The truth about 9/11

Pepe Silvia

Drowned Out wrote:

matabele wrote:

The thing that makes this unlikely is the amount of people that would have had to be involved keeping their mouths shut. After all these years somebodies conscience would have got the better of them or they would get the urge to spill the beans, either for money or for fame.

If it were an inside job, or at least criminal negligience, how many people would have knowledge of every detail in the plan? Probably very few. Lots of people would have knowledge of minor details, which if pieced together, paints a picture in stark contrast to the Commission report.
There were many whistleblowers - no one with a smoking gun, here it is on a silver platter-type confession....but many that were silenced when trying to report anomolies between the official story and what they knew as truth...a partial list:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... &aid=17961

not to mention the timeline the commission was given under oath was later proven to be false....

another thing that ended up being false is the claim of boxcutters. that came from a single source, who said his wife called him from her cell phone on the plane and told him that....but according to the FBI her cell phone record shows she never made such a call, nor was the skyphone on the plane used to call him....in short, the FBI says this guy was never called by his wife on 9/11 and yet the boxcutter myth is accepted as common knowledge and fact.

FiveB247x

This is what most people who speak of a 9-11 conspiracy theory do... and in more general, most conspiracy theories.

Drowned Out wrote:

FiveB247x wrote:

Simply because we don't know all the facts regarding what happened and trying to find out is one thing, but 99.9% of anyone on this board who talks about this stuff, isn't looking for or seeking "truth", they're simply trying to fill the void on their skewed version of the truth. So we hear all about conspiracy, inside job, who knew what, and the half-truth science which fits their mold. Just like the lunar landing, 100% of the fact and truth has been gone over, yet people still believe it didn't occur... you know why? Not because of truth or fact, but simply because they don't want to believe. People don't care about truth and fact, they care about what facts they choose to believe in order to build their truth. Which is why it's a conspiracy theory.

Drowned Out wrote:

I always enjoy how people paint anyone who questions 9/11 as a conspiracy theorist, or even more heinous, a "truther" (since when is 'truth' a dirty word?) Im guessing you'd be willing to admit that the official story doesnt add up...yet you have no problem talking down to people who point out the inconsistencies therein....
We've already got the "too many people involved", and the "evil geniuses / incompetent buffoon" blanket rebuttals...all thats left is a smug reference to occams razor and we'll have the trifecta of "I have no idea what happened, but here's why YOU are wrong" statements all in one thread. All three are just an easy way out.
we can finish it off with " you'll never know, why bother?" To complete the circle of apathy. Cool.

Are you insinuating that this is what Ive done / am doing? Are you above this?

Pepe Silvia

is the murder of jfk just a silly conspiracy theory, too, or is that one legit?

FiveB247x

How many different theories are there who did it? So what does that tell you?

Pepe Silvia wrote:

is the murder of jfk just a silly conspiracy theory, too, or is that one legit?

Drowned Out

FiveB247x wrote:

This is what most people who speak of a 9-11 conspiracy theory do... and in more general, most conspiracy theories.

Drowned Out wrote:

Are you insinuating that this is what Ive done / am doing? Are you above this?

ugh, I wish you'd quote like everyone else does, your reply-before-the-quote way is painful with multiple quotes lol...

K, so...since you seem so intent on categorizing/psychoanalyzing the people who still have questions about 9/11, while seeming reluctant to stick your own neck out at all....do you support the state stance on what happened that day, since all the facts have been gone over? Or do you fit in your other categories - one of the .01% who is looking for truth? Or.....one of the apathetic who has given up cause we'll never know?

Pepe Silvia

FiveB247x wrote:

How many different theories are there who did it? So what does that tell you?

Pepe Silvia wrote:

is the murder of jfk just a silly conspiracy theory, too, or is that one legit?

so, the government's account is right? a lone gunman shot him from the back making his head go back and to the left?

i ask because in the 9/11 debunking shows they always dismiss jfk's assassination theories as equal to 9/11 theories.

FiveB247x

I don't equate the two and feel there's plenty of unknown, but my point was simply there's a million and one different variations of what truly occurred.. whether it's the official story or tons of varying stories. If we ever had the government come out and actually say what did happen, it wouldn't be believed by most. People have it in their heads that such a large occurrence can only be explained with an equally grandiose answer. If Bin Laden was caught tomorrow and confessed to everything, every last detail, many would still dismiss it. So what does that tell you? People want to believe their own version of fact and truth.

Pepe Silvia wrote:

FiveB247x wrote:

How many different theories are there who did it? So what does that tell you?

Pepe Silvia wrote:

is the murder of jfk just a silly conspiracy theory, too, or is that one legit?

so, the government's account is right? a lone gunman shot him from the back making his head go back and to the left?

i ask because in the 9/11 debunking shows they always dismiss jfk's assassination theories as equal to 9/11 theories.

Pepe Silvia

while i know there are certainly people like you describe that doesn't account for everyone who questions the events. i don't claim to know what happened, in fact i can't even decide between a few scenarios but i do know what they say doesn't add up.

as to the government is inept...yeah, when it comes to the people, that's the point, it's not like every branch of government would have to be involved in this, i really think they could get away with it with even less than 2 dozen people. these are the same people who sent thousands of our kids to war without proper protection saying "you go to war with the army you have, not the army you wish you had." meanwhile they are giving no bid contracts to campaign investors and cheney's former company and then giving them bonuses even after they are found to have committed a lot of fraud in billing us (on top of feeding our troops spoiled meat, dirty water....) also, as far as death tolls go multiple 9/11s happen in the US every day from lack of health care and smoking.

and we're supposed to believe over an hour after the 1st plane hit the towers rumsfeld still had no idea any of that happened? he was in the pentagon, the fucking sec of defense, over an hour after cheney (a former sec of defense) says it is obvious we are under attack and no one bothers to tell rummy? he doesn't find out until AFTER the pentagon is hit? really??? give me a fucking break! and cheney, again a former sec of defense, waits over an hour after saying it is obvious we are under attack to scramble fighters? a known hijacked plane is allowed to penetrate DC's no fly zone, again over an hour after the first plane hit, makes a u-turn, re-penetrates DCs no fly zone and then cheney finally decides to get some jets up in the air when andrew's air force base is 10miles away from DC?

and then we are told a few years later the guy who supposedly did this isn't important and our president doesn't even think about him??

ask anyone what weapons did the hijackers use and i bet they will say boxcutters and yet there is no actual basis for this claim but everyone accepts it as fact....but i'm sure they mean everything else they said

OnTheEdge

9/11 was planned and executed by a group of fuckheads that call themselves Al-Qaida. Their leader in Osama Bin Laden. Thy hijacked some planes. Pilots called traffic control towers and passengers called loved ones. Then they all crashed.

9/11 is now solved. This thread can be put to rest.

COMMON SENSE!!!

Pepe Silvia

OnTheEdge wrote:

9/11 was planned and executed by a group of fuckheads that call themselves Al-Qaida. Their leader in Osama Bin Laden. Thy hijacked some planes. Pilots called traffic control towers and passengers called loved ones. Then they all crashed.

9/11 is now solved. This thread can be put to rest.

COMMON SENSE!!!

and what did they hijack the planes with?

OnTheEdge

Let's talk real conpiracy theories.

How about all that Roswell shit??

FiveB247x

But see here's the point - this entire post has so many assumptions in it. Firstly, you're taking things out of sequence in order to mold "how things went". Yes 9-11 was used as a crutch to invade Afghanistan, Iraq and do plenty of other things in this country and abroad, but that doesn't mean it was planned as such. It merely means the opportunity and reasons presented themselves, so they were acted upon. Not the same thing at all as you describe them. Secondly, simply because we can't fathom that such a high-up official was either out of the loop, uninformed or perhaps for the public's welfare, the level of knowledge is not commonly known, doesn't automatically mean it's bogus. It can simply mean we, as citizens have presumptions of how things are compared to the actual practice or reality of them. I think everyone just has these preconceived notions, but it doesn't typically match up to actual reality and that big void is where things like conspiracy theories and similar arise from.

Pepe Silvia wrote:

while i know there are certainly people like you describe that doesn't account for everyone who questions the events. i don't claim to know what happened, in fact i can't even decide between a few scenarios but i do know what they say doesn't add up.

as to the government is inept...yeah, when it comes to the people, that's the point, it's not like every branch of government would have to be involved in this, i really think they could get away with it with even less than 2 dozen people. these are the same people who sent thousands of our kids to war without proper protection saying "you go to war with the army you have, not the army you wish you had." meanwhile they are giving no bid contracts to campaign investors and cheney's former company and then giving them bonuses even after they are found to have committed a lot of fraud in billing us (on top of feeding our troops spoiled meat, dirty water....) also, as far as death tolls go multiple 9/11s happen in the US every day from lack of health care and smoking.

and we're supposed to believe over an hour after the 1st plane hit the towers rumsfeld still had no idea any of that happened? he was in the pentagon, the fucking sec of defense, over an hour after cheney (a former sec of defense) says it is obvious we are under attack and no one bothers to tell rummy? he doesn't find out until AFTER the pentagon is hit? really??? give me a fucking break! and cheney, again a former sec of defense, waits over an hour after saying it is obvious we are under attack to scramble fighters? a known hijacked plane is allowed to penetrate DC's no fly zone, again over an hour after the first plane hit, makes a u-turn, re-penetrates DCs no fly zone and then cheney finally decides to get some jets up in the air when andrew's air force base is 10miles away from DC?

and then we are told a few years later the guy who supposedly did this isn't important and our president doesn't even think about him??

ask anyone what weapons did the hijackers use and i bet they will say boxcutters and yet there is no actual basis for this claim but everyone accepts it as fact....but i'm sure they mean everything else they said

Pepe Silvia

FiveB247x wrote:

But see here's the point - this entire post has so many assumptions in it. Firstly, you're taking things out of sequence in order to mold "how things went". Yes 9-11 was used as a crutch to invade Afghanistan, Iraq and do plenty of other things in this country and abroad, but that doesn't mean it was planned as such. It merely means the opportunity and reasons presented themselves, so they were acted upon. Not the same thing at all as you describe them. Secondly, simply because we can't fathom that such a high-up official was either out of the loop, uninformed or perhaps for the public's welfare, the level of knowledge is not commonly known, doesn't automatically mean it's bogus. It can simply mean we, as citizens have presumptions of how things are compared to the actual practice or reality of them. I think everyone just has these preconceived notions, but it doesn't typically match up to actual reality and that big void is where things like conspiracy theories and similar arise from.

Pepe Silvia wrote:

while i know there are certainly people like you describe that doesn't account for everyone who questions the events. i don't claim to know what happened, in fact i can't even decide between a few scenarios but i do know what they say doesn't add up.

as to the government is inept...yeah, when it comes to the people, that's the point, it's not like every branch of government would have to be involved in this, i really think they could get away with it with even less than 2 dozen people. these are the same people who sent thousands of our kids to war without proper protection saying "you go to war with the army you have, not the army you wish you had." meanwhile they are giving no bid contracts to campaign investors and cheney's former company and then giving them bonuses even after they are found to have committed a lot of fraud in billing us (on top of feeding our troops spoiled meat, dirty water....) also, as far as death tolls go multiple 9/11s happen in the US every day from lack of health care and smoking.

and we're supposed to believe over an hour after the 1st plane hit the towers rumsfeld still had no idea any of that happened? he was in the pentagon, the fucking sec of defense, over an hour after cheney (a former sec of defense) says it is obvious we are under attack and no one bothers to tell rummy? he doesn't find out until AFTER the pentagon is hit? really??? give me a fucking break! and cheney, again a former sec of defense, waits over an hour after saying it is obvious we are under attack to scramble fighters? a known hijacked plane is allowed to penetrate DC's no fly zone, again over an hour after the first plane hit, makes a u-turn, re-penetrates DCs no fly zone and then cheney finally decides to get some jets up in the air when andrew's air force base is 10miles away from DC?

and then we are told a few years later the guy who supposedly did this isn't important and our president doesn't even think about him??

ask anyone what weapons did the hijackers use and i bet they will say boxcutters and yet there is no actual basis for this claim but everyone accepts it as fact....but i'm sure they mean everything else they said

ummmmm......where did i mention iraq or afghanistan?? :? :?

and yer right, i guess it's just a silly assumption to think if the president was told we are under attack and the vp said it was obvious we were under attack and 2 planes have since hit the world trade center towers word might have somehow have gotten to the secretary of defense. but what do i know? i guess keeping the sec of defense 'in the loop' during our country being attacked wouldn't be that high up on most people's list. not just someone in the administration but maybe someone in the pentagon might have passed the word along to his office which i guess is in complete isolation from the outside world that they didn't even know anything was going on....

FiveB247x

Was just making the point that what seems to be obvious to some is far from practical for others. We're talking about a president who continued reading to children for some time after finding out the nation was under attack. That says lots bout the mindset of that group at work.

Pepe Silvia wrote:

ummmmm......where did i mention iraq or afghanistan?? :? :?

and yer right, i guess it's just a silly assumption to think if the president was told we are under attack and the vp said it was obvious we were under attack and 2 planes have since hit the world trade center towers word might have somehow have gotten to the secretary of defense. but what do i know? i guess keeping the sec of defense 'in the loop' during our country being attacked wouldn't be that high up on most people's list. not just someone in the administration but maybe someone in the pentagon might have passed the word along to his office which i guess is in complete isolation from the outside world that they didn't even know anything was going on....

Pepe Silvia

FiveB247x wrote:

Was just making the point that what seems to be obvious to some is far from practical for others. We're talking about a president who continued reading to children for some time after finding out the nation was under attack. That says lots bout the mindset of that group at work.

Pepe Silvia wrote:

ummmmm......where did i mention iraq or afghanistan?? :? :?

and yer right, i guess it's just a silly assumption to think if the president was told we are under attack and the vp said it was obvious we were under attack and 2 planes have since hit the world trade center towers word might have somehow have gotten to the secretary of defense. but what do i know? i guess keeping the sec of defense 'in the loop' during our country being attacked wouldn't be that high up on most people's list. not just someone in the administration but maybe someone in the pentagon might have passed the word along to his office which i guess is in complete isolation from the outside world that they didn't even know anything was going on....

i am in the camp that thinks bush may be a dick but he was still a puppet. i think he was used to having these titles and such in business without ever really having to do much in life, he was there with a golden parachute because of his last dad and grandfather.

he even admitted in his first term that he didn't bother to read or look into things, he just relied on his advisors and those around him to fill him in with what he needed to know. when he was told we were under attack i really think he had no clue about anything and was scared shitless not knowing what he's supposed to do. but luckily for him he's got all these other people around him like his vp was a former sec of defense during the 1st gulf war and our invasion of panama among other actions.

bush was constantly out of the loop. even the sec of treasury complained how inattentive he was. he relied on other people with a set agenda to know what actions to take.

and i need to amend my earlier statement, rumsfeld was notified we were under attack 12min before the pentagon was hit....so 40 min after we were under attack they notified the sec of defense.

Pepe Silvia

maj4e wrote:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

maj4e wrote:

I haven't read that site yet (I'll flip through it later) but I just find it hard to believe that a government that screws up so many things on a daily basis can be so efficient in executing a plan like that and keep it a secret before, during and 9 years after.

what about all the black ops and other secrets kept throughout the years? how'd they manage that? it's not like every person in government would have been involved, it really wouldn't even take that many, just some in the right places

I don't doubt for a sec that there's clandestine operations. But 9/11 was an order of magnitude greater than 4 guys sneaking in and knocking off a diplomat in Czechoslovakia. And really I'm not saying that they couldn't pull it off but there's no way that the hundreds it would take to execute it would be quiet about it for 9 years.

Plus I'm not trying to argue with anyone just throwing in the ol' 2 cents.

what do you make of these quotes from rumsfeld?

http://www.defense.gov/Transcripts/Tran ... iptID=3845

"They [find a lot] and any number of terrorist efforts have been dissuaded, deterred or stopped by good intelligence gathering and good preventive work. It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it's physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every conceivable technique. Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center."

http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/tran ... iptid=2603

Rumsfeld: I had said at an 8:00 o'clock breakfast that sometime in the next two, four, six, eight, ten, twelve months there would be an event that would occur in the world that would be sufficiently shocking that it would remind people again how important it is to have a strong healthy defense department that contributes to -- That underpins peace and stability in our world. And that is what underpins peace and stability.

or this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3LJXoXpAHE

a guy says a missile then catches himself and says airplane, could be an honest slip...but around 1:17 rumsfeld claims terrorists shot down the plane in pennsylvania

OutOfBreath

Pepe Silvia wrote:

maj4e wrote:

I haven't read that site yet (I'll flip through it later) but I just find it hard to believe that a government that screws up so many things on a daily basis can be so efficient in executing a plan like that and keep it a secret before, during and 9 years after.

what about all the black ops and other secrets kept throughout the years? how'd they manage that? it's not like every person in government would have been involved, it really wouldn't even take that many, just some in the right places

It is something quite different to hide arms deals with militias, and secretly supporting some destabilizing forces in countries America doesn't like (this they do ALL the time), and executing 9-11 squarely onto a prominent American target, killing thousands of Americans. The first can be justified ideologically and as national security/interests of America to encourage the silence needed. The second, not so much.

The unlikeliness is too great. The details that arguably doesn't quite fit may be because it's hard to pin down every detail in such a massive investigation of an event, or even that the government is hiding some stuff to cloak their own incompetence in preventing such an attack. The knowledge that they really can't prevent stuff like this 100% is terrifying to many people, as the public reactions to 9-11 etc has clearly shown.

Inside job - highly unlikely. If they wanted war support or whatever, they could have gotten that a lot cheaper than blowing up WTC.

Incompetence/inability to prevent - to some degree most likely. Communication failure between public agencies may have been downplayed to keep the public's confidence at a reasonable level.

Peace
Dan

arthurdent

Science... or STFU


:roll:

Jason P

chris32482 wrote:

I came across this website with a lot of interesting blurbs regarding 9/11 made by knowledgable and credible people. It has really made me think seriously about what I believe. For a long time I thought maybe it was possible that certain individuals within our Government knew about an impending attack and allowed it to happen, but I didn't believe it was an "inside job". Now, I question that assumption. I wonder if our leaders were not actually involved to a much greater extent.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/officialsquestion911commissionreport#Shaffer

IF our leaders were able to pull off the most elaborate inside job in the history of mankind, how is it that these same super-geniuses were unable to hide some chemical weapons, uranium, or W.M.D.'s in Iraq so that the invasion could have been justified to the world???

chris32482

OutOfBreath wrote:

Inside job - highly unlikely. If they wanted war support or whatever, they could have gotten that a lot cheaper than blowing up WTC.

Peace
Dan

I don't think it has anything to do with cheap. In fact, a lot of people made billions of dollars off the WTC disaster. Put-option trading on Airline stocks was unprecedented in the week prior to the attacks, something like 100 times higher than normal, which is itself evidence to suggest somebody knew what was going to happen. And do you know how much money Dick Cheney probably got from Halliburton after they were awarded no-bid contracts in Iraq?