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

Options
1101113151619

Comments

  • Well, you certainly have more faith in our crooked government than I ever will.

    It's not just the government, it's the people who they ask to conduct the investigation. The investigation is done by people outside and inside the government...engineers, air traffic controllers, etc. etc. If it WAS just the government investigating the events, I'd be very skeptical about the findings. But that's not the case.
  • Saturnal wrote:
    It's not just the government, it's the people who they ask to conduct the investigation. The investigation is done by people outside and inside the government...engineers, air traffic controllers, etc. etc. If it WAS just the government investigating the events, I'd be very skeptical about the findings. But that's not the case.
    thank you...
    Take me piece by piece.....
    Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
  • Is this what you guys are talking about?? I cant believe people still believe it......................... http://youtube.com/watch?v=pfurtEggwXw
  • Saturnal wrote:
    It's not just the government, it's the people who they ask to conduct the investigation. The investigation is done by people outside and inside the government...engineers, air traffic controllers, etc. etc. If it WAS just the government investigating the events, I'd be very skeptical about the findings. But that's not the case.

    The 9/11 comission is simply politicians. And if the investagtion is brought on by the govt you better believe it's going to say what they think it should.

    Why are independent investigations and research also backed by professionals in their field so uncredible for you?
    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
  • well i have more faith in our governments version of what happened than i do of you and your boyfriends version....


    We didn't do the original research, obviously. The more I read the more it brings up glaring questions that haven't been answered. Also I have nothing to gain by lying about it.

    I don't think you're going to believe anything posted no matter what if it doesn't already fit your current stance.
    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
  • The 9/11 comission is simply politicians. And if the investagtion is brought on by the govt you better believe it's going to say what they think it should.

    Why are independent investigations and research also backed by professionals in their field so uncredible for you?
    ya know.....

    your boyfriend has been kind enough to share his thoughts of what he believes happened .......
    remotes control planes....
    explosive devices.....
    government involved.....
    etc.
    etc.
    etc.

    im just curious... do you agree 100% with his theories???
    or do you have any theories of your own???
    Take me piece by piece.....
    Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
  • Saturnal wrote:
    I haven't developed my own theory on why exactly the buildings collapsed, but I don't think it matters much when thinking about the event. I'm not gonna go through it all again, because I've talked about it in another thread here.

    I'm just saying this discussion always goes around in circles because people cannot stick to making an argument in favor of their own theory (or a theory they agree with)...they can only stick to asking more and more questions to try and discredit certain other theories.


    Well people keep asking questions about different aspects of the collaspe and then so those questions are debated again. We may know that the towers didn't fall due to the melted steel but not everyone knows that.
    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
  • ya know.....

    your boyfriend has been kind enough to share his thoughts of what he believes happened .......
    remotes control planes....
    explosive devices.....
    government involved.....
    etc.
    etc.
    etc.

    im just curious... do you agree 100% with his theories???
    or do you have any theories of your own???

    I don't agree 100% with a lot of things especially when there are some aspects that just can't be known. It's foolish to devote yourself to one theory when it's really is just a theory. I just read what's out there. I do, however, find the official version to be very lacking and so much makes no sense. So I'll debate the points I'm familiar with until I am presented with something that causes me to change my mind. I haven't seen that yet.

    Let's look at some basic questions that don't add up....

    How can we believe that the Pentagon has no better surveillence than the tapes they've shown us?
    Why never let any of the other tapes of the Pentagon being hit be seen? There's at least 2 more videotapes of the Pentagon being hit...one from a gas station across the street and another from a Hotel across 95.
    What about all the money that was made on put options on the 2 airlines used that day?
    What about the firefighters who were there that say they heard and saw explosions?
    Why seal the recordings of the firefighters communications?
    Why not let Sybil Edmonds speak publicly about her claims about several warnings about the attack?
    What about Able Danger?
    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
  • Posts: 4,141
    has anyone watch the 'the improbable collapse' video i posted?

    here's another, this one's just over 10 min.... in the months before 9/11 we got 23 warnings about a terrorist attack from 11 foreign governments...some of those warnings even mentioned using planes...hmmm 2 months before the cia said a terrorist attack was imminent?? and the head of the fbi testified ashcroft told him that he didn't want to hear anymore about the warnings??? not even a month before teh fbi's leading authority on al qaeda resigns b/c of 'repeated obstructions into investigations into al qaeda'??

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iswVPEZvFZM
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • I don't agree 100% with a lot of things especially when there are some aspects that just can't be known. It's foolish to devote yourself to one theory when it's really is just a theory. I just read what's out there. I do, however, find the official version to be very lacking and so much makes no sense. So I'll debate the points I'm familiar with until I am presented with something that causes me to change my mind. I haven't seen that yet.

    Let's look at some basic questions that don't add up....

    How can we believe that the Pentagon has no better surveillence than the tapes they've shown us?
    Why never let any of the other tapes of the Pentagon being hit be seen? There's at least 2 more videotapes of the Pentagon being hit...one from a gas station across the street and another from a Hotel across 95.
    What about all the money that was made on put options on the 2 airlines used that day?
    What about the firefighters who were there that say they heard and saw explosions?
    Why seal the recordings of the firefighters communications?
    Why not let Sybil Edmonds speak publicly about her claims about several warnings about the attack?
    What about Able Danger?
    ok....so you have a lot of questions about what exactly happened that day....as im sure most of us do...

    but given all the research you have obviously done...

    lets here your theory......what do you believe happened???
    Take me piece by piece.....
    Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
  • Why are independent investigations and research also backed by professionals in their field so uncredible for you?

    Because there are so few of them. They are completely out-numbered by people who say the opposite.
  • Cincinnati, Ohio Posts: 3,649
    I just read what's out there.

    don't believe everything you read. there alot of nut jobs in this world.

    we have every right to question any and all possible theories about this tragedy,
    but i'm sorry some facts are just indisputable, and i think its time to face them.
    Nice shirt.
  • don't believe everything you read. there alot of nut jobs in this world.

    I don't.

    we have every right to question any and all possible theories about this tragedy,
    but i'm sorry some facts are just indisputable, and i think its time to face them.[/quote]

    which undisputable facts are you talking about?
    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
  • ok....so you have a lot of questions about what exactly happened that day....as im sure most of us do...

    but given all the research you have obviously done...

    lets here your theory......what do you believe happened???

    I don't have a postive answer to what happened. The planes could have been controlled by remote, they could have let it happen, it could have been Islamic terrorists. I don't have any definite answers and I dont' pretend to. How can I know for sure what happened any more than you. I think the evidence supports a controlled demolition and if fire didn't bring down the towers then why did building 7 come down. And the planes took sharp turns that more than likely wouldn't be possible for amateur pilots to pull off. Also look at the percision hit at the pentagon. So it's hard for me to believe these guys could have pulled the whole thing off given the circumstances.

    What's your theory then? Do you have any answers to the questions I posed?
    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
  • Cincinnati, Ohio Posts: 3,649

    which undisputable facts are you talking about?

    well i know for a fact that i saw with my own eyes those planes
    slam into those towers and kill thousands of innocent people.

    i can't possibly imagine what gain our government would have by
    'staging' or orchestrating such a horrific event or any part of it.

    maybe i'm just being naive, but thats my opinion.

    there are a lot of unanswered questions though, i will agree with that.
    Nice shirt.
  • Posts: 1,045
    El_Kabong wrote:
    so you can't name anything?

    Hmmm...

    Pentagon being hit by a plane. Woman standing in hole apparently not being burnt. Debunking "Jenga Theory". WTC 7....

    You name it. As I stated before, use the search function, it is your friend.

    Handball against the curtains...
  • Posts: 1,045
    To possibly settle this once and for all, why don't we pick one particular event and debate it to an end. Let's go with the Pentagon. If I can show that a plane most likely hit that building and not a missile or UAV then that would bring your "theory" to a screeching halt, would it not? I mean if that part is not a conspiracy then the rest must not be either, correct? Or if you's like we could debate the collapse of the WTC 1 or 2. Or even WTC 7. Let's pick one and stay on topic and acknowledge points made by both sides and debate them till they are resolved. Staying on topic is clearly the only way to gain any ground on this issue.

    How 'bout it?
  • I don't agree 100% with a lot of things especially when there are some aspects that just can't be known. It's foolish to devote yourself to one theory when it's really is just a theory. I just read what's out there. I do, however, find the official version to be very lacking and so much makes no sense. So I'll debate the points I'm familiar with until I am presented with something that causes me to change my mind. I haven't seen that yet.

    Let's look at some basic questions that don't add up....

    How can we believe that the Pentagon has no better surveillence than the tapes they've shown us?
    Why never let any of the other tapes of the Pentagon being hit be seen? There's at least 2 more videotapes of the Pentagon being hit...one from a gas station across the street and another from a Hotel across 95.
    What about all the money that was made on put options on the 2 airlines used that day?
    What about the firefighters who were there that say they heard and saw explosions?
    Why seal the recordings of the firefighters communications?
    Why not let Sybil Edmonds speak publicly about her claims about several warnings about the attack?
    What about Able Danger?
    reason for not releasing pentagon surveillance?? national security??? policy???

    firefighters hearing explosions??? well 2 planes loaded with jet fuel just crashed in to the twin towers....i bet they heard fucking explosions...

    but i dont think it was explosive devices planted in the building....

    able danger?? from what i have just read...

    the U.S. senate intelligence committee concluded able danger did not identify Atta or any other hijackers before the 9-11 attacks....


    my theory???

    im gonna go with 19 hijackers with links to al-queda and osama bin laden hijacked 4 planes
    Take me piece by piece.....
    Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
  • Posts: 10,118
    How can we believe that the Pentagon has no better surveillence than the tapes they've shown us?

    who said we should believe what? pentagon has never claimed to not have better footage. but you know, I know they probably do.
    Why never let any of the other tapes of the Pentagon being hit be seen? There's at least 2 more videotapes of the Pentagon being hit...one from a gas station across the street and another from a Hotel across 95.

    national security. what did you want to see? do you believe a missile hit the pentagon?

    What about all the money that was made on put options on the 2 airlines used that day?

    investors get lucky all the time.
    What about the firefighters who were there that say they heard and saw explosions?

    call me crazy but when a entire floor weighing thousands of tons crashes down on the floor below, it might, just might, sound like an explosion.
    Why seal the recordings of the firefighters communications?

    they arent.
    Why not let Sybil Edmonds speak publicly about her claims about several warnings about the attack?
    What about Able Danger?


    who? what about it?
  • i thought the u.s. government use remotely controlled planes...you have to pick something and go with it...you're all over the place...was it a terror attack or not? if not, this is insignificant...if so, then it shows that, at least, there is a possiblity the the u.s. government knew that this could happen and used it as the catalyst to do what they wanted to do...expand the military, instill a culture of fear in the citizenry, develop a more comprehensive military world presence, and foster a take no prisoners and ask no questons situation (a blank check) for going to war with an ideology. so, what is it? do you understand how this really pokes holes in your "internal demolition" of WTC buildings 1 and 2?
    El_Kabong wrote:
    has anyone watch the 'the improbable collapse' video i posted?

    here's another, this one's just over 10 min.... in the months before 9/11 we got 23 warnings about a terrorist attack from 11 foreign governments...some of those warnings even mentioned using planes...hmmm 2 months before the cia said a terrorist attack was imminent?? and the head of the fbi testified ashcroft told him that he didn't want to hear anymore about the warnings??? not even a month before teh fbi's leading authority on al qaeda resigns b/c of 'repeated obstructions into investigations into al qaeda'??

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iswVPEZvFZM
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.