to all of the areas just mentioned — after all, the events of 9/11 have been used by the administration to justify every single aspect of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East since September 11. It is a charge that is more important also because it affects the very core of our entire political system. If proven, it is a conspiracy, so far successful, not only against the people of the United States, but against the entire world. Finally, it is a charge too important to ignore simply because the U.S. government refuses to discuss it. We must force the Bush administration to discuss it.

Discussions aggressively pushed day after day about what really happened on 9/11 will be one of the most important tasks between now and early November. Such discussions can, one hopes, provide progressives with a way to jolt voters out of their apathy and inchoate willingness to support the status quo that they think gives them security — and encourage more voters to stop supporting Bush, the Republicans, and the wobbly Democratic politicians who might as well be Republicans. A major issue like this, already supported by many voters, may prove particularly important in a congressional election year when new uncertainties in the Middle East, new possibilities of terrorism against the U.S. in retaliation for recent large-scale acts of Israeli/U.S. terrorism in Gaza and Lebanon, and the corrupt almost-single-party U.S. political system combine to make it more likely that supporters of Bush will retain their majority this November.

In terms of electoral impact, it would not matter whether heavy publicity did in fact force the administration to accept a new high-level investigation of the 9/11 events. Initially, the principal goal would be to contribute heavily to the defeat of both Republicans and Democrats who refuse to support wholeheartedly a major new investigation by Congress or an international court. This might result in the defeat of more Republicans than Democrats in November, but ultimately the hoped-for goal should be the end of a system in which Democrats are barely different from Republicans, along with cutbacks in the political power of wealth and the foreign and domestic lobbies paid for by wealth. These are the dominant features of our system today that have practically eliminated meaningful democracy in the U.S. This failure of democracy has happened before in U.S. history, but this time it is likely to last longer — at least until U.S. policies begin to pay as much attention to the needs of the world as they do to selfish or thoughtless needs of the U.S. and of its military-industrial complex. Attacks on the criminal events surrounding 9/11 might speed this process.

Virtually no members of Congress, Democratic or Republican, will relish calling for a further investigation of 9/11. For right now, in addition to other motives, the issue should be used to go after those political prostitutes among elected office-holders who should also be defeated because they are so easily seduced by money and power to vote for immoral wars against weak enemies.

At the Los Angeles meeting of the American Scholars’ Symposium, one of the main speakers, Webster Tarpley, summarized his own views on the events of 9/11. He emphasized that “neocon fascist madmen” had perpetrated the 9/11 “myth.” He went on to say, “The most important thing is that the 9/11 myth is the premise and the root of the Afghanistan War and the Iraq War and the coming attack on Iran. … We must … deprive [the myth’s perpetrators] of the ability to stampede and manipulate hundreds of millions of people [with their] … cynically planned terrorist events.”

Let’s give Webster Tarpley and other mistakenly labeled conspiracists who have labored in the wilderness for so long three cheers.


Bill Christison is a former senior official of the CIA. He was a National Intelligence Officer and the Director of the CIA’s Office of Regional and Political Analysis before his retirement in 1979. Since then he has written numerous articles on U.S. foreign policies.

Swiftfox
06-21-2007, 09:10 AM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8399599446820879166&hl=en

Moore brought up his lingering questions on 9/11, which are a clear departure from the 'government negligence' picture he painted in his film Fahrenheit 9/11 , released some three years ago.

Moore told reporters, "I've had a number of firefighters tell me over the years and since Fahrenheit 9/11 that they heard these explosions-- that they believe there's MUCH more to the story than we've been told. I don't think the official investigations have told us the complete truth-- they haven't even told us half the truth."

"I've filmed there before down at the Pentagon-- before 9/11-- there's got to be at least 100 cameras, ringing that building, in the trees, everywhere. They've got that plane coming in with 100 angles. How come with haven't seen the straight-- I'm not talking about stop-action photos, I'm talking about the video. I want to see the video; I want to see 100 videos that exist of this," Moore said.

"Why don't they want us to see that plane coming into the building? Because, if you know anything about flying a plane, when you're going 500 miles per hour, if you're off by that much, you're in the river. So, they hit a building that's only 5 stories high...[unclear] that expertly. I believe that there will be answers in that video tape and we should demand that that tape is released."

Aidon
06-21-2007, 11:20 AM
LOL multiple poles including a couple zogby poles show that 60-80% of americans believe there was government involvement. If you go to other countries it is even higher. If you are less than 50% than you are the minority.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/poll_only_16_percent_believe_gov_on_911.htm

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/13469 , 16% believe the government was telling the truth. I think this would be the category you are in.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14727720/ 63% believe in government involvement

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stop Belittling the Theories About September 11
by Bill Christison
Source: dissidentvoice.org
August 14, 2006

However horrendous the crimes of two of the world’s great liars and terrorists in Gaza and Lebanon, it is imperative that we not let the deeds of Ehud Olmert and George W. Bush distract us from another recent event.

The U.S. alliance with Israel and the power of the lobby that lets Israel so easily influence U.S. foreign policy have been major factors in allowing the monstrous slaughter of innocent civilians in Gaza and Lebanon. What is happening in these lands may also encourage Olmert and Bush to start new hostilities in Syria and heavy, possibly nuclear, bombings in Iran — and this entire mess of neocon pottage may lead to a new World War and clashes of civilizations and religious fundamentalisms that these two wretched politicians seem quite literally to want to impose on the rest of us. It’s a tough case to make that anything else going on in the world — anywhere — could possibly be of equal importance.

But on July 29 and 30, and then again on August 1, something else happened that increasing numbers of people believe is of equal importance. On these dates C-SPAN rebroadcast a panel discussion, held originally in late June, sponsored by an organization called the American Scholars’ Symposium to discuss what really happened on September 11, 2001. Held in Los Angeles, the meeting lasted two days, and the C-SPAN rebroadcast covered one almost two-hour wrap-up session. The meeting was attended by 1,200 people interested in hearing something other than the official story of 9/11. The TV audience was evidently large enough to spur C-SPAN to broadcast the panel discussion five separate times in four days.

Even a month late, this is a lot of airtime for stories that many people call conspiracy theories — and for which many others use nastier descriptions. It is possible that the head of C-SPAN, Brian Lamb, so strongly disbelieves the conspiracy theories that he felt giving them ample publicity would discredit them further. It is equally possible, however, that Lamb, who seems honestly to believe in presenting various sides of most issues as fairly as he can (although not always giving every side equal time), tried to do exactly that on the many legitimate questions raised about what actually happened on September 11. In any event, C-SPAN has made a major effort to bring information on the principal theories about 9/11 to the mainstream U.S. media. Lamb cannot be blamed for the coincidence that recent heavy military activity in Gaza and Lebanon is nearly drowning out his efforts.

Let’s address the real issues here. Why is it important that we not let the so-called conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 be drowned out? After spending the better part of the last five years treating these theories with utmost skepticism, I have devoted serious time to actually studying them in recent months, and have also carefully watched several videos that are available on the subject. I have come to believe that significant parts of the 9/11 theories are true, and that therefore significant parts of the “official story” put out by the U.S. government and the 9/11 Commission are false. I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. The items below highlight the major questions surrounding 9/11 but do not constitute a detailed recounting of the evidence available.

ONE: An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. Hard physical evidence supports this conclusion; among other things, the hole in the Pentagon was considerably smaller than an airliner would create. The building was thus presumably hit by something smaller, possibly a missile, or a drone or, less possibly, a smaller manned aircraft. Absolutely no information is available on what happened to the original aircraft (American Airlines Flight 77), the crew, the “hijackers,” and the passengers. The “official story,” as it appeared in The 9/11 Commission Report simply says, “At 9:37:46, American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, traveling at approximately 530 miles per hour. All on board, as well as many civilians and military personnel in the building, were killed.” This allows readers to assume that pieces of the aircraft and some bodies of passengers were found in the rubble of the crash, but information so far released by the government does not show that such evidence was in fact found. The story put out by the Pentagon is that the plane and its passengers were incinerated; yet video footage of offices in the Pentagon situated at the edge of the hole clearly shows office furniture undamaged. The size of the hole in the Pentagon wall still remains as valid evidence and so far seems irrefutable.

TWO: The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them. A plane did not hit Building 7 of the Center, which also collapsed. All three were most probably destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings before 9/11. A substantial volume of evidence shows that typical residues and byproducts from such demolition charges were present in the three buildings after they collapsed. The quality of the research done on this subject is quite impressive.

If the judgments made on Points ONE and TWO above are correct, they raise many “Who done it” questions and strongly suggest that some unnamed persons or groups either inside or with ties to the government were actively creating a “Pearl Harbor” event, most likely to gain public support for the aggressive foreign policies that followed — policies that would, first, “transform” the entire Middle East, and second, expand U.S. global domination.

These first two points provide the strongest evidence available that the “official story” of 9/11 is not true. If the government could prove this evidence false, and its own story on these points correct, all the other data and speculation supporting the conspiracy theories would be undermined. It has provided no such proof and no answers to growing questions.

Other, less important points supporting the theories include the following.

THREE: For at least one hour and 45 minutes after the hijacking of the first aircraft was known, U.S. air defense authorities failed to take meaningful action. This strikes some “conspiracy theorists” as valid evidence that the U.S. Air Force was deliberately restrained from acting. Maybe so, but my own skepticism tells me that the inefficiency of U.S. defense forces is likely to be just as plausible an explanation.

FOUR: Some of the theorists believe that the 19 named hijackers were not actually the hijackers. One claim is that the names of the hijackers were not on the manifests of any of the four aircraft.

FIVE: None of the 19 hijackers’ bodies were ever autopsied (since they were allegedly totally destroyed in the crashes, including even the people in the Pennsylvania crash).

SIX: At least five of the alleged hijackers (or persons with identical names) have since turned up alive in the Middle East. Nonetheless, the FBI has never bothered to re-investigate or revise the list of hijackers. Does this suggest that the FBI knows that no one in the administration is interested in reopening any further investigations?

SEVEN: Numerous pilots have allegedly told the theorists that none of the 19 hijackers could have flown the airliners well enough to hit the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon with as much accuracy as was displayed. The debate on this issue simply raises more doubt about the government’s charge that the people it has named as hijackers are the real hijackers.

EIGHT: No one, except possibly government investigators who are not talking, has seen the plane that went down in Pennsylvania. Some of the conspiracy theorists suggest that it was deliberately destroyed before it hit the ground; others suggest that the plane actually landed in Cleveland and that passengers then were whisked away to some unknown destination. What happened to them at that point is simply a large question mark that makes it more difficult to believe this particular scenario.

NINE: Machinations in the U.S. stock market in the days before 9/11 suggest that some inside players in the market knew or suspected that United and American Airlines stock would soon drop. Two of the four of the aircraft involved in 9/11 were, or course, United planes and the other two were American Airlines planes.

It should be reemphasized that these items do not make up a complete list of all the charges made by the theorists, but they are a good sample. Anyone interested in perhaps the best summary of these charges should watch the video “Loose Change.”

To repeat, points ONE and TWO above are the most important. If something other than an airliner actually did hit the Pentagon on 9/11, and if the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center actually were dropped to the ground by controlled demolitions rather than by anything connected to the hijackings, the untrue stories peddled by The 9/11 Commission Report are clearly susceptible of being turned into major political issues.

A Scripps Howard News Service/Ohio University poll taken from July 6 to 24, 2006 concluded that “more than a third [36 percent] of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them, so that the United States could go to war in the Middle East.” The poll also found that “16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed.”

A poll done by the Zogby polling organization two months earlier, between May 12 and 16, 2006, and using questions worded somewhat differently, suggested even more strongly that the issue could become a “big one” if aggressively publicized. This poll concluded that 42 percent of Americans believed there had indeed been a cover-up of the true events of 9/11, and an additional 10 percent of Americans were “unsure.” The co-author of the poll, W. David Kubiak, stated that, “despite years of relentless media promotion, whitewash, and 9/11 Commission propaganda, the official 9/11 story still can’t even muster 50 percent popular support.”

Whichever of these polls is closer to the truth, it would seem that there is considerable support for making a major political issue of the subject.

This should be worked on at two different levels. At the first level, the objective should be long-term, centered on making a maximum effort to find out who the individuals and groups are that carried out the attacks in New York and Washington. Then, these people should be tried in an international court and, if possible, convicted and punished for causing so many deaths. Such a trial, accompanied by actual change in U.S. policies, would show that some people on this globe are at least trying to move closer to more just and decent behavior in human relationships around the world.

At the second level, the short term, the task should be to immediately set to work as hard as is humanly possible to defeat in this year’s congressional election any candidate who refuses to support a no-holds-barred investigation of 9/11 by the Congress or a high-level international court. No more evidence than is now available is needed in order to begin this process.

A manageable volume of carefully collected and analyzed evidence is already at hand on both items ONE and TWO above. Such evidence should be used right now to buttress charges that elements within the Bush administration, as well as possibly other groups foreign or domestic, were involved in a massive fraud against the American people, a fraud that has led to many thousands of deaths.

This charge of fraud, if proven, involves a much greater crime against the American people and people of the world than any other charges of fraud connected to the run-up to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. It is a charge that we should not sweep under the rug because what is happening in Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, Syria, and Iran seems more pressing and overwhelming. It is a charge that is more important because it is related to all of the areas just mentioned — after all, the events of 9/11 have been used by the administration to justify every single aspect of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East since September 11. It is a charge that is more important also because it affects the very core of our entire political system. If proven, it is a conspiracy, so far successful, not only against the people of the United States, but against the entire world. Finally, it is a charge too important to ignore simply because the U.S. government refuses to discuss it. We must force the Bush administration to discuss it.

Discussions aggressively pushed day after day about what really happened on 9/11 will be one of the most important tasks between now and early November. Such discussions can, one hopes, provide progressives with a way to jolt voters out of their apathy and inchoate willingness to support the status quo that they think gives them security — and encourage more voters to stop supporting Bush, the Republicans, and the wobbly Democratic politicians who might as well be Republicans. A major issue like this, already supported by many voters, may prove particularly important in a congressional election year when new uncertainties in the Middle East, new possibilities of terrorism against the U.S. in retaliation for recent large-scale acts of Israeli/U.S. terrorism in Gaza and Lebanon, and the corrupt almost-single-party U.S. political system combine to make it more likely that supporters of Bush will retain their majority this November.

In terms of electoral impact, it would not matter whether heavy publicity did in fact force the administration to accept a new high-level investigation of the 9/11 events. Initially, the principal goal would be to contribute heavily to the defeat of both Republicans and Democrats who refuse to support wholeheartedly a major new investigation by Congress or an international court. This might result in the defeat of more Republicans than Democrats in November, but ultimately the hoped-for goal should be the end of a system in which Democrats are barely different from Republicans, along with cutbacks in the political power of wealth and the foreign and domestic lobbies paid for by wealth. These are the dominant features of our system today that have practically eliminated meaningful democracy in the U.S. This failure of democracy has happened before in U.S. history, but this time it is likely to last longer — at least until U.S. policies begin to pay as much attention to the needs of the world as they do to selfish or thoughtless needs of the U.S. and of its military-industrial complex. Attacks on the criminal events surrounding 9/11 might speed this process.

Virtually no members of Congress, Democratic or Republican, will relish calling for a further investigation of 9/11. For right now, in addition to other motives, the issue should be used to go after those political prostitutes among elected office-holders who should also be defeated because they are so easily seduced by money and power to vote for immoral wars against weak enemies.

At the Los Angeles meeting of the American Scholars’ Symposium, one of the main speakers, Webster Tarpley, summarized his own views on the events of 9/11. He emphasized that “neocon fascist madmen” had perpetrated the 9/11 “myth.” He went on to say, “The most important thing is that the 9/11 myth is the premise and the root of the Afghanistan War and the Iraq War and the coming attack on Iran. … We must … deprive [the myth’s perpetrators] of the ability to stampede and manipulate hundreds of millions of people [with their] … cynically planned terrorist events.”

Let’s give Webster Tarpley and other mistakenly labeled conspiracists who have labored in the wilderness for so long three cheers.


Bill Christison is a former senior official of the CIA. He was a National Intelligence Officer and the Director of the CIA’s Office of Regional and Political Analysis before his retirement in 1979. Since then he has written numerous articles on U.S. foreign policies.


People like you believed the Protocols of the Elders of Zion too.

Your conpsiracy theories are amusing until they cross into good old fashioned Jew hating.

Yeah, its the Jews controlling the US government who caused 9/11. Good job. You're now in the same ranks as such intellectual giants as Achmed the Syrian Goat Herd and Ahmadinejad the Iranian Madman.

Aidon
06-21-2007, 11:22 AM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8399599446820879166&hl=en

Moore brought up his lingering questions on 9/11, which are a clear departure from the 'government negligence' picture he painted in his film Fahrenheit 9/11 , released some three years ago.

Moore told reporters, "I've had a number of firefighters tell me over the years and since Fahrenheit 9/11 that they heard these explosions-- that they believe there's MUCH more to the story than we've been told. I don't think the official investigations have told us the complete truth-- they haven't even told us half the truth."

"I've filmed there before down at the Pentagon-- before 9/11-- there's got to be at least 100 cameras, ringing that building, in the trees, everywhere. They've got that plane coming in with 100 angles. How come with haven't seen the straight-- I'm not talking about stop-action photos, I'm talking about the video. I want to see the video; I want to see 100 videos that exist of this," Moore said.

"Why don't they want us to see that plane coming into the building? Because, if you know anything about flying a plane, when you're going 500 miles per hour, if you're off by that much, you're in the river. So, they hit a building that's only 5 stories high...[unclear] that expertly. I believe that there will be answers in that video tape and we should demand that that tape is released."

Moore's an idiot and always has been, even on the rare occasions when I agree with him.

Hello, "expertly" flying a plane would be the ability to land that jet on a 50 foot wide runway, rather than crashing into it. A reasonably trained chimpanzee could hit the ****ing Pentagon. Its huge.

Gunny Burlfoot
06-21-2007, 12:43 PM
Your conpsiracy theories are amusing until they cross into good old fashioned Jew hating.

Yeah, its the Jews controlling the US government who caused 9/11. Good job. You're now in the same ranks as such intellectual giants as Achmed the Syrian Goat Herd and Ahmadinejad the Iranian Madman.

I concur with you on this, Aidon.

Like the author I linked, I, too, enjoy conspiracy theories. I really like the idea of alien conspiracies, Bigfoot, and the Loch Ness monster. Of course, I realize it's all hearsay, and I often wonder why not a single f*****g one of the alien abductees can't break off a piece of the spaceship, or at least scratch one of the aliens (DNA under fingernails!) but I enjoy the "what if?" aspect of it.

However, if you delve too deeply into the conspiracy subculture, past the postulation that lizard men are controlling our governments from miles underneath the earth, and past Hoagland's imaginations of superskyscrapers on the Moon, there is a very disturbing tendency for them to roll in Jewish blood libel right into their Grand Theory of Everything.

In their defense, I'd say most of the theorists that I've read don't cross that racist line, but once you start seeing wheels within wheels within everything, then they venture into a realm populated by He Who Will Not Be Named, David Duke, and all the Muslim imams, among others.

Swiftfox
06-21-2007, 06:32 PM
Quit using the CT'ers hate jews crap, sure some CT think the jews are in on everything. A lot think criminal elements in the government are responsible some of which may or may not have ties to Isreal. Wether or not they are jewish is irrelevant. We want criminals brought to justice and if there was treason involved then I say we stretch their necks like Saddam's.

The whole point of the Moore link is that more people all the time are questioning the official "Conspiracy Theory".


Why is it OK to play a don't hate the Jew card but it perfectly acceptable to hate all Muslims ... hippocrites.

Swiftfox
06-21-2007, 06:46 PM
Hello, "expertly" flying a plane would be the ability to land that jet on a 50 foot wide runway, rather than crashing into it. A reasonably trained chimpanzee could hit the ****ing Pentagon. Its huge

There are experienced pilots in the planes that crashed that have said there is no way they could have accomplished this miracle feat at the pentagon. where it looped around and came it at suposedly 500+ miles an hour clipping light poles but maintaining control to crash into the pentagon. (Which just happened to be almost empty as it was just refurbed.)

There are also flight instructors who in simulators have tried to duplicate it and only succed on the 10th attempt. Keep in mind these hijackers were reportedly poor pilots, having turned off their transponders would be navigating on sight alone.

If I had the ties to the Bin laden family that Bush does I'd be in Guantanamo right now.

Klath
06-21-2007, 06:50 PM
The whole point of the Moore link is that more people all the time are questioning the official "Conspiracy Theory".
I'm not really up on all the specifics of the various conspiracy theories so this may be a stupid question... how do they address the disappearance of all of the people who were on flight 77? If the Pentagon was hit by a missile, where did the plane and all the passengers on the flight go?

This allows readers to assume that pieces of the aircraft and some bodies of passengers were found in the rubble of the crash, but information so far released by the government does not show that such evidence was in fact found.
This picture appears to contain a photo of debris from the plane:

http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/Post911/dubious_claims/010911-N-6157F-001.jpg

Swiftfox
06-21-2007, 06:59 PM
What I see is a part of something, I don't think it's been proven that it's a part of a comercial aircraft. You'll have to like this argument it's similar to the "molten steel/metal (in the WTC 1, 2 and 7 debris) was never proven to be steel" line from the debunkers.

I'm not convinced either way on the plane hitting or not hitting the pentagon. I'm quite certain planes hit WTC1 and 2 so having another hit the Pentagon isn't much of a stretch. I think it's open to debate and needs further investigation. The ability for remote controling aircraft including take offs and landing has been available since the 60's. I think it's fair to say there must have been improvments since then.


Also Operation Northwoods 1962 (showing both the ability for drones was avaiable and the reasoning to do it.)

The proposals included:

-Starting rumors about Cuba by using clandestine radios.
-Staging mock attacks, sabotages and riots at Guantanamo Bay and blaming it on Cuban forces.
-Firebombing and sinking an American ship at the Guantanamo Bay American military base — reminiscent of the USS Maine incident at Havana in 1898, which started the Spanish-American War — or destroy American aircraft and blame it on Cuban forces. (The document's first suggestion regarding the sinking of a U.S. ship is to blow up a manned ship and hence would result in U.S. Navy members being killed, with a secondary suggestion of possibly using an unmanned ship and fake funerals instead.)
-"Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type [sic] planes would be useful as complementary actions."
-Destroying an unmanned drone masquerading as a commercial aircraft supposedly full of "college students off on a holiday". This proposal was the one supported by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
-Staging a "terror campaign", including the "real or simulated" sinking of Cuban refugees:
We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington. The terror campaign could be pointed at refugees seeking haven in the United States. We could sink a boatload of Cubans enroute [sic] to Florida (real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in the United States even to the extent of wounding in instances to be widely publicized. Exploding a few plastic bombs in carefully chosen spots, the arrest of Cuban agents and the release of prepared documents substantiating Cuban involvement, also would be helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible government.

-Burning crops by dropping incendiary devices in Haiti, the Dominican Republic or elsewhere.

Swiftfox
06-21-2007, 07:17 PM
Oh look here's now info

FBI Knowingly Allowed Bin Laden To Personally Charter Flight After 9/11 (http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/bin_laden_fbi_let_charter_flight_after_911.htm)

It was revealed that the FBI had previously redacted Osama Bin Laden's name from the records in order “to protect privacy interests.”

What will have to come out to make you question your stance on 9/11?

I think most of you will have to see Cheyney cackle geefuly, while high 5'ing Bin laden shouting "we did it!" and then like most comic book criminals, detail exactly how. There's probably a tape of that somewhere ...

Tudamorf
06-21-2007, 07:32 PM
What will have to come out to make you question your stance on 9/11?You could start with a rational explanation as to WHY the government would do what you allege they did.

Anka
06-21-2007, 07:38 PM
You could start with a rational explanation as to WHY the government would do what you allege they did.

You could then explain why Al Qaeda terrorists would claim this terrorist attack if they could just expose the supposed conspiracy and bring down the US government instantaneously.

Swiftfox
06-21-2007, 08:14 PM
- double post deleted -

Swiftfox
06-21-2007, 08:21 PM
You could start with a rational explanation as to WHY the government would do what you allege they did.

Money and power, and it's not "the government" it's "criminal elements within the government". To the worlds elite the world is a grand chessboard. 3000 victims are nothing to these people. They considers the vast majority of us to be "useless eaters (http://www.whale.to/b/genocide_q.html)"

"Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns" -- Henry Kissinger

You could then explain why Al Qaeda terrorists would claim this terrorist attack if they could just expose the supposed conspiracy and bring down the US government instantaneously.

If you are talking about the Bin laden confession tape. It's authenticity is in question doubt.

Google cache (http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:BSuKOA7e3HsJ:zroxi.com/giproxy/nph-proxy.pl/000000A/http/infowars.net/articles/february2007/190207Osama_tape.htm+bin+laden+confession+fake&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=ca)
A leading expert on Osama Bin Laden has officially gone on the record saying that he believes the so called "9/11 Confession" tape, released shortly after the attacks, is an outright fake that has been used by US intelligence agencies to deflect attention from
“conspiracy theories” about 9/11.

Professor Bruce Lawrence, head of Duke University’s Religious Studies program, joined Kevin Barrett last Friday on his radio show (gcnlive.com, 2/16/2007, first hour) in his first public interview since comments he made last year indicating that he believes Bin Laden may be dead and that many of the newer tapes are either fake or consist of old audio and video.

The "Confession" video, played ad infinitum in the wake of the attack on Afghanistan in December 2001, was magically found in a house in Jalalabad after anti-Taliban forces moved in. It featured a fat Osama laughing and joking about how he'd carried out 9/11. The video was also mistranslated in order to manipulate viewer opinion and featured "Bin Laden" praising two of the hijackers, only he got their names wrong.

This Osama also uses the wrong hand to write with and wears gold rings, a practice totally in opposition to the Muslim faith.

Despite the fact that the man in the video looks nothing like Bin Laden, the CIA stood by the video whilst many, including Professor Lawrence now, have declared it an outright fake.

Lawrence is the author of a book entitled Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama Bin Laden, which translates Bin Laden's writing. In January 2006 he told ABC news that a newly released audio tape was missing several key elements and "was like a voice from the grave". The Professor had analyzed more than 20 complete speeches and interviews of the al Qaida leader for his book, and, while the CIA confirmed the voice on the tape as Bin Laden, Lawrence questioned when it was recorded and declared the timing of its release as politically convenient.

Last Friday Lawrence, citing informants in the US intelligence apparatus’s Bin Laden units, told Kevin Barrett that everyone knows the tape is fake, adding that the hoax has been kept alive because it is politically useful to those who wish to bolster the official 9/11 conspiracy that 19 hijackers directed by Bin Laden from a cave carried out the attacks.

We have previously covered the scores of times Osama Bin Laden has been used as a tool of fear and control as a tried and tested method whenever the going gets tough. Many tapes have been determined to be total fakes by voice analysis or simply re-hashes of old material.

Research led us to discover that the most recent "Al Qaeda" video releases featuring Bin Laden had already featured in a docudrama The Road to Guantanamo. The media tentatively even admitted that it was the government that released the tapes.

In a separate revelation, AP reported that an expert on Islamic extremism deemed the Al Qaeda footage as so out of character for al-Qa'ida it could have been taken by a security agency.

Bin Laden was created by US intelligence , worked with US intelligence in the late 70s and 80s, was used as a patsy by US intelligence before and after 911 and is now being used as a manipulative tool of fear by the criminal elite faction currently in power in the US.

In June 2006, Muckraker Report investigative reporter Ed Haas contacted the FBI to ask why 9/11 was not specifically mentioned on Bin Laden's wanted page on the FBI website.

“The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden's most wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11," he was told Rex Tomb.

In Bin Laden's first interview after the 9/11 attacks he denied any involvement. This isn't like a kid caught thieving in a sweet shop - terrorists always claim responsibility for attacks they have perpetrated otherwise why bother killing people to send a political message?

Then came the now thoroughly debunked "Confession Tape".

The fact that the FBI does not consider the 'confession tape' as reliable evidence of involvement in 9/11 was subsequently completely dismissed by the Washington Post and others who still say the tape proves that Al-Qaeda have, "proudly taken responsibility for the hijackings."



Bin laden was considered a CIA asset and because Al-Qaeda was a CIA creation to begin with. There is also a documentary that claims no such group exists by the BBC (http://www.livevideo.com/video/89CFA18504794B26ABF2737BDF2D613D/9-11-truth-al-qaeda-doesn-t-e.aspx)

Fyyr Lu'Storm
06-21-2007, 08:45 PM
Why is it OK to play a don't hate the Jew card but it perfectly acceptable to hate all Muslims

Because Jews don't hate me, don't want to convert me, enslave me, or kill me.

Many Muslims on the planet do.

Now not ALL do, of course; but those who like me, and act all normal and sh!t, tend to be rather normal people(by definition perhaps).

Now I do hate a few Jews, of course. But not because they are Jews, e.g. I hate Alan Dershowitz, of course. But not because he is a Jew, he could be an Atheist for all I care(most probably is).

Tudamorf
06-21-2007, 09:44 PM
Money and power, and it's not "the government" it's "criminal elements within the government".That's a nice, generic, and meaningless explanation.

Tudamorf
06-21-2007, 09:45 PM
Why is it OK to play a don't hate the Jew card but it perfectly acceptable to hate all Muslims ... hippocrites.Because in case of the Muslims, the allegations are true?

oddjob1244
06-22-2007, 01:38 AM
Well, that settles that, how can you argue with hearsay from an unnamed mystery witness, delivered by two conspiracy theory lunatics? <img src=http://lag9.com/rolleyes.gif>

Seriously. I'm guessing next is going to be links to interviews of people claiming to be abducted by UFOs, or seeing lochness monster, or big foot because people never lie to get attention. beyond *eye roll*

Anka
06-22-2007, 07:24 AM
All that stuff about the Al Qaeda not existing and pseudo-terrorists taking pride in false claims is really weak. US troops are dieing in Afghanistan against rebels, terrorists, and insurgents. These people are not a myth. The Taliban, Iraqis, Al Qaeda, etc all want US troops out of the middle east. Exposing a conspiracy over 9/11 would be one of the fastest ways of achieving all their goals.

You can't blithely assume the widespread collusion of US enemies in a massive conspiracy plot when it is patently against all their interests to do so.

B_Delacroix
06-22-2007, 07:54 AM
I regularly look for plane crash debris at my job. You would be suprised at how much "disappears" when a plane burns up. Its freaking impossible to find on the ground and that's out here in the relatively flat desert. An airplane that burns up pretty much turns into slag.

The best one was where they ran an F4 on the rocket sled track into a concrete wall. There was a puff of flame and the plane seemed to just vanish.

Then again, that just means I'm part of the conspiracy. Yea, 3000+ people are voluntarily keeping quiet about this.

Klath
06-22-2007, 09:29 AM
The best one was where they ran an F4 on the rocket sled track into a concrete wall. There was a puff of flame and the plane seemed to just vanish.
F-4 vs. Concrete Wall (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwAhkRciO7k&mode=related&search=)

The F4 was going at about the same speed as Flight 77 was going when it hit the Pentagon. While not quite a as solid as a 5' thick reinforced concrete wall, the Pentagon is pretty damn solid as building go.

B_Delacroix
06-22-2007, 11:25 AM
Exactly, you see what I mean? Suprising how little is left of the plane isn't it?

I don't know if that test was done at the test track here. It looks like our track and we do have F4s around, but it could just as well have been in California.

I've seen plenty of crashes. Accident and on purpose and there just aren't a lot of parts left when its all done. Spent an entire afternoon buggying around the desert looking for one that we had the coordinates for and found nothing. It turns out that it was a few miles north of the last signal we recieved. Found it via flyby the next day.

Swiftfox
06-22-2007, 05:52 PM
I said I wasn't convinced either way. I did notice the tips of the wings almost sliced into the concrete in that video. The damage at the hole in the pentagon where the impact was, is not consistant with the wings or 6 ton engines hitting the building at all.

http://www.oilempire.us/graphics/pentagon_composite.jpg

and

http://www.liferepatterning.com/9-11%20Pentagon%20images/9-11%20A0021a_Pentagon%20-%20analysis%20of%20damage.jpg

I don't think the pentagon plane or no plane debate is what 911 truth hinges on. There are still plenty of other holes in the official story that have raised questions and doubt.

Fenlayen
06-22-2007, 06:41 PM
Only thing these make me question is the sanity of the small percentage of the population that actually belive in the conspiracy theories.

Swiftfox
06-22-2007, 08:43 PM
Here's more people who question the official story

100 Senior Military, Intelligence, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials (http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/), 140+ Engineers, scientists, and other scholars (http://patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html), 70+ entertainers and media professionals (http://patriotsquestion911.com/media.html), and the 100+ 9/11 survivors and family members (http://patriotsquestion911.com/survivors.html)

Aidon
06-25-2007, 03:13 PM
Quit using the CT'ers hate jews crap, sure some CT think the jews are in on everything. A lot think criminal elements in the government are responsible some of which may or may not have ties to Isreal. Wether or not they are jewish is irrelevant. We want criminals brought to justice and if there was treason involved then I say we stretch their necks like Saddam's.

When CTers stop attempting to blame 9/11 on some grand Jewish conspiracy...I'll stop pointing out that they're a bunch of moronic anti-Semites, like that guy you quoted.

Israel was not behind 9/11. Suggestions that Israel was are based purely on Jew hatred. Its the same line of thought which directly lead to an entire nation blaming their financial woes after WWI on Jews and then allowing them to be rounded up and executed en masse. When you propogate such lies, you are being anti-Semitic and I will call you out. It is not "Playing the Jew Card" (the mere verbiage exposing anti-Semitism), it is a prudent measure of security. Jews have been persecuted and killed because of libellous conspiracy theories since Christianity took over the Roman Empire.

To repeat such venemous lies is to propogate the beliefs which history has proven lead to Jewish death, time and again.

No, I will not quit. Every time you post such filth suggesting that Jews are behind 9/11, I will call it out as an anti-Semitism, because such lies are spawned of Jew hatred. Take your nuveau-Protocol's of the Elder's of Zion crap and shove it.



Why is it OK to play a don't hate the Jew card but it perfectly acceptable to hate all Muslims ... hippocrites.

You're a full fledged anti-Semite. Read what you just wrote, you pathetic piece of ****. You've bought into the conspiracy theories and would hate all Jews...and invent reasons why you should. Because you cannot show massive perpetual constant Jewish terrorism for the past 60 years (versus the constant fear of Islamic terrorism which has been pervasive, for good reason, in the Western world), you will attempt to invent acts of insideous Jewish conspiracy? When a Jew attempts to clarify the actual motivation which lies behind the repeated Jewish conspiracy theories which has permeated our history, then we are all hypocrites?

Allow me to clarify some points here:

When Jews dislike Muslims it means we don't like them and wish they'd leave us alone to live in peace and cease their violence against anyone who dares even offend them...and yet (in the US at least) we still fight to preserve their rights as US citizens.

When Muslims dislike Jews, it means they advocate the killing of any and all Jews possible, blaming every dissapointment or disaster on some grand Jewish conspiracy, teach their children that its God's work to try and kill Jewish women and children. This is not exageration. This is the majority belief of the Muslim world in the 21st century. Most Muslims believe the conspiracy theories that Jews are behind 9/11. Most Muslims believe that their God demands the destruction of Israel (which necessitates the murder of another 6 million or so Jews).

When Europeans espouse Jewish conspiracy theories, it historically leads to Jewish beatings, destruction of Jewish property, desecration of Jewish holy sites, and eventually to the murder of Jews. Be it the Blood Libel, the Protocol's of the Elders of Zion, or the new theories arising which claim that Jewish influence caused the US government to bomb her own people on 9/11.

No, there is no hypocrisy. There is prudent concern.

Tudamorf
06-25-2007, 03:38 PM
Jews have been persecuted and killed because of libellous conspiracy theories since Christianity took over the Roman Empire.And even earlier. Of course, back then, some of them were true.

Swiftfox
06-25-2007, 06:53 PM
Quote me exactly which site, and what phrase I linked in this thread that says they think the Jews did it. **** you. I went back to every one in this thread and not one says anything about it being the Jews. In fact Alex jones specificaly avoids the Protocols of Zion crap and is called down for it by those Jew hating morons. How about stop glossing over the important parts and stop trying to discredit the whole thing with your antisemite card.

Alex is not a Zionist that's an attepmt to discredit him. Call him anytime on his show and ask him. Tell him you disagree with him on anything you will get pushed to the front of the call line. 1-888-259-9231 11am-2pm central.

Why is it OK to play a don't hate the Jew card but it perfectly acceptable to hate all Muslims ... hippocrites.


That's hippocritical bull**** and you know it. I don't think "the muslims" are responsible at all. Look at the official list of Hijackers. Most of them are Saudi.. but we're not going to attack them because Bush is in buisness with them.

I am not an anti-semite, I hate all people equally. Including the white bastards (Bush,Cheyney,Rumsfeld,Wolfowitz, etc..) who in my opinion and belief are responsible for 911. I could care less what religious belief/ nationality they are. People can be bastards no matter what they believe. Holier than thou Christians are just as bad as Satan worshipers, I hate them both equally too. An asshole is still an asshole.

If someone was drowning I would save them regardless, I would hope they would do the same, Taliban, Muslim, Hindu, Jew or Eskimo it matters not.

Tudamorf
06-25-2007, 07:09 PM
Quote me exactly which site, and what phrase I linked in this thread that says they think the Jews did it.The diatribe you quoted in Post #11 goes on and on about how the U.S. and Israel are responsible for the world's evils and are conspiring to take it over.

Anka
06-25-2007, 07:39 PM
To be fair, I think the 9/11 conspiracy theorists are mostly just foolish and not anti-semitic. However there's a lot of pain associated with that terrorist attack and the following military campaigns in the middle east. It's pretty easy to offend someone with that foolishness.

Swiftfox
06-25-2007, 08:09 PM
That was hardly a "the Jews did it" article. Sure it said some crap about suporting Isreal, but policy that seems to be taking Isreals side consistently isn't neccesarily in the best intrest of America. The rest of the article less that was still good.

Tinsi
06-26-2007, 08:00 AM
I have a question for you, Swiftfox:

Why on earth would someone (i.e. The US govt) have no problem smashing 3 full planes and a couple of sky scrapers into oblivion, but then, at the thought of sacrificing the people on board a 4th plane go "hmm no, let's not. Let's just PRETEND it's a plane with people in it!"?

Swiftfox
06-26-2007, 09:16 AM
I'm not convinced either way on a plane hitting or not hitting the pentagon.. and only 2 other planes hit skyscrapers, the 4th at shanksville is not consitant with a plane impacting the ground either, compound with that 2 slip ups by Rumsfeld mentioning it was shot down, an 8 mile debris field, and the famous "you believe it's me, don't you?" call.

Maybe they needed something they could remote pilot better or something with explosoves onboard. Who knows, the evidence was tampered with at all 4 (5 counting wtc7) sites. The FBI still has not released any footage of anything actualy showing a plane at the pentagon. And then there was the whole parking lot frames that were supposed to "shut us up" that still never showed a plane.

Like I said wether or not a plane was used here isn't something that the CT involving 911 revolves around it's just a peice of the puzzle requiring further investigation. It's not like they couldn't use another when there were 2 other planes used already.

Back to the origional topic of this thread. The witness is allegedly Barry Jennings, Deputy Director, Emegency services department, New york city housing authority.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=429497217632201010&hl=en

Between 1min 30 seconds and 2 minutes specificaly.

B_Delacroix
06-26-2007, 03:18 PM
I am going to hazard a guess that you have never actually been to a plane wreckage site.

At any rate, I have seen pictures of the place where there are plenty of plane parts laying around. Even an aluminum peice of fuselage that didn't quite get caught in the fire (and so didn't melt like it normally does).

Madie of Wind Riders
06-27-2007, 07:06 AM
You know what struck me most about that clip... the host Alex Jones, sounds just like the late Sam Kinison. LOL!!

Aidon
06-27-2007, 03:32 PM
Sam Kinison was one funny funny man...

"If you want to save the people in Ethiopia...don't send them food! Don't! If you want to save the starving people in Ethiopia...send them mother****ing U-Hauls! YOU LIVE IN THE DESERT NOTHING GROWS IN THE ****ING DESERT ITS THE ****ING DESERT HELLLOOOO SAND!"

or

"You want me to go back down there? Look what they did to my ****ing hands! I can't play the piano anymore!"

Or Sam's Kids (as opposed to Jerry's Kids), where they get jack daniels and whoores.