Former George Bush Chief Economist Says 911 Was An Inside Job

a reply to: Informer1958

I took it from your reference.

a reply to: Informer1958

it's history already.

a reply to: skyeagle409

I took it from your reference.

Why did you quote it then?

The fact is the OS is not history.

Historians will write that 911 was an inside job.

Historians will write that the OS is a fallacy.

When the History of 9/11 is Written

What will future history books say about 9/11? When all the facts are in, what will future historians write about 9/11?

Well, a good place to start might be to see what professional historians are saying now.

All of the following historians have concluded that 9/11 was an inside job, or at least questioned major portions of the the government's account about 9/11:

Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps (ret), Military Historian and Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center, Washington, D.C. 1990 - 1994, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense during the Reagan Administration and a highly decorated Vietnam veteran (two Silver Stars, a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart)

Georg Kreis, PhD, Professor of History and Director of the Europe Institut of the University of Basel

Daniele Ganser, PhD, Lecturer in the History Department at the University of Basel. Former Senior Researcher at the Center for Security Studies at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Former Researcher at the Military Academy (MILAK) of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology

Howard Zinn, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Political Science, Boston University. Historian and political scientist. Author of A People's History of the United States

Major John M. Newman, PhD, U.S. Army (ret), Professor of History and International Relations, University of Maryland. Former Executive Assistant to the Director of the National Security Agency. Former military attaché in China. 21-year career in U.S. Army Intelligence

James G. Smart, PhD, Professor Emeritus of History, Keene State College. Former Assistant Professor of History, University of Chattanooga

Carolyn Baker, PhD, Adjunct Professor of History, New Mexico State University

Joseph Diaferia, Professor of History and political science

Prominent World War II historian Robert Stinnett (who stated, in a telephone interview with me, that he believes the government let 9/11 happen in order to justify its agenda)

Gore Vidal, writer and historian

Many other historians, especially those with expertise on war and fascism, understand that false flag operations such as 9/11 have been used throughout history to justify military campaigns and the consolidation of domestic power.

georgewashington.blogspot.com...

a reply to: Informer1958

Don't you even read the contents of your own links? Go back to your link and read, and afterward, you will have no problem finding those quotes.

Historians have wrote that the OS is a fallacy.

Do you mean the historians at "AE911 Truth" who'd claim that explosives took down WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7, and yet, cannot produce a single valid video that depicts the sound of demo explosions nor even seismic evidence depicting demo explosions?

a reply to: Informer1958

Just to let you know that none of the people in your link has ever produced a single shred of evidence that supports their claim. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if some of their references came directly from Gordon Duff, of "Veterans Today."

Remember, Gordon Duff has admitted on video that he is a source of 9/11 disinformation and some of his disinformation has been used by 9/11 conspiracy theorist against me during our debates,......that is, until I posted the admission of Gordon Duff as a source of disinformation.

Why don't they present their so-called evidence to investigative reporters of major news agencies?

a reply to: skyeagle409

Do you mean the historians at "AE911 Truth" who'd claim that explosives took down WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7, and yet, cannot produce a single valid video that depicts the sound of demo explosions nor even seismic evidence depicting demo explosions?

That wont work, because A&E were able to prove the WTC were destroyed by demolition, by using science.

A&E do not need any videos sounds of explosion to prove their science. I have yet to see your science that debunks A&E science.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Just to let you know that none of the people in your link has ever produced a single shred of evidence that supports their claim.

Care to prove it?

Remember, Gordon Duff has admitted on video that he is a source of 9/11 disinformation and some of his disinformation has been used by 9/11 conspiracy theorist against me during our debates,......that is, until I posted the admission of Gordon Duff as a source of disinformation.

That wont work.

I can speak for the Truth movement and I know they do not endorse, or support Gorden Duff. Your info is old and stale and the Truth movement have moved on from dis info.

Why don't they present their so-called evidence to investigative reporters of major news agencies?

That wont fly.

Since when are the propaganda media interested in Truth?

a reply to: Informer1958

That wont work, because A&E were able to prove the WTC were destroyed by demolition, by using science.

That won't fly because "AE911 Truth" is not credible, as shown by the fact that even hardcore truthers have attack Richard Gage of "AE911 Truth" for deception and lies, and of course, videos and references to that fact have been presented.

a reply to: Informer1958

I can speak for the Truth movement and I know they do not endorse, or support Gorden Duff.

Well, they have used Gordon Duff in their arguments. In fact, they have even used Eddy Current's hoaxed WTC 7 in their arguments against me, and that, after I had posted references that his video was a hoax. Just goes to show why the Truth Movement is a joke.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: Informer1958

That wont work, because A&E were able to prove the WTC were destroyed by demolition, by using science.

That won't fly because "AE911 Truth" is not credible, as shown by the fact that even hardcore truthers have attack Richard Gage of "AE911 Truth" for deception and lies, and of course, videos and references to that fact have been presented.

that's true but only because Gage says we shouldn't look into the pentagon attack or how W Bush and family helped plot it. So he's disinfo.

a reply to: skyeagle409

That won't fly because "AE911 Truth" is not credible, as shown by the fact that even hardcore truthers have attack Richard Gage of "AE911 Truth" for deception and lies, and of course, videos and references to that fact have been presented.

That won't fly because A&E is very credible and their science does not lie.

The fact is, all of the OS conspiracy theorist have never been able to debunk A&E credible science with any science of their own.

The fact is OS conspiracy theorist find A&E science a big threat against them and the OS.

The fact is OS conspiracy theorist are looking for every way to discredit A&E, they cant debunk their science so now they are going after all the scientists by making up malicious fallacies in hoping to discredit A&E as you just demonstrated.

Well, they have used Gordon Duff in their arguments. In fact, they have even used Eddy Current's hoaxed WTC 7 in their arguments against me, and that, after I had posted references that his video was a hoax. Just goes to show why the Truth Movement is a joke.

The fact is "no member" on ATS has used anything from Gordon Duff in the years I have been on ATS. Your argument is old and stale used many years ago. The Truth Movement has moved on past all the lies that were created by many of the OS conspiracy theorist, and disinformation artist, the FBI , CIA, keyboard OP's.

The Truth Movement is not a joke.

Who are the people that are in the Truth Movement?

Architectures, Engineers, many NYC Firemen, NYC Police, Scientist, some Congressmen, and millions of people all over the world who see through the lies of the OS.

The fact is, The Truth Movement is everyone who doesn't believe the many lies and the impossibilities that defies physic and credible science, that you are making a mockery of.

The fact is, The OS is dying raptly over the years as more scientific evidence is discovered, and whistle Blowers are leaking out new information that was hidden from the public.

The only thing you have left in your arsenal in defending the OS is ridicule as you just demonstrated.

a reply to: Informer1958

That won't fly because A&E is very credible and their science does not lie.

Let's take a look in case you missed it.

AE911 Truth Fails, Again

The Troofers were all excited that they got a vote held at the Americans Institute of Architects annual meeting, unfortunately it failed by the overwhelming vote of 3,892 to 160.

AE911 Truth claims over 100 of their members are in the AIA, which means that they barely managed to get votes from any other architects at all.

screwloosechange.blogspot.com...


AE911Truth.INFO
Answering the questions of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Discredited Sources

Richard Gage freely admits to borrowing from others, but never to the extent you would imagine.

His entire presentation rests on the work done by others, people like Steven Jones, Jim Hoffman, Kevin Ryan, and David Ray Griffin. He also uses clips from and promotes a variety of 9/11 conspiracy films. The most predominant are 911 Mysteries and Loose Change. A variety of other arguments long seen in the debunking wars make their way into the presentation. I’ve seen evidence that even the slides that make up his presentation came from the slideshows of others.

In doing so, Gage is resting on broken reeds. Almost every one of these people are speaking outside their areas of expertise.

The closest are Steven Jones, a physicist, and Kevin Ryan, a chemist. Jones, once caught up in the cold fusion debacle, was released from his position at Brigham Young University once his stance on 9/11 conspiracies became an issue. He has not been able since to publish any of his scientific work supporting 9/11 theories in respected peer-reviewed journals, for his papers demonstrate a lack of attention to control and a leap to judgment. Ryan used his company’s email to question the import of tests done by it for NIST’s report on the Towers. The tests were far outside his area of expertise, and his misrepresentations in the letter got him fired from UL.

Jim Hoffman is a software engineer who has speculated that “hot sheets of air” caused the perimeter columns in the Towers to appear as if they were bowing. 911Mysteries and all versions of Loose Change are riddled with errors from beginning to end.

And finally, David Ray Griffin, the most consistently respected member of the 9/11 Truth Movement, is a professor of theology and philosophy of religion. He possesses the credentials not of a scientist, but a prophet. And his several books on 9/11 demonstrate this. Ryan Mackey’s methodical critique of one lengthy chapter, On “Debunking 9/11 Debunking” 2.1, shows how completely wrong Griffin is on almost every claim he made. (He got the date right.)

Indeed, the only original contribution I’m aware of Richard Gage adding to his presentation is the AIA logo, an architects’ organization in which he is a member. However, even that has been scrubbed off the site after he and others were supposed to “crash” the annual meeting of the organization. This leaves him solely with the motley crew from which he’s cobbled his presentation.

On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a “time warp”

So what’s with Richard Gage and A&E911 that they are still promoting a theory that T. Mark Hightower and I proved was indefensible in three articles published on 1 May 2011, on 17 July 2011 and on 27 August 2011? Why did Gage squander this precious opportunity to advance 9/11 Truth on C-SPAN by endorsing a provably false theory?

We know the before and after of the World Trade Center in relation to 9/11, so the answer to (a) is trivial. But Richard Gage had no answer to (c), even though he was asked it several times, and his answer to (b) was false and misleading. Is this the best that Richard Gage and A&E911 can do? It was embarrassing when he was asked the all too obvious question and could not answer it:

www.veteranstoday.com...


Architects Shy From Trutherism
American Institute of Architects

Architects didn't show up for a 9/11-architecture-conspiracy documentary screening—and the AIA doesn't want its name associated with Trutherism

The AIA itself, however, is firm about its relationship with Gage. “We don’t have any relationship with his organization ( AE 911 Truth) whatsoever,”

www.architectmagazine.com...


The Poorly Scripted Cognitive Infiltration of AE911Truth and Tom Sullivan’s Lies of Omission

Who fact checked this slide? Who included it with the article without any links to the original source? Who put that caption on it that claims this information relates to a “cutter charge designed for use with thermite” when it clearly is NOT? Who selectively edited the abstract taking out the mention of the fact that this is a “thermite igniter” for a propellant charge? Who chose an image of a MINING demolition controller which is incapable of being used for building demolitions when CDI has their own software driven system that is? These are serious questions that require immediate retractions for the good of the credibility of Richard Gage, Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth, and the entire Truth movement.

Richard Gage’s Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth seems to be spreading more and more disinformation since Gregg Roberts has come on board and their latest foray into anti-detcord disinfo (Tom Sullivan section starts at 1:34:35 into the video) with CDI (primary suspect for the demolition of the Trade Centers) explosives loader Tom Sullivan, is no exception.

Tom Sullivan is now being paraded around as a former CDI employee, someone who took photos and “loaded” buildings with explosive charges for demolition. But in this video “interview” with Richard Gage, his story is wildly inaccurate as he contradicts himself over and over again and his real purpose (aside from undermining the controlled demolition investigation of 9/11 (much like Steven Jones’ “thermite” saga)) seems to be to spread deliberate misinformation about det cord to real Truth advocates.

empirestrikesblack.com...

a reply to: HorusChrist

that's true but only because Gage says we shouldn't look into the pentagon attack or how W Bush and family helped plot it. So he's disinfo.

Yes indeed, Richard Gage is "disinfo." We can go here as well.

Major Problems with Tom Sullivan’s AE911Truth “Interview”

This deliberate manipulation of the relevant facts is a major disappointment. Seeing AE911Truth put out this kind of work is troubling indeed. It is going to feed the debunker community and probably drive several engineers and architects away from Richard Gage’s previously good works.

In order to reclaim the integrity that AE911Truth has built over the years, Richard Gage himself must immediately retract this work and thoroughly investigate every single aspect of Tom Sullivan’s story. Though Sullivan would have had to approve the power point presentation slides, ultimately Richard Gage must take responsibliity for this terrible mistake.

After emailing AE911Truth and after trying to email the author of the “interview” article, I have heard back from no one about the serious flaws in their article. Instead, I have noticed that they are trying their best to make sure it is posted in as many locations as they can complete with the glaring mistakes and deliberate misstatements. As of this afternoon, the article still features the incredibly inaccurate and downright deceptive power point slides and the factually inaccurate captions as you can see from the screenshot below.

willyloman.wordpress.com...


Lies of AE911Truth Exposed

It is time to bring the lies of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 “Truth” (AE911Truth) to light.

First, as we see, here, AE911Truth claims that over 24,000 Architects and engineers came face to face with the truth. However, as this site points out, if you go to AE911Truth’s own site, you’ll see they only added 50 new petitioners, and if you watch the videos from AE911Truth’s own Web site, you’ll see that only 4 of those 50 were architects or engineers.

truthersaresanitychallenged.wordpress.com...

a reply to: Informer1958

The fact is, The OS is dying raptly over the years as more scientific evidence is discovered, and whistle Blowers are leaking out new information that was hidden from the public.

Don't you mean, fabricated?! It has been 14 years, so where is that so-called scientific evidence? Apparently, there has been no breaking news on TV in that regard after all of these years.

The Shaky Moral Foundation that AE911Truth is Built Upon

healthwyze.org...


AE911Truth lies about "118 Witnesses", is made aware, then lies further

"They've finally done it. The Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth has now lost any shred of dignity or honesty they may have once had"

On your main page, you state that 118 first responders heard sounds of explosions "at the plane impact zone - a full second prior to collapse". I've read and re-read AE911truth's Graeme MacQueen's paper "118 Witnesses" and can't find a single witness who reported hearing an explosion at the impact zone a full second prior to collapse, much less 118.

The majority of witnesses (all 31 in the "bomb" category and well over half in the "explosion" category) use the term bomb or explosion to describe the sound DURING the collapse. IE, the roar of the collapse sounded like an explosion/bomb. The remaining accounts describe explosions well before and well after the collapses, as explicitly described by the first responders, and many say they believe in hindsight that the explosions were electrical (Stephen Gregory) or the like.

A few of the eyewitnesses do say that they heard an "explosion" above them and looked up to see one of the towers collapsing. Since the eyewitnesses don't say that the explosion occured before the collapse began (as opposed to the noise they heard being the collapse itself), it's completely dishonest to say that the noise was heard "a full second prior to collapse". Absolutely none of them (unless I'm missing one) describe the noise as coming from the impact zone, which makes this a double lie. A couple days later, a Judy Shelton responded by saying, "Thank you for pointing this out, we are fixing it."

Weeks passed without them changing a thing. Finally today I checked back and see that the main page now reads, "Sounds of explosions and flashes of light witnessed at the beginning of the "collapse" by 118 first responders". Instead of CORRECTING what was already a lie about the sounds of explosions, they pushed it even further to now include "flashes of light" as well!

I know of one person (Stephen Gregory) who talked about flashes of light, but he explicitly states that he believes it was electrical, due to the building coming apart. They're taking his words out of context, but this is still only one person (MAYBE a few others that I'm missing). Certainly not all 118! Maybe this group should reconsider its reason for existing if they have to lie to support their existence.

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Even al-Qaeda has jumped on the bandwagon.

9/11 Conspiracy Theories 'Ridiculous,' Al Qaeda Says

An Al Qaeda representative says that claims the U.S. government was behind the attacks on Sept. 11th are demeaning to Al Qaeda.

www.theonion.com...

a reply to: skyeagle409

AE911 Truth Fails, Again

The Troofers were all excited that they got a vote held at the Americans Institute of Architects annual meeting, unfortunately it failed by the overwhelming vote of 3,892 to 160.

That won't work.

As soon as I got to "Troofers", I stop reading the rest.

Your source is nothing but ridicule, and disinformation.

What about the rest of A&E scientist are they all lairs to? Surly you can do better then this.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Don't you mean, fabricated?! It has been 14 years, so where is that so-called scientific evidence? Apparently, there has been no breaking news on TV in that regard after all of these years.

What was fabricated? You have not debunked anything from A&E but to slander them.

a reply to: Informer1958

That won't work.

"AE911 Truth" has shown its true colors for all to see, and as a result, "AE911 Truth" is as credible as a 9 dollar bill.

a reply to: skyeagle409

"AE911 Truth" has shown its true colors for all to see, and as a result, "AE911 Truth" is as credible as a 9 dollar bill.

That won't fly.

The fact is The world looks up to A&E and all their science. A&E are very credible.

You can slander and ridicule A&E all you like, however you just shown your true colors.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth) is a non-profit non-partisan organization of architects, engineers and affiliates dedicated to exposing the falsehoods and to revealing facts about the complete destruction of all three World Trade Center high-rises on September 11, 2001.
Our organization is devoted to:

■ Dispelling misinformation and disinformation with scientific facts and forensic evidence

■ Educating and motivating thousands of architects and engineers as well as the public at large

■ Obtaining a truly independent WTC investigation with subpoena power

■ Achieving mainstream media coverage for our cause

www1.ae911truth.org...