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

cincybearcat

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I read it and I disagreed. If you think it's a waste then by all means you're free to think that. You act as if that all people do is spend their time on this and never have questioned the events before the attacks which we have.

Yep, that's what I think. This board is nothing but opinions.

I act like what? Far from it, I know that many people here spend time questioning everything.

While your questioning...I'm finding answers.

Abookamongstthemany

cincybearcat wrote:

Yep, that's what I think. This board is nothing but opinions.

I act like what? Far from it, I know that many people here spend time questioning everything.

While your questioning...I'm finding answers.

So, what answers have you gotten?

DPrival78

yield2me wrote:

the people who are responsible for knocking those buildings down were piloting those planes

oh really?

FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

Hijack 'suspects' alive and well

Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well.

The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.

Saudi Arabian pilot Waleed Al Shehri was one of five men that the FBI said had deliberately crashed American Airlines flight 11 into the World Trade Centre on 11 September.

His photograph was released, and has since appeared in newspapers and on television around the world.

He told journalists there that he had nothing to do with the attacks on New York and Washington, and had been in Morocco when they happened. He has contacted both the Saudi and American authorities, according to Saudi press reports.

Mistaken identity

Abdulaziz Al Omari, another of the Flight 11 hijack suspects, has also been quoted in Arab news reports.

He says he is an engineer with Saudi Telecoms, and that he lost his passport while studying in Denver.

FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt.

yield2me

DPrival78 wrote:

oh really?

FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

Hijack 'suspects' alive and well

Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well.

The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.

Saudi Arabian pilot Waleed Al Shehri was one of five men that the FBI said had deliberately crashed American Airlines flight 11 into the World Trade Centre on 11 September.

His photograph was released, and has since appeared in newspapers and on television around the world.

He told journalists there that he had nothing to do with the attacks on New York and Washington, and had been in Morocco when they happened. He has contacted both the Saudi and American authorities, according to Saudi press reports.

Mistaken identity

Abdulaziz Al Omari, another of the Flight 11 hijack suspects, has also been quoted in Arab news reports.

He says he is an engineer with Saudi Telecoms, and that he lost his passport while studying in Denver.

FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt.

Yes really! Maybe the govt doesn't have the identities 100% but it doesn't change the fact that whoever was piloting those planes is responsible for the attacks.

fanch75

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

What about the last plane that hit the pentagon? It hit an hour and half after the ones that hit the towers.

Things happened relatively quickly and it was difficult for air traffic control/the military to tell which planes were/were not hijacked. I'm not sure how many planes were in the air at the time, but there were many, especially along the east coast.

I do think it is quite possible that United 93 (the PA one) was shot down, and that was covered up. I think that's more probable than the whole "Let's roll!" thing.

farfromglorified

DPrival78 wrote:

oh really?

FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

Hijack 'suspects' alive and well

Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well.

The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.

Saudi Arabian pilot Waleed Al Shehri was one of five men that the FBI said had deliberately crashed American Airlines flight 11 into the World Trade Centre on 11 September.

His photograph was released, and has since appeared in newspapers and on television around the world.

He told journalists there that he had nothing to do with the attacks on New York and Washington, and had been in Morocco when they happened. He has contacted both the Saudi and American authorities, according to Saudi press reports.

Mistaken identity

Abdulaziz Al Omari, another of the Flight 11 hijack suspects, has also been quoted in Arab news reports.

He says he is an engineer with Saudi Telecoms, and that he lost his passport while studying in Denver.

FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt.

For God's sake research your sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waleed_al-Shehri#Aftermath

DPrival78

yield2me wrote:

Yes really! Maybe the govt doesn't have the identities 100% but it doesn't change the fact that whoever was piloting those planes is responsible for the attacks.

so why are we so quick to blame arab, or "al-qaeda", terrorists for 9/11, when there's no proof who the hijackers were? the only "proof" offered was the repeated display of pictures of 19 men, some of whom are still alive.

why is there not a single arab name on any of the passenger lists from any of the 4 flights?

Abookamongstthemany

nevermind, the link doesn't work anymore

yield2me

DPrival78 wrote:

so why are we so quick to blame arab, or "al-qaeda", terrorists for 9/11, when there's no proof who the hijackers were? the only "proof" offered was the repeated display of pictures of 19 men, some of whom are still alive.

why is there not a single arab name on any of the passenger lists from any of the 4 flights?

I'm sure they didn't use their real names...why are we quick to blam al-qaeda? Well for one they took responsibility for it, they sent out videos of them cheering and prasing god and talking about their mission being a success. Yes, a few of the people's identities might not be right but the majority of them are right and their is video of some of the men in the airports at the time the flights were to leave.

inmytree

what's all this 9/11 talk...the man responsible was just hanged...right...?

we are all safer from them there a-rabs...

cincybearcat

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

So, what answers have you gotten?

Can't you read....

That all of you conspiracy nuts are nuts...that's the answer.

By the way, the can't you read part is a joke...sometimes you don't read my writing in the correct context.

Oh, and the finding answers part was a joke as well.

my2hands

cincybearcat wrote:

1) People were too afraid to shoot down planes full of innocent people. I don't think they thought they would be flown into buildings...probably assumed it was going to be like most airline hijackings. That would have been a very difficult call to make.

nice try, but i will steal abooks response to this one... What about the last plane that hit the pentagon? It hit an hour and half after the ones that hit the towers... you really think the military and US government would let a hijacked plane fly into DC airspace 90 minutes after 2 planes hit the towers? i do not think they are this incompetant (this is a major sticking point for me and the "official story")

2) He was scheduled to read to the class. He was in the middle of doing so. I believe he misjudged the situation and thought that him remaining calm and finishing was hte right move to try and help the rest of America stay calm. It was a dumb decision.

i call bullshit, when the country is under attack you do not continue to read to a kindergarten class, under ANY circumstances. especially considering he is in a school, how do they know he wasnt a target?

3) Don't know, not a pilot. But things can and do happen. Maybe Allah helped.

exactly, because it is bullshit. plain and simple. anyone with a 3rd grade education knows this is just flat out impossible. and lets not forget they were not pilots either

4) Every president would refuse to be sworn in under oath for ANYTHING so long as they can avoid it. As for stonewalling the investigation, he was being political when he shouldn;t have been. He didn;t want public finding of where his administration failed in protecting Americans. That's a political death sentence and would have been for the entire party. It was about politics.

if your explantion is valid then he put politics above the truth and the lives lost. which makes him one disgusting mofo. i think the american people would have responded well to the truth of what happened, rather than see the prez stonewall an investigation like they had something to hide

Abookamongstthemany

cincybearcat wrote:

Can't you read....

That all of you conspiracy nuts are nuts...that's the answer.

By the way, the can't you read part is a joke...sometimes you don't read my writing in the correct context.

Oh, and the finding answers part was a joke as well.

Ah.

You're answers never match mine. Perhaps I'm not looking as hard as you are. Oh and me asking you for the answers, was me joking in return. Why else would I look to you for answers, you greedy neocon?

You don't get my jokes just as often there, buddy.

yield2me

my2hands wrote:

nice try, but i will steal abooks response to this one... What about the last plane that hit the pentagon? It hit an hour and half after the ones that hit the towers... you really think the military and US government would let a hijacked plane fly into DC airspace 90 minutes after 2 planes hit the towers? i do not think they are this incompetant (this is a major sticking point for me and the "official story")

i call bullshit, when the country is under attack you do not continue to read to a kindergarten class, under ANY circumstances. especially considering he is in a school, how do they know he wasnt a target?

exactly, because it is bullshit. plain and simple. anyone with a 3rd grade education knows this is just flat out impossible. and lets not forget they were not pilots either

if your explantion is valid then he put politics above the truth and the lives lost. which makes him one disgusting mofo. i think the american people would have responded well to the truth of what happened, rather than see the prez stonewall an investigation like they had something to hide

So what you're saying is that it is more likely that the govt. blew up it's own offices (pentagon) and killed its own people rather than letting a hijacked plane full of innocent americans fly in that airspace? come on

cincybearcat

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

You don't get my jokes just as often there, buddy.

I'm well aware of that. We have communication issues.

my2hands

yield2me wrote:

So what you're saying is that it is more likely that the govt. blew up it's own offices (pentagon) and killed its own people rather than letting a hijacked plane full of innocent americans fly in that airspace? come on

no, what i am saying is that there are GLARING holes in the official story. i am not blaming anyone or accusing the govt of a conspiracy at all. but, i have not seen these vital questions answered to satisfy my curiousity. thats all, and as an american citizen i feel it is my right, and duty to ask these questions. you think i want to believe it was a conspiracy? i would love to believe the officail story, but there are just too many damn holes in it. thats all

Abookamongstthemany

cincybearcat wrote:

I'm well aware of that. We have communication issues.

That we do. At least we've gotten far enough to realize this. That's progress.

enharmonic

The truth is that we will never know the truth.

There are some legitimate questions that have never been answered...which could easily be answered if someone had the guts to ask. Chief among them, who is the money behind all of the put-options that were placed against the companies most significantly affected by 9/11? Surely the SEC has this information, if not the banks that made the transfers.

Are we to believe that the same terror organization that is only cabaple of IED's/roadside bombs, etc. is capable of pulling off an attack of this magnitude unassisted? There was major assistance. Will we ever know the real players? Nope. But enough of the speculation...lets focus on good old fashioned physical science...the following (less the steel certification disclosure) is 5th grade stuff in most American schools.

The steel used to construct WTC I and II were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard requires samples to be exposed to temperatures around 1000°C (1832°F) for several hours without weakening. The melting point of steel is about 1370°C.

The maximum flame-temperature for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is about 900°C. This is well less than the sustained temperature required to weaken ASTM E119 steel after several hours of exposure, much less melt it.

The NIST report suggests that the steel was probably exposed to temperatures of only about 250°C, which is 1/4th the sustained temperature required to weaken ASTM E119 steel.

There were photos taken of molten pools of steel at the base of both WTC towers even weeks after the attacks. If jet fuel burned that hot, it would melt the engines of jets during the course of routine flights!

I didn't make this shit up. It's science. There's no statistical model that will support the theory of jet fuel weakening or melting steel.

69charger

enharmonic wrote:

I didn't make this shit up. It's science.

Nope, you didn't, but someone else did without much thought for the scientific process (i.e. Jenga Theory) and you bought into it . Pictures of molten steel? Was it actually molten steel? The people who actually handled it say it wasn't. Go figure. Was jet fuel the only thing burning that day, or was there millions of sqare feet of office contents burning that day? Hmmm...

Guess we'll have to ask the obvious alien spacecraft that visited O'Hare this week. I mean, nothing else can explain that either right? Must have been aliens...

Ahnimus

Well, it's interesting to note that NIST is still trying to figure out what caused WTC7 to collapse and are expecting to have an answer for us this year. Apparently they are having problems figuring out WTC7, yet they could figure out what happened to the two towers, which I would think would be harder.

Another interesting note is that Prof. Steven E. Jones has resigned from the Scholars for 9/11 truth movement.