9/11 Truth: Bush Admin. sets the towers to fall, raises military budget, Iraq for OIL

jlew24asu

ledvedderman wrote:

If WTC7 was brought down on purpose SOMEONE must have known the attacks were coming,

why are those 2 mutually exclusive? 7 could have been taken down simply because the building couldnt be saved. if thats the case, why they lied about it, I dont know. but I dont see how it relates to SOMEONE knowing the attacks were coming.

ledvedderman

jlew24asu wrote:

why are those 2 mutually exclusive? 7 could have been taken down simply because the building couldnt be saved. if thats the case, why they lied about it, I dont know. but I dont see how it relates to SOMEONE knowing the attacks were coming.

I'm pretty sure it takes weeks, at the very least, to plan out a demolition. It's a very precise process to ensure the building falls into itself. I don't think it could have been done in the chaos of the day with only 6 hours from the time the building was hit until WTC 7 came down. That would be some kind of a record for a perfect demolition

jlew24asu

ledvedderman wrote:

I'm pretty sure it takes weeks, at the very least, to plan out a demolition. It's a very precise process to ensure the building falls into itself. I don't think it could have been done in the chaos of the day with only 6 hours from the time the building was hit until WTC 7 came down. That would be some kind of a record for a perfect demolition

this building was already heavily damaged. IF it was taken down, my guess would be that some demo guys could take out some crucial support beams. which makes me wonder, where were all the explosions? I watched that building come down LIVE on TV. I saw or heard no explosions. when I see a controlled demo happen, there are multiple explosions on several levels. you think demolition teams can stroll around that building for "weeks" before 9/11. setting up explosives, detonators, etc and go unnoticed? for weeks? seems you would use your common sense on that one. not to mention the same thing would happen over in WTC 1 & 2?? 2 of the tallest most secure buildings on the planet

macgyver06

who cares. its been almost 6 years.

ledvedderman

jlew24asu wrote:

this building was already heavily damaged. IF it was taken down, my guess would be that some demo guys could take out some crucial support beams. which makes me wonder, where were all the explosions? I watched that building come down LIVE on TV. I saw or heard no explosions. when I see a controlled demo happen, there are multiple explosions on several levels. you think demolition teams can stroll around that building for "weeks" before 9/11. setting up explosives, detonators, etc and go unnoticed? for weeks? seems you would use your common sense on that one. not to mention the same thing would happen over in WTC 1 & 2?? 2 of the tallest most secure buildings on the planet

Funny you should mention that. I have read many reports that mention power failures the weeks leading up to the attacks and bomb sniffing dogs being pulled out 2 weeks before the attacks. I also remember reading where there was a lot of unusual people around during those two weeks during the power outages.

ledvedderman

macgyver06 wrote:

who cares. its been almost 6 years.

Good attitude. No matter who is right, you should care about the events of that day. If the conspiracy theorists are right, than it shows a massive level of corruption by some in the gov't, and if the official story 3,000+ innocent people lost their lives by a terrorist attack. Seems like a big deal to me

jlew24asu

ledvedderman wrote:

Funny you should mention that. I have read many reports that mention power failures the weeks leading up to the attacks and bomb sniffing dogs being pulled out 2 weeks before the attacks. I also remember reading where there was a lot of unusual people around during those two weeks during the power outages.

you read "many reports" huh. :rolleyes:

jlew24asu

ledvedderman wrote:

Good attitude. No matter who is right, you should care about the events of that day. If the conspiracy theorists are right, than it shows a massive level of corruption by some in the gov't, and if the official story 3,000+ innocent people lost their lives by a terrorist attack. Seems like a big deal to me

this we can agree on

ledvedderman

jlew24asu wrote:

you read "many reports" huh. :rolleyes:

Don't get your panties in a bunch jlew, I'm looking for the articles now. I'm sure they won't be "credible" sources to you. Who needs facts when one has a strong opinion.

ledvedderman

An article in New York Newsday documented the removal of bomb-sniffing dogs just five days before the attack.

September 12, 2001

The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday.

Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday, bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.

"Today was the first day there was not the extra security," Coard said. "We were protecting below. We had the ground covered. We didn't figure they would do it with planes. There is no way anyone could have stopped that."

Security guard Hermina Jones said officials had recently taken steps to secure the towers against aerial attacks by installing bulletproof windows and fireproof doors in the 22nd-floor computer command center... 1

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The following e-mail was forwarded by John Kaminski to a CC list of about 50 people in April of 2004. Subsequently, Victor Thorn published an article amplifying the e-mail and promoting its assertions as fact.

_________________________________________________________________

From: "Scott Forbes" XXXXXXXs2002@hotmail.com>
To: XXXXXX@comcast.net
Subject: Official Ver[si]on of 9/11 - new info
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 12:35:12 +0000

To John Kaminski,

I was pleased to read your article "The Official Version of 9/11 is a Hoax"
... Please note some other facts. My name is Scott Forbes and I still work
for Fiduciary Trust. In 2001 we occupied floors 90 and 94-97 of the South
Tower and lost 87 employees plus many contractors.

On the weekend of 9/8,9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2,
the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical
supply for approx 36hrs from floor 50 up. I am aware of this situation since
I work in IT and had to work with many others that weekend to ensure that
all systems were cleanly shutdown beforehand ... and then brough[t] back up
afterwards. The reason given by the WTC for the power down was that cabling
in the tower was being upgraded ... Of course without power there were no
security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers'
coming in and out of the tower. I was at home on the morning of 9/11 on the
shore of Jersey City, right opposite the Towers, and watching events unfold
I was convinced immediately that something was happening related to the
weekend work ...

I have mailed this information to many people and bodies, including the 9/11
Commission but no-one seems to be taking and registering these facts. Whats
to hide? Can you help publicise them?

Please feel free to mail me.

Scott Forbes


Now, I have no reason to not believe these events. These people seem to have no political agenda but just want the truth to get out there. The 9/11 Commission isn't the truth, that's for sure. I don't know what the truth is, but I have no reason to discredit one mans testimony because it's either what I don't believe

jlew24asu

I just havnt seen enough proof to think that bombs were laid out in 3 buildings. too many people would have to be involved. and the cover up just wouldnt be so perfect. someone would talk. its good to question the government though. im glad we have that right

even flow?

jlew24asu wrote:

basically none of you can hold on to an argument without mentioning WTC 7. weak

Which is a tad stronger than listening to the "official" story get regurgitated with all the glaring holes in it. Flip the coin?

citizen_drew

I wonder if somebody as credible as Peter Jennings is turning over in his grave when his voice is used in that Loose Change video saying moments just after the event…

“The second building that was hit by the plane has just completely collapsed. We have no idea what caused this. Almost looks like one of those planned implosions. As if a demolition team set off, when you see the whole demolitions of whole buildings. It folded down on itself and it was not there anymore. If you wish to bring anybody who's ever watched a building being demolished on purpose knows, that if you're going to do this, you have to get at the at the under infrastructure of a building and bring it down.”

Good thing we got the NIST report to clear everything up for us.

El_Kabong

ledvedderman wrote:

Funny you should mention that. I have read many reports that mention power failures the weeks leading up to the attacks and bomb sniffing dogs being pulled out 2 weeks before the attacks. I also remember reading where there was a lot of unusual people around during those two weeks during the power outages.

i had posted an article a while back about one of the 2 towers that were hit had the power cut from like floor 50 and up while they performed security upgrades...interesting enough a bush brother ran the security company that handled security fro the wtc's as well as the airports that the hijacked planes originated from...i think his contract ended 9/12 at the wtc

El_Kabong

jlew24asu wrote:

basically none of you can hold on to an argument without mentioning WTC 7. weak

ya know what else is weak?

http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?p=4041038#post4041038

american

It is unbeleivable to think that the government would/could pull off an event such as 9/11 and keep it a secret. This is the same government that couldn't keep a blow job a secret. The same government that couldn't keep watergate a secret. Given your ridiculuos theories, don't you think the government actually being able to keep a secret of this magnitude is giving them too much crdeit?

miller8966

the looney left will hold onto anything that makes repubs look bad.

"bush brought down the towers"- Because being in office a year he was able to plan that

"THe Republicans stole the election..kerry won"- No he lost by a million votes...where the outcry for the midterm elections

american

miller8966 wrote:

the looney left will hold onto anything that makes repubs look bad.

"bush brought down the towers"- Because being in office a year he was able to plan that

"THe Republicans stole the election..kerry won"- No he lost by a million votes...where the outcry for the midterm elections

Sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo true.

ledvedderman

miller8966 wrote:

the looney left will hold onto anything that makes repubs look bad.

"bush brought down the towers"- Because being in office a year he was able to plan that

"THe Republicans stole the election..kerry won"- No he lost by a million votes...where the outcry for the midterm elections

Kerry lost by more than a million votes? If we're going by your logic that we should be talking about President Al Gore right now. Having the most votes doesn't mean you are President, hell, if you have the majority of votes in a state doesn't mean you get it's electoral votes and the presidency.

I don't know many people who don't believe the official 9/11 story who put all the blame on Bush and say HE was behind it. There's no way it was Bush. Are you so naive that you think they would only have 9 months to put all of this together? The PNAC came out in 1999, that gives them plenty of time to put something together. I don't believe it was the gov't who did it, but rouge members inside the gov't.

jlew24asu

ledvedderman wrote:

I don't believe it was the gov't who did it, but rouge members inside the gov't.

really? and el queda was just a set up?