9/11 video question

12467

Comments

  • would most people backing the theory of a neoconservative terrorist, consider the present administration to be the ones behind the attack?
  • hsewifhsewif Posts: 444
    but if a group outside our government made it happen, then it is a terrorist attack, which is exactly what we thought it was to begin with.

    I brought up a point along those lines...

    I said something like "if bombs were indeed planted and detonated, how can anyone prove that our government did it and not terrorists?"

    Only one person responded and not directly. It was their thought that the terrorists would be rubbing it in our faces that they were able to plant bombs.

    I think the exact opposite (if in fact bombs were planted....which I'm not convinced that they were).

    Terrorists would rather let a huge chunk of our population assume that their government did it.

    Which is more effective overall? To tell all of your secrets or let the human mind wonder? (and divide a country?)

    and something else----if our government did plant bombs and all of this evidence is coming out proving it....wouldn't it be safe to assume that in the future, our morally corrupt government will step forward and say that terrorists planted bombs? To divert the attention away from themselves? Isn't that the next logical step? (fine-they've busted us on the explosives....let's point our fingers at Osama)

    ha-does that make sense?
  • oops, double post.
    you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
    ~Ron Burgundy
  • hsewif wrote:
    I brought up a point along those lines...

    I said something like "if bombs were indeed planted and detonated, how can anyone prove that our government did it and not terrorists?"

    Only one person responded and not directly. It was their thought that the terrorists would be rubbing it in our faces that they were able to plant bombs.

    I think the exact opposite (if in fact bombs were planted....which I'm not convinced that they were).

    Terrorists would rather let a huge chunk of our population assume that their government did it.

    Which is more effective overall? To tell all of your secrets or let the human mind wonder? (and divide a country?)

    and something else----if our government did plant bombs and all of this evidence is coming out proving it....wouldn't it be safe to assume that in the future, our morally corrupt government will step forward and say that terrorists planted bombs? To divert the attention away from themselves? Isn't that the next logical step? (fine-they've busted us on the explosives....let's point our fingers at Osama)

    ha-does that make sense?

    ok, that is your theory. respectable. but don't rule out any other possible theories because you made your own. not saying you would, just be openminded.

    if the truth is an inside job, then it is all about money. so, follow the money.
    you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
    ~Ron Burgundy
  • hsewif wrote:
    and something else----if our government did plant bombs and all of this evidence is coming out proving it....wouldn't it be safe to assume that in the future, our morally corrupt government will step forward and say that terrorists planted bombs? To divert the attention away from themselves? Isn't that the next logical step? (fine-they've busted us on the explosives....let's point our fingers at Osama)

    ha-does that make sense?
    i'm not so sure that the words "morally corrupt govt" and "step forward" really belong in the same sentence...and i think your proposed ideas may be over-thinking the situation. there is no need for the govt to deny anything or point fingers at terrorists for activities that a large majority of the public will never buy into unless someone in power is caught red-handed...and by that i mean caught on video or audio tape admitting to activities surrounding the planning and implementation of the 9/11 attacks.

    ds
    And no one sings me lullabyes
    And no one makes me close my eyes
    So I throw the windows wide
    And call to you across the sky....
  • hsewifhsewif Posts: 444
    DarkStar wrote:
    i'm not so sure that the words "morally corrupt govt" and "step forward" really belong in the same sentence...and i think your proposed ideas may be over-thinking the situation. there is no need for the govt to deny anything or point fingers at terrorists for activities that a large majority of the public will never buy into unless someone in power is caught red-handed...and by that i mean caught on video or audio tape admitting to activities surrounding the planning and implementation of the 9/11 attacks.

    ds

    my ideas are over-thought?

    You could be right....it's easier to believe that holographic missiles were somehow involved.

    and you're right about the government not stepping forward. My point was that when and if the evidence is overwhelming (which it ISN'T at this point) they might come forward and point fingers.
  • hsewif wrote:
    my ideas are over-thought?

    You could be right....it's easier to believe that holographic missiles were somehow involved.

    and you're right about the government not stepping forward. My point was that when and if the evidence is overwhelming (which it ISN'T at this point) they might come forward and point fingers.

    I haven't heard about holographic missles yet.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • I haven't heard about holographic missles yet.

    yeah, there are some pretty ridiculous theories out there.
    you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
    ~Ron Burgundy
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    I haven't heard about holographic missles yet.

    http://gallerize.com/911_home.htm
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • spiral outspiral out Posts: 1,052
    but if a group outside our government made it happen, then it is a terrorist attack, which is exactly what we thought it was to begin with.

    Well, isn't the question who are the terrorists?
    Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!

    The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
  • spiral outspiral out Posts: 1,052
    hsewif wrote:

    Terrorists would rather let a huge chunk of our population assume that their government did it.

    And that can also be twisted round. The goverment did and made it look like terrorists.
    Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!

    The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
  • lgtlgt Posts: 720
    jsand wrote:
    I can prove that the JFK assassination was an inside job - my experiment used a Hot Wheels car, a water pistol, GI Joe figures, and legos.

    LOL!!

    Anyway, my contribution to the thread: I would be "impressed", if the US government were behind 9/11, considering the mess they've made in Iraq.... basically, even if you believe the US govt. would do it for their own reasons, I really doubt they would be able to pull it off.

    The Bush administration is not the most efficient one.
  • Another Ignored 9/11 Clue: Bomb Sniffing Dogs Removed From WTC Days Before Attack

    Jon Rappoport | June 28 2004

    As you’ll see from the Newsday excerpt below, tight security at the Twin Towers in NYC was lightened in the days just before the 9/11 attacks.

    What makes the particular removal of bomb-sniffing dogs so important are statements from firemen that they heard bombs going off in the Towers on 9/11, as they were carrying out their rescue operation.

    Naturally, if people were planting bombs in the Towers, they would not have wanted those charges to be discovered by trained dogs prior to 9/11.

    This matter of the dogs and the statements of firemen about bombs were completely ignored by the 9/11 commission.

    Parallel: in the 1995 OKC bombing, there had to have been charges pre-planted on specific columns of the Murrah building, because no truck bomb of any size could have caused the profile of damage sustained by the building on April 19. Certain columns were taken down and certain columns survived intact. A few of the surviving columns were closer to the truck than other columns which went down. It’s likely that, on April 19, as the diversionary blast went off in the Ryder truck, the charges that had already been placed on the columns were set off by remote control from another location. Or the Ryder truck shock wave itself set off detonators embedded in the charges on the columns.


    When The Explosives Were Placed: WTC South Tower Upper Floors Closed on 9/8 & 9/9

    San Francisco Indymedia | April 23 2004

    Many people have theorized the World Trade Center was wired with explosives, causing the unprecedented collapse following the impacts of two jumbo jets. In fact, NYC firefighters remarked that day that it seemed like bombs were going off in the buildings, just prior to the tower's collapse. One glaring question remains unanswered: exactly how and when could such a monumental undertaking be accomplished. Read on for the answer...

    Feedback from the Progressive Review's Undernews for April 22, 2004.

    WE RECEIVED THE FOLLOWING from someone who worked for Fiduciary Trust on the 90th, 94-97th floors of the South Tower:

    "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 36 hrs 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 brought 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."


    NBC: FDNY Chief of Safety Reported Bombs Both Within the Towers and on the Planes on 9/11
    TRANSCRIPT (1 minute 27 seconds in)

    "....The Chief of Safety of the Fire Department of New York told me that...er...shortly after 9 o'clock here had roughly 200 men in the building trying to effect rescues of some of those civilians who were in there...er... and that basically he received word of the possibility of a secondary device, another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could but he said that there was another explosion which took place and then an hour after the first hit here, the first crash that took place, he said there was another explosion which took place in one of the towers here.

    So obviously he, according to his theory, he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted in the building. One of the secondary devices he thinks that took place after the initial impact was, he thinks, may have been on the plane that crashed into one of the towers. The second device, he thinks, he speculates, was probably planted in the building...er... so that's what we have been told by...erm...Albert Turi who is the Chief of Safety for the New York City Fire Department, he told me that just moments ago."

    The reporter then goes on to describe continuing explosions which are blamed on faulty gas lines.

    ...."the bottom line is, that according to the Chief of Safety of the New York Fire Department, he says that he lost a great many men in those secondary explosions and he said that there were literally hundreds if not thousands of people in those towers when the explosions took place. He said everything above the 60th floor was extremely difficult to get to as you can imagine."


    9/11 Security
    Courtesy of Marvin BushMarvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company, Burns noted, was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Burns also served. [Utne]

    According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."

    The company lists as government clients "the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S Air force, and the Department of Justice," in projects that "often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or high-risk government sites."

    Stratesec (Securacom) differs from other security companies which separate the function of consultant from that of service provider. The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.

    The Dulles Internation contract is another matter. Dulles is regarded as "absolutely a sensitive airport," according to security consultant Wayne Black, head of a Florida-based security firm, due to its location, size, and the number of international carriers it serves.

    Black has not heard of Stratesec, but responds that for one company to handle security for both airports and airlines is somewhat unusual. It is also delicate for a security firm serving international facilities to be so interlinked with a foreign-owned company: "Somebody knew somebody," he suggested, or the contract would have been more closely scrutinized.

    As Black points out, "when you [a company] have a security contract, you know the inner workings of everything." And if another company is linked with the security company, then "What's on your computer is on their computer." [American Reporter]

    Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted

    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 [September 11]. 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 [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed. [NY NewsDay]

    Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down

    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 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "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." [WingTV]
    Marvin Bush was in New York on 9/11

    it goes on and on and on and .........,proof is in the pudding.too much info to list!!! http://www.prisonplanet.com/911.html

    The only "Conspiracy Theorie" is your gov. lame ass version of the "truth".many in our country are dumbed down lemming minded,sheeple morons incapeable of independent thought and unable to comprehend that governments have murdered there own people all through out history.
    "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot". Mark Twain


    "I would rather die on my feet than to live on my knees."
    Emiliano Zapata
  • DPrival78DPrival78 Posts: 2,263
    another aspect of the whole 9/11 thing that doesn't get mentioned as often as things like the building collapses, and the pentagon anomalies, ete, is "the dancing israelis". 5 people were picked up by the feds on 9/11 after they were seen by many witnesses across the river in NJ celebrating and filming the twin towers as they burned. they were later picked up driving a van which contained: traces of explosives, a few grand in cash, and arab clothing. they were turned over to the fbi, held for a period of days (i forget how long), and then sent back to israel. it turns out that they weren't just israeli citizens, they were mossad (israeli intelligence) agents. they were allegedly working for a moving company in NJ, which was mysteriously abandoned by its owners after 911. a few of these men appeared on an israeli talk show to discuss all of this, and one of the men said that they were just there to "document the event".

    i don't know about any of you, but all of that seems awfully suspicious to me. "document the event'?? if that is true, then they obviously at least knew an "event" was going to take place that day. how did they know? who told them? who sent them to document it? were they involved in this event in any other way? where did the traces of explosives in the van come from? whats with all the cash? whats with the arab clothes? those seem like logical questions to me. yet, this was never investigated at all.
    i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
  • would most people backing the theory of a neoconservative terrorist, consider the present administration to be the ones behind the attack?

    i think the common misconception is that this had to be some massive conspiracy. it is plausible that a select group of people could have orchestrated this.

    if anyone has read "Crossing the Rubicon", it lays out a ton of facts. these facts are either coincidence or conspiracy. This many coincidences (like the war games going on that day involving potential highjacked planes, or the various warnings from countries all over the world that this was going to happen) would be enough to convict in any court of law.

    motive, well, look at who has benefited the most from 9/11....
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    bryanfury wrote:
    motive, well, look at who has benefited the most from 9/11....


    and who would that be? Silverstein? meaning what? he was behind the attacks on sept 9/11? out with it
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    and who would that be? Silverstein? meaning what? he was behind the attacks on sept 9/11? out with it

    well, the Carylye Group for one. made up of some of the worlds biggest players, they have made billions on defense contracts.

    Dick Cheney's options from halliburton have gone through the roof thanks to their contracts.

    our government has given out billions of dollars in contracts to those closely associated with this administration.

    and that is only the monetary gains. look at the political gains the Right has captured since 9/11. the only reaosn they won the past few elections was "national security". Take 9/11 out of the mix, and the Republicans would have been voted out a long time ago.
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
  • DPrival78DPrival78 Posts: 2,263
    bryanfury wrote:
    motive, well, look at who has benefited the most from 9/11....

    the pnac'ers all benefitted.. they just so happened to luck out and get the "new pearl harbor" they wished for, and off we go, following their plan to a T.. first iraq, and any month now, iran.

    silverstein benefitted, sure. a few bill. in his pocket could be considered a benefit. what a savvy business move to buy the towers and take out that insurance policy just in time.
    i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
  • DPrival78 wrote:
    the pnac'ers all benefitted.. they just so happened to luck out and get the "new pearl harbor" they wished for, and off we go, following their plan to a T.. first iraq, and any month now, iran.

    silverstein benefitted, sure. a few bill. in his pocket could be considered a benefit. what a savvy business move to buy the towers and take out that insurance policy just in time.

    "luck"? maybe. but when you string a series of "coincidences" together, i don;t think you can call that luck.

    I think the main thing here is that I'm not saying 100% that this is how it happened.

    BUT, we have to at least explore the possibility. No one wants to believe that this could have happened, and this creates a barrier to even looking at the facts and digging further.
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    bryanfury wrote:
    well, the Carylye Group for one. made up of some of the worlds biggest players, they have made billions on defense contracts.

    Dick Cheney's options from halliburton have gone through the roof thanks to their contracts.

    our government has given out billions of dollars in contracts to those closely associated with this administration.

    and that is only the monetary gains. look at the political gains the Right has captured since 9/11. the only reaosn they won the past few elections was "national security". Take 9/11 out of the mix, and the Republicans would have been voted out a long time ago.

    amazing. so you think that bush/cheney or even some clever republicans sat in a room and thought up the 9/11 attacks?

    wow. just wow.
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    amazing. so you think that bush/cheney or even some clever republicans sat in a room and thought up the 9/11 attacks?

    wow. just wow.

    never said Bush. he can barely tie his shoes.

    what is amazing to me is the fact that you completely discount the possibility. Eventhough our government has a history of these types of things (blowing up a shuttle and blaming castro, gulf of tonkin, etc etc etc).
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
  • even flow?even flow? Posts: 8,066
    jlew24asu wrote:
    amazing. so you think that bush/cheney or even some clever republicans sat in a room and thought up the 9/11 attacks?

    wow. just wow.


    Sounds just as good or better than: "sat around in caves and pulled it off". ;)
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • even flow? wrote:
    Sounds just as good or better than: "sat around in caves and pulled it off". ;)

    exactly! it amazes me that after all the deception from this administration, so many people are willing to just accept their version of events at face value.

    wow. just wow.
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    jlew24asu wrote:
    amazing. so you think that bush/cheney or even some clever republicans sat in a room and thought up the 9/11 attacks?

    wow. just wow.

    http://www.newamericancentury.org
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Ahnimus wrote:

    hey, no fair throwing facts into the discussion!
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    even flow? wrote:
    Sounds just as good or better than: "sat around in caves and pulled it off". ;)


    the difference is those nuts sitting around in caves have the will and resolve to see innocent americans dead.

    do republicans?
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Ahnimus wrote:


    not sure what "facts" this shows
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    bryanfury wrote:
    never said Bush. he can barely tie his shoes.

    what is amazing to me is the fact that you completely discount the possibility. Eventhough our government has a history of these types of things (blowing up a shuttle and blaming castro, gulf of tonkin, etc etc etc).


    what shuttle did america blow up?


    your amazed that I completely discount our government orchastrated 9/11? amazing isnt it
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    the difference is those nuts sitting around in caves have the will and resolve to see innocent americans dead.

    do republicans?


    i don't know, ask the people of New Orleans.

    also, your taking a very narrow view of it. its not that they wanted innocent americans dead. it was the means to an end. the only way to get support for the iraq war. "collateral damage" to use their antiquated terms.
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    what shuttle did america blow up?


    your amazed that I completely discount our government orchastrated 9/11? amazing isnt it

    wanted to blow a shuttle up. it was a hair from happening. had one person not blown the whistle, it would have happened.

    and yes, i am amazed. you were probably one of those that are amazed that we weren't greeted as liberators too. and amazed there were no wmd. and amazed that our troops used white phosphorous on civilians in Fallujah. etc etc etc.
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
Sign In or Register to comment.