Changing my view over 9 / 11

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
From another detractor:

*SNIP*

Um, not the secret service agents, but other members of the President's staff. Where are they posted? I have no idea, I found them in BOOKS. By the way, can someone explain why all things must be posted on the internet???

So I'm a detractor now for asking you for verification of your explanation?

What BOOKS are you referring to? You paid so much attentiton to their contents - even remembering what was written on the cards they were holding up for the President to read - that you surely can't have forgotten their titles.

All I'm asking for is information from you that I can verify to back up your claim.

Start with Ari Fleisher's book and go from there. He was the one writing messages on his clipboard for Bush to see. There have been more than enough interviews with him, President Bush and others as to why the events at Booker Elementary unfolded the way they did that day. You just might have to go to your local library to find them.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

I'm not going on a wild goose chase. Either it's in Ari Fleisher's book, in which case I'll get hold of a copy (Taking Heat, I presume) and read it, or it's not, in which case I would like to know which book it is in.

Rock Ape, I definitely second the motion of Trexter Ziam! Good advice there my fellow realizer! Here's the 'just' that I put 2-2 together.. I heard the story break over the radio around 7:30amish as I was pulling in the parking lot at home from work that morning. I ran to the TV and watched as the 2nd place hit and said out load.."oh sh****.!!!! close the borders NOW!" was my INSTANT reaction, spending 9 years in the national guard ( but I had been out of the guard since '88)..which is a oxymoron as of 2002. I quickly grabbed the phone and in my mind I fully expected to get 'the' phone call incase the situation got worse. Clamming myself a bit, and waited for more reports to come in, I ran through the situation over in my mind a few times after the 2nd hitting; which was .. basically.. 'Lockdown' status. Martial Law and close the damm borders. No no one get in and no one gets out until the threat is proven a real threat.

Time marches on.....after watching the news for a full day, still no mention of closing the borders, no National Guard at ground zero. Interesting enough, ground zero is a military term used for nuke attack, since that is true, why wasn't it being treated as 'ground zero'??? such as, full military force at the scene, etc. you know, securing the site. What I EXPECTED to see was, military in FULL MOP 4 gear(gas masks) with a defensive perimeter...NADA!!
What i EXPECTED to see, like most people, would be the SS would surround the Pres. rush him outta there. When I didn't see that....I too, questioned it.

3 days later....I began to weep uncontrollably when I realized the truth of the matter. My weeping lasted anywhere from 10-mins to an hour ... and multiple times a day....I'd have to go in to the men's room a work just to cry my eyes outs and I wasn't the only one either....

The truth will set us ALL free, if we patient and listen and except it; as hard as it is to change a mind and lifestyle, Truth will always..ALWAYS prevail. For those things which are hidden in darkness will be expose by the light, it's just a matter of time.

Originally posted by Rock Ape
Until a few days ago, I was always against all the 9/ 11 conspiracy theories, in fact they got on my nerves. Then the other day on discovery channel I watched a programme about the gulf war, and they did a bit on 9 / 11, they showed the planes hitting the Twin Towers and the Pentagon burning, they then showed President bush reading to a class, someone comes in tells him and they slowed the film down to a still of the president…. Not angry, not annoyed, not even slightly miffed. And it was at that moment I knew I’d seen that very look only once before.

It was on old war footage of Winston Churchill, touring the bombed out remains of Coventry. He knew Coventry was going to be firebombed, as the English had broken Germany’s Enigma code, but if they’d have evacuated the city, the Germans would know we had cracked the code and changed it, so Churchill, let Coventry get firebombed to keep the secret of Enigma.

The look on both Winston Churchill and George W Bushes face was the same. A look of pure guilt and realization at what they had done, and how many had died to keep a secret.

I’m sorry but I couldn’t find the photo’s on the web to show you.



Peace

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

Out of interest, I have found a refernece to a book by Bill Sammon called Fighting Back that includes a description of Ari Fleischer holding up a legal pad bearing the words, "DON'T SAY ANYTHING" on it. This book is promoted as 'the inside story of President Bush's war on terror', suggesting he had co-operation from the White House.

Sammon's explanation of this note is not that Fleischer was trying to delay Bush's exit from the classroom, however, but that it had become clear the statement Bush had prepared to give once the reading event was over was now inadequate, given the second impact had since taken place.

Does Fleischer specifically state that the purpose of these 'messages' was to delay the President's exit?

ETA - Here's Fleischer himself explaining why he wrote the message. It agrees with Sammon's assessment and means that the reasons you attributed to it are wrong, I'm afraid.

Source: CNN

S. O'BRIEN: Andy Card leans over and whispers -- fills the president in as he's reading this book. And you write a note to the president that says: "Don't say anything yet."

FLEISCHER: Right.

S. O'BRIEN: Why?

FLEISCHER: Well, what happened was the president was going to haven't been told about the first tower, thinking it an accident, he was going to make remarks to the country inside that schoolroom about this accident and that federal resources would be made available to help the people of New York.

As soon as it was clear the second tower had been hit, it wasn't an accident. And the most important thing was to get the president a full briefing before he spoke to the country, because at that point, obviously tens of millions were watching their TV to see what was happening. He wasn't. He was sitting in a schoolroom for those moments until he could get those briefings.

So I'll give Ari Fleischer's book a miss and, unless you have any other evidence to offer, assume that your explanation as to why the President's exit was delayed is likely wrong.

[edit on 15-3-2008 by coughymachine]

reply to post by coughymachine


Well I was going to say you had made a good start, but your post makes it clear that you are unwilling to look for all of the information. And Im not about to spoon feed it to you. Did that too many times in the past to only see people willfully choose to remain ignorant.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

Oh I made good progress all right. Unfortunately for you, it was to demonstrate that one of the examples you offered to support your claim about the reason for the delay was false.

But don't sulk or take that as evidence I'm closed minded - I'm not. If you can provide the evidence, I've already shown you I'll check it out.

And stop pretending you're been helpful here. You made a claim. It is your responsibility to either back it up or accept it was made in error. Your suggestion that I go running around doing a whole stack of reading, starting with Ari Fleischer's book and going from there, was pretty lame Im afraid. You'd be profoundly sceptical of any claim I made if I sent you off on a journey in order establish its veracity rather than quoting a specific source.

So, does Fleischer's book specifically mention the reasons you gave for delaying Bush's exit? I think at this stage, it would be approrpiate for you to give page numbers rather than a 'yes' or 'no'.

For those of you, who have posted messages to the effect that you've recently come to the sad realization that 911 was an inside job, I HIGHLY recommend you go to your library and try to find this book.
Crossing the Rubicon by Michael C. Ruppert.
He pulls no punches and he does an excellent job of explaining the 'Why', which is actually not the obvious answer that most 911 Truthers believe it to be.
Another very good book, which unfortunately won't be in the library but which you can buy online, is 911: Synthetic Terror by Webster Tarpley.
He presents a VERY convincing case that, whatever else 911 might have been, it was also an attempted coup that failed. Who would have benefited from Bush's assassination (yes, assassination is the right word here, read the book to find out how), let's see...oh yeah, Dick Cheney!! The scary part about Tarpley's book is the realization of how close the world came to all out nuclear war with Russia on that day. You may not agree with all of Tarpley's conclusions but I guarantee that you will have a better understanding of this whole mess. The book is well worth the money.

reply to post by Studenofhistory

For anyone interested in reading or downloading Webster Tarpley's '9/11 Synthetic Terrorism Made in the USA', it's available for free in pdf format here.


[edit on 22-3-2008 by coughymachine]

Originally posted by skinnyblaze
Rock Ape welcome to the truth!!There is a wave of new people realizing the we have been lied to. I am sure you will hear from the gallery of paid debunker hacks, msm zombies and the simply close minded. They will pummel you with name calling and straw man arguements.I have noticed the raging skeptics only last a few pages, until they feel they have ruined the thread. Then they fade away...Recognize the names (they are a small yet vocal bunch) and then ignore them.And then strap yourself in for a mountain of evidence...And more comes every week.

Very sound advice and accurate description of the shills around here. The Ignore function is a godsend
At first I couldnt believe it and thought it was nonsense, so I put the whole 'inside job' issue aside for a few years. I just recently looked into it with an open mind and came to the logical conclusion in light of all the facts.

Originally posted by Unplugged
Very sound advice and accurate description of the shills around here. The Ignore function is a godsend

At first I couldnt believe it and thought it was nonsense, so I put the whole 'inside job' issue aside for a few years. I just recently looked into it with an open mind and came to the logical conclusion in light of all the facts.

Thanks Unplugged...The "debunkers" act as if people looking for the truth are happy about the fact that we were lied to,mis-led and decieved.As if it was some sort of game.The truth of the matter is that the realization that a massive cover up by the government and more painfully, our media is crushing.I read every post for the first few months pro and con....but the "msm believers" arguements ran in circles.It was obvious they didnt believe it themselves.The massive amounts of evidence lead me to believe that there really is no honest debunker. Thus I ignore them.

"swampy how I love you , how I love you, my dear ole swampy!"

Originally posted by skinnyblaze

Originally posted by Unplugged
Very sound advice and accurate description of the shills around here. The Ignore function is a godsend

At first I couldnt believe it and thought it was nonsense, so I put the whole 'inside job' issue aside for a few years. I just recently looked into it with an open mind and came to the logical conclusion in light of all the facts.

Thanks Unplugged...The "debunkers" act as if people looking for the truth are happy about the fact that we were lied to,mis-led and decieved.As if it was some sort of game.The truth of the matter is that the realization that a massive cover up by the government and more painfully, our media is crushing.I read every post for the first few months pro and con....but the "msm believers" arguements ran in circles.It was obvious they didnt believe it themselves.The massive amounts of evidence lead me to believe that there really is no honest debunker. Thus I ignore them.

"swampy how I love you , how I love you, my dear ole swampy!"

I, for one, dont "act as if people looking for the truth are happy....." actually I think its pretty sad that "truthers" tend to ignore the vast amounts of evidence, normally because someone on the internet told them it was not true.

I could start another account on ATS, post a story about how I helped plant the charges in the WTC... quite a few people on here would accept it and then start spreading it on other sites.

To be honest, I could care less if you think im honest or not. The people important to me, KNOW Im honest...those are my family in friends in real life. People on the internet....ehh who really cares if they think im honest or not. So continue to ignore me, you choose to believe fairy tales, I will stick with the truth.

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
I, for one, dont "act as if people looking for the truth are happy....." actually I think its pretty sad that "truthers" tend to ignore the vast amounts of evidence, normally because someone on the internet told them it was not true.

That sounds more like you than me. Consider this:

Every time I want to discuss specifically what NIST shows that is so rock-solid, for example, the discussion will eventually come down to someone insisting themselves to be too much of a layman to actually understand what is in the report, and/or there will be appeals to authority and non-sequitur rhetorical questions. Never is the issue resolved, and rarely are even scientific principles considered technically and mutually. It seems I can hardly get a discussion to go that deep before you OCTs are already sticking your heads in the sand as far as any kind of formal sense of logic goes.

I could link you to a recent "discussion" I had with jthomas as a classic example of the immature and non-logical responses that I eventually start getting when someone can't answer my questions. As an example.

That is what I personally know from my experience here to be true, and I would refrain from even posting nonsense like this if anyone here were truly interested in discussing what was really causing all the physical phenomenon observed, etc.

If anyone here just blindly accepts what they are told, it is the individuals that are afraid to break down the technical reports into the same objective facts that the investigators themselves must have once been presented with.


You can start your thread if you want. We'll see how accurate your prediction really is, that you think this bunch is really so gullible. Really, try it; we'll count the websites that pop up with your garbage. Do you want to give it a try?

[edit on 24-3-2008 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
I, for one, dont "act as if people looking for the truth are happy....." actually I think its pretty sad that "truthers" tend to ignore the vast amounts of evidence, normally because someone on the internet told them it was not true.

That sounds more like you than me. Consider this:

Every time I want to discuss specifically what NIST shows that is so rock-solid, for example, the discussion will eventually come down to someone insisting themselves to be too much of a layman to actually understand what is in the report, and/or there will be appeals to authority and non-sequitur rhetorical questions. Never is the issue resolved, and rarely are even scientific principles considered technically and mutually. It seems I can hardly get a discussion to go that deep before you OCTs are already sticking your heads in the sand as far as any kind of formal sense of logic goes.

I could link you to a recent "discussion" I had with jthomas as a classic example of the immature and non-logical responses that I eventually start getting when someone can't answer my questions. As an example.

That is what I personally know from my experience here to be true, and I would refrain from even posting nonsense like this if anyone here were truly interested in discussing what was really causing all the physical phenomenon observed, etc.

If anyone here just blindly accepts what they are told, it is the individuals that are afraid to break down the technical reports into the same objective facts that the investigators themselves must have once been presented with.


You can start your thread if you want. We'll see how accurate your prediction really is, that you think this bunch is really so gullible. Really, try it; we'll count the websites that pop up with your garbage. Do you want to give it a try?

[edit on 24-3-2008 by bsbray11]

Actually, it has already happened...and the story the individual posted WAS swallowed hook, line and sinker.

What you will never understand is that, no one will ever know the exacts of why the buildings collapsed. All there will ever be is educated guesses. If you want to argue over educated guesses because someone had a comma in the wrong spot in the report or made a small math error, feel free.

There were (and are) too many variables. How many janitor storage closets were there? (filled with cleaning fluids that go BOOM) How many oxygen tanks were there? Gas lines? All those would contribute to what was going on...and there is NO way to know the magnitude.

Anyone who ever assumes they know everything there is to know about the physical world (or assumes that they know all the specifics about what was going on in regards to the impact damage or fires inside the towers), is quite frankly an idiot.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999


Conspiracy or not, the President of the United States does not read books to little kids during an attack on it's civilians.

1) He needs to be the President. Call people. Make sure people are doing their jobs, like Rumsfield for instance, apparently needed someone to remind him that he was the Defense Secretary.

2) He needs to stay alive. Do you work for the Secret Service? I just wondering where you got the idea that when you are being attacked by an unknown, the best idea is to just leave everything that is important where it is?

It doesn't matter whether there is a conspiracy or not. This is just the first action taken by our President in his 8 years that makes no sense. It is typical of his administration to do their job in terrible fashion, and it pretty much sums up the past 8 years of lies and ignorance.

So why are you wasting your time defending it when anyone with common sense can see it was the wrong decision?



[edit on 24-3-2008 by Sublime620]

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Actually, it has already happened...and the story the individual posted WAS swallowed hook, line and sinker.

I've seen hoaxes posted here more than once, but it's a massive exaggeration to say that's why this forum exists. You know you can't explain all of us away with that.

What you will never understand is that, no one will ever know the exacts of why the buildings collapsed.

What you don't understand is that "exact" is a relative term; I don't expect to ever understand every movement that occurred and I don't think anyone else does, either. But there is enough information to critique overly-simplistic theories like "pancake" theory and the like.

There were (and are) too many variables. How many janitor storage closets were there? (filled with cleaning fluids that go BOOM)

Rofl, you forgot the exploding fire extinguishers.

How many oxygen tanks were there? Gas lines? All those would contribute to what was going on...and there is NO way to know the magnitude.

Not even commercial high explosives cause overpressures that launch multi-ton building debris hundreds of feet laterally. This is the kind of simple discrimination that destroys naive theories even IF the collapses are only considered as generalized theories. You don't need to know everything, stop putting words in my mouth and open your head. All you're doing is brushing would-be anomalies under the table as unexplainable and offering pure conjecture to explain things I'm not even talking about.

[edit on 24-3-2008 by bsbray11]

post swampfox

"What you will never understand is that, no one will ever know the exacts of why the buildings collapsed. All there will ever be is educated guesses. If you want to argue over educated guesses because someone had a comma in the wrong spot in the report or made a small math error, feel free"


But swampy you have spent 17 hours a day on here 7 days a week telling us you know exactly how the towers fell? Remember , planes hit, excess fuel, then pancake.Do not tell me the legendary Swampfox is hedging his bets?

You are coming along, pretty soon you will be starting a new thread on how you are changing your view.God love you Swampy.