Announce your position on 911.

I disbelieve the official story:

1. The next day at a conference with the public (on 9/12), Bush said that he saw the first tower go down live on TV the day before when he was at the school reading stories to children (on 9/11). The problem is that there was never any footage shown of the first tower going, on tv, on any news agency.

The first shown news footage of the first tower going down was shown a couple of days later, after a director gave the media his footage of the documentary he was filming on NYC firefighters.

2. Undercover Israeli agents were arrested, after being reported to the police by a woman who saw men in a van cheering the attack, and were found to have tracked the "hijackers." Israel has very close ties with the US, and to tell me that no one in the government knew about them coming here is a load of bull.

(I will add 3 more, just for the heck of it)

3. The day of the attacks, FEMA and other government agencies (including the FBI) were running "drills" in NY to prepare for the disaster. It just happened that FEMA and other disaster groups were there the day the attacks happened, where it happened.

4. The towers all had a steel frame running through the center of every floor. This frames could have easily withstood an earthquake, but one airliner takes it down?

Haven't heard this one anywhere else but one documentary that was shown on TV:

5. The government agent in charge of investigating Bin Laden was moved to the WTC just a few weeks before the attack. He died in the attacks as well.

[edit on 16-3-2007 by DJMessiah]

..the official story.

I'm not going to bother to give you my 2 reasons because the fact that I believe automatically makes me a Disinformation Specialist.

Must really bother you that the NWO spends SO much of your money paying SO MANY Disinformation Specialists.

Although, the NWO is behind on my paychecks. Now that I think about it, they haven't sent me a single one.

This next statement is only for the NWO.

"If you guys don't start sending me some cash, I'm going public with every thing know!!!!"

That should get my paychecks coming in.

my view on it is that it was amreica who blow it up..or collapsed it, what ever phrasing you want, i have heard of few..well alot alot of theorys but one did grab my atention.

There were CIA angents in the world trade centres, this was CIA just keeping tabs on the world trade centres, make sure nothing happens, this is good, but what made me think is that on 9-11 EVERY CIA agent had phoned in sick, now i think thats a little bit too big to just be a coinceidence.

Then theres the one where structural engineers say it shouldnt of fallen like that, it looks like an explotion from the bottom.

So in my view it was America

Just in case this thread degenerates into silliness, confusion, and the usual, there were some really good posts a few pages back to check out...

Originally posted by Vixion
my view on it is that it was amreica who blow it up..or collapsed it, what ever phrasing you want, i have heard of few..well alot alot of theorys but one did grab my atention.

There were CIA angents in the world trade centres, this was CIA just keeping tabs on the world trade centres, make sure nothing happens, this is good, but what made me think is that on 9-11 EVERY CIA agent had phoned in sick, now i think thats a little bit too big to just be a coinceidence.

Then theres the one where structural engineers say it shouldnt of fallen like that, it looks like an explotion from the bottom.

So in my view it was America

Do you have any evidence of any CIA agents that worked at the WTC that called in sick? This is the first I have heard of this, and would like to know more.

Originally posted by Connected
[LMAO!!!!!!!!! Dis-info agent. Ignore list, here he comes..

:shk: You asked a question and you got an answer. An answer you didn't like. So suddenly this person is a 'dis-info agent' and on our ignore list?

Originally posted by sensfan
I believe the official story, most of it anyway

I agree with sensfan and with the resons given by him.
I believe most of the official story.

What I think outside the official story is that Israel knew the hits were coming. They had people filming the NYC hit. They were on the other side of the river. But I do NOT think that the Jews in NYC knew about it and got out of the towers before they came down. That's just garbage. The government of the country of Israel knew ... the American Jews did not.

Also - Bush43 let all the Bin-Ladens get out of the country on those airplanes.



[edit on 3/16/2007 by FlyersFan]

I thought the purpose of this thread was for members to state their stance, on weither you believed or did not believe the official Story with regards to 9/11, I find it rather ridiculous some members are being attacked for voicing their opinion/Stance.

State your stance, an let that be an end to it.

Is not helpful when other members snip at each other

[edit on 16-3-2007 by spencerjohnstone]

I agree with spencerjohnstone

Just post what the OP asked for and move along.
If you want to debate a point, created your own thread.

To the OP,

just wondering why?
You said 'you need' to find out?

Is it for a poll? Research etc?
What do you plan to do with your findings??

Thanks.

Originally posted by hlesterjerome
I'm not going to bother to give you my 2 reasons because the fact that I believe automatically makes me a Disinformation Specialist.

Just because some unhelpful posters in this thread automatically reject those of an opposing view as "Disinformation Specialist", doesn't mean we all do. Some of us would genuinely like to know your reasons.

I don't believe the official story OR the unofficial story. (However, I do believe terrorists really brought those buildings down with planes and I don't believe our government orchestrated or willingly allowed 9/11 to happen.)


Why I don't believe the official story:
1. Way too much secrecy among the administration.
2. I find it hard to believe with all our intelligence abilities that NOBODY knew ANYTHING about an impending terror attack.
3. Our government is negligent and incompetent--always.


Why I don't believe the CT story:
1. The idea of someone planting explosives (or thermite, if we must go there) on the columns of a building, that has been attacked before, that's as active and busy as the WTC, and nobody noticed, is beyond all reason.
2. No physical evidence whatsoever of explosives or thermite.
3. The official explanation for the collapses pans out--if you take the time to actually read the explanations and do more than just go, "It doesn't look right to me!" It doesn't look right to me either. It definitely didn't look right when I saw it happen live on television. But the science supports it.

[edit on 16-3-2007 by whiterabbit]

I believe that the official version of 911 as presented by the U.S. government is essentially correct. An event of this magnitude will always heve oddities, coincidences and unanswered questions, but I find no compelling evidence to believe otherwise. My employment with the government ended in 1975 when I was discharged from the U.S. Army.



[edit on 3/16/2007 by TheAvenger]

Originally posted by Fjtruth

1. When it was said at the time that the government had never envisaged planes being used as weapons, I didn't believe them - and they have since been proved to be lying on that. Why?
   
2. When they found the alleged perpetrators' IDs on the scenes so quickly - or even at all - it seemed suspicious.
   
   

NORAD had trained specifically for this scenario. When they were alerted, and no consequence came of it, it was claimed to not have been an assumed attack profile.

The perpetrators had been monitored. I remember very brief reports they were on a suspect list, like Muosoi (sp.?), the 20th hijacker. Later they claimed he was detained on unrelated charges, but it was due to his activities before 9/11 that caused some to initiate an arrest. These activities were related to flight.

......................
Just because some unhelpful posters in this thread automatically reject those of an opposing view as "Disinformation Specialist", doesn't mean we all do. Some of us would genuinely like to know your reasons.
......................

You are correct. Sorry.

#1...I've seen no evidence that I see as being credible that convinces me otherwise.

#2...Ocams Razor.

Direct Government complicity = Direct Government involvement

2 - It would be too big a conspiracy to be covered up for so long by so many people. People can't help but talk. A secret is only a secret till you tell 1 person, then it will get out...EVERY TIME.

First off I have to address the above statement. People within the administration HAVE tried to come out and talk and every single time they have been smeared. Now they are stopping people within the intelligence agencies from coming forward under whistleblower laws. The reason is the same reason that certain people have used in the past way too much. National security. It's a farce now because every time something comes up that is questionable the excuse of 'national security' is used. It's used to shut people up and it's used to threaten whistleblower's who are trying to make right what is wrong. The list of high ranking officials in this government that question sincerely what happened that day is large and growing larger by the day. Yet people conveniently like to say that "no one has come forward. It's just too hard to keep your mouth shut." Even if your life is threatoned and the lives of your family.... Sure.

Reason 1: Regardless of all of the 'bizarre' official explanations of WHY those buildings fell as uniformly and quickly as they did it still doesn't make sense at all. Too fast, to uniformly. Especially on WTC 7 with sporadic fires on two floors of 47 and not evenly dispursed. Why would it fall all at once and so neatly? Sorry. Not happening.

Reason 2: So many of the questions presented to the commission were ignored and much of what would have destroyed the official story was ignored. Why classified documents about anything that happened? It's not a 'national security' issue. Yet, the majority of what happened is classified and only two people on the commission were allowed to view the docs. Both work for the current administration.

There is so much more but I'll at least try to stick to the rules and list only 2.

[edit on 16-3-2007 by dariousg]

Originally posted by sensfan

Originally posted by Vixion
my view on it is that it was amreica who blow it up..or collapsed it, what ever phrasing you want, i have heard of few..well alot alot of theorys but one did grab my atention.

There were CIA angents in the world trade centres, this was CIA just keeping tabs on the world trade centres, make sure nothing happens, this is good, but what made me think is that on 9-11 EVERY CIA agent had phoned in sick, now i think thats a little bit too big to just be a coinceidence.

Then theres the one where structural engineers say it shouldnt of fallen like that, it looks like an explotion from the bottom.

So in my view it was America

Do you have any evidence of any CIA agents that worked at the WTC that called in sick? This is the first I have heard of this, and would like to know more.

I too would like to hear more on this. Although I believe there was a lot more to 9-11 than what the 'official' story claims, I still do not like rumors or unsubstantiated statements being made. It is the biggest thing that prevents our ability to get to the truth of the matter. It gives debunkers extra ammo to throw at the whole mess. "Yeah, the government did it along with 20,000 others and not one person is talking". Well, if one is to take EVERY single theory and throw them all into the mix then yes, it does seem like there is too much for anyone to keep quiet on. However, what we all have to keep in mind is that the best way to confuse an issue is to throw extra crap into the argument for. This way there is a ton of lies and crazy stories mixed in with the legitimate arguments.

To clarify things, I labeled him a dis-info agent long before this thread was created. His 2 reasons for believing the official story in this thread just assured me that he is.

I ask for 2 good reasons, and he gives me two joke answers.

Also, just because I called one person a dis-info agent, doesn't mean I'm going to call everyone that believes the official story one. There is major difference's. One can truly believe the theory is correct, and another can pretend the theory is correct. It really feels like, after reading all of his posts, esdad is pretending that the official story is correct, and that he truly doesn't believe in it, but he forces himself to do it.

How else can someone ignore all of the conflicts, and coincidences, and the fact that many of the puzzle pieces just dont fit?

I mean come on, a passport from the terrorist can survive but the black boxes from the jets cant? Give me a break.

Also, this topic was created to see the mentality of some of you. This was a test to see the reactions of some of you on this board, for my own personal research. ESDAD failed the test miserably.

Basically, the believers boggle my mind. I don't understand how they can be so blind to all the inconsistencies in 911. If 911 was nothing more than a terrorist attack, there wouldn't be inconsistencies.

I disbelieve the official story.

1. The secret service didn't evacuate Bush ASAP even though the country was under attack and his location was well known - placing him and the entire school in danger if such an attack were real.

2. The laws of physics and something my mother calls "common sense".

Sorry, also, for taking this thread rather lightly.

I find it a bit presumptuous for the original poster to assume that anyone who doesn’t agree with his point of view HAS to be working for “Da-Man.”

Not everyone that reads these forums are “True believers” of conspiracy theories.

I personally don’t subscribe much to conspiracy theories. However, I come to this site because I find some of the discussions here interesting, not because I’m being paid to spew forth dis-information.

I find a lot things that are proposed on this site to be very farfetched, yet I don’t make verbal attacks toward people that disagree with my beliefs. I may occasionally put my two cents in, but, again, I have never ridiculed or attacked anyone here.

I believe that most people in the general public do no take most conspiracy theories seriously. But hey, at one point in time everyone KNEW that the Earth was flat.

Usually people in this forum demand that posters give evidence along with their claims. The gentleman that started this thread said that he is using this thread “to psychologically understand people’s position on 911.” Should he be asked to clarify his qualifications to make psychologically determinations of this sort?

P.S. Actually I’m I convert to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.