911 Conspiracy Facts - Incriminating

Originally posted by cashlink
All I can say is WERE IS YOUR COMMON SENSE? Or is this the first time you have read and posted on a 911 thread, if so then I will accept your ignorance on the subject of 911 and the truth movement.

lol
My ignorance? I am hardly the first one to point out the many inconsistencies of the truth movement, even truthers acknowledge this. My ignorance in what exactly?

However I see you been a member since 2004, so I have to wonder. You have ask some very good valid questions, but for me to answer all your question it would take me weeks of sending you links ,videos, documentaries, new reports, eye witness testimony, scientific research, and a whole lot more.

Seen them all.
And yet in the 7 years since there is still inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and sometimes flat out lies.

And answering those questions would not take long at all. Some of them can be answered with just a word or two.
The point really wasn't necessarily to answer them however, but to point out the MANY different answers you would get to those questions from people who believe the same thing.
So who's right?

You need to do your own research then get back with us.

Trust me I have.
But this isn't about me and what I believe. The question is what is a logical and provable alternative explanation. What is ANY alternative explanation for that matter.

If you really do your research right, you will probably need to talk to a good therapist. Why? Because you will be MAD! This will eat at you, it will make you sick; you will lose sleep over thinking about 911, trust me you will want something done but not much is being done. You will feel betrayed, and you will never trust another politician again. You will find out in your research, that our new media has turn on us, sold us out to the corporations who dictate what the news is, especially the pentagons propagandas

Hardly. The nature of politics hasn't changed in thousands of years. If the government was fully responsible, why would it come as a surprise? Why would you trust politicians in the first place?

And as stated, I have done research.
The only 100% conclusion I can make, is that about 99.99999999% of the stuff posted on youtube is BS (for both sides of this argument).


Tezz:

However, truthers do not need to propose an alternate theory.

Don't you think the American people and the families of the thousands of those who lost their lives are owed and explanation? It is NOT just enough to say "the government did it" then offer no explanation on how, why, or who did it.
This whole thing is about finding answers right?

I would of loved to see George Bush testify infront of the 9/11
Commision by himself.

With George public speaking record, George would of spit out
something he shouldnt of said.

Like Rumbsfield "the plane was shot down in PA".

posted by IvanZana
Thank you for YOUR opinion but..... People are learning the truth every day and will continue to do so and articles like this help.

Thank you for reading and sharing the truth presented in the original post.

posted by ThatsJustWeird
When? Ok, something like this would take years to plan. Seeing as the Bush administration is the most incompetent administration in the history of U.S. politics, you're telling me they were able to in 8 months plan and carry out the largest attack on U.S. soil?

How? How were they able to do it in such a short time? How were they able to secretly plant explosives? ....
How could they keep this secret? How could they fool anyone? How could they have possibly done this even remotely right? How is it that they haven't done anything since?

Obviously you have not put too much effort into studying 9-11 have you? The NeoCONs planned this long ago, from back when George HW Bush was VP under Reagan. Bush Sr set up a lot of necessary assets when he was CIA Director back in 1976. The Bush/Walker clan is a nest of traitors from way back in WW1 and WW2. How do you think the NeoCONs tricked the American people into supporting a proven alcoholic and drug addict for pResident? Planning or just plain luck? 9-11 was planned long before 2001, just like Dubya already had troops poised to invade Afghanistan before 9-11. The NeoCONs needed a 'New Pearl Harbor Event' to carry out their plans for domination of the Middle East, which they wrote about publicly long before Dubya became pResident. Try doing a little bit of study and you will learn all about it.

Part of the reason we 9-11 Truthers have been so vocal is to force the traitors to hesitate about attempting another 9-11 event. Even though the majority of Americans are boob tube addicts and have not a clue, we want the treasonous individuals within OUR goverment and OUR military and OUR military industrial complex to think twice about getting away with it again and murdering even more innocent Americans.

posted by cashlink
We already know that our Government was “not” caught off its guard on the morning of 911. The Government and FEMA knew the show was going to happened Heck! They been practicing these events for years this was nothing new for them.

posted by ThatsJustWeird
So the Government was practicing stopping what the Government was planning to do?

You should be able to figure out that practicing an event would expose the weaknesses in the 'psyops mission' and enable improvements. Correct? Only small renegade elements within OUR government and military and intelligence agencies and a certain foreign government were involved in 9-11. Apparently the remainder have been cowed into silence by the corrupt and murderous Bush Regime.

But still, there were huge mistakes and contradictions and outright impossibilities in the final operation, which is why there are millions of 9-11 Truthers openly questioning the event and demanding a real independent investigation into 9-11. That is why there are thousands of 9-11 Truth organizations all over the world loudly demanding true justice for the innocent victims of 9-11. It is not difficult to see the reason for our 9-11 Truther numbers.

posted by cashlink
We do not even have any real proof that these airplanes were commercial airlines (only what the official say) again nothing but hear say!

posted by ThatsJustWeird
Actually that is one of the few things they DO actually have tangible proof of.
If it wasn't that would mean the hundreds of people on the planes would also be in on it, along with their families I suppose. It is a joke to think the Bush admin would be able to keep all of them quiet.

No we do not. Not one of the four aircraft involved in 9-11 has been verified by serial number. Unlike 90% of aircraft crash investigations, these four aircraft have not been verified. Apparently an effort to identify the four aircraft was deliberately not taken by the Bush Regime and their FBI and controlled Federal agencies.

Obviously if the Passengers are dead, then it would be simple to keep them quiet, wouldn't it? Apparently some of them were in on it, and a large multi-million dollar bribe along with resettling their families in the witness protection program should suffice in keeping them quiet. The promise of a .22 in the back of the head if they did not keep quiet should add the necessary incentive. With $$$Trillions$$$ of taxpayer dollars available to line their pockets, do you think that any corrupt government would hesitate to murder their own citizenry? Do you require proof that OUR government is corrupt? Have you noticed how much value OUR current government places on the 'cannon fodder' within the all volunteer military? Have you ever heard about the thousands of American POWs and MIAs abandoned by an uncaring government after VietNam?
VIETNAM'S POW/MIA

posted by tezzajw
Yes, there is not much consistency between truthers. However, truthers do not need to propose an alternate theory.

That's the main problem I see on this forum - people wanting to explain what happened. There's no point trying to explain alternative hypothesis. All that truthers have to do is to pick apart the official story and prove it's false. That's it. Nothing more required.

For example: If it can be proven that the alleged Flight AA77 did fly North of Citgo, then that proves the official story is false. It's as simple as that. There's no need to worry about a 'flyover', as the official story is false.

Yes and it has been proven beyond any doubt that the decoy aircraft flew over the Naval Annex and north of the Citgo. That alone proves the official flight path through the light poles and along the official damage path inside the Pentagon is TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE and therefore the entire 9-11 'New Pearl Harbor Event' was an INSIDE JOB Attack on America. The obvious demolition of the three WTC skyscrapers in New York just adds to the proof.

Originally posted by IvanZana
And while the government has consistently stated that it did not know where the aircraft were before they struckthis short video clip of the Secretary of Transportation's testimony before the 9/11 Commission shows that Cheney monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon.…

Now THIS is the sweetest batch of hokum I've seen come out of the factory in a long time!

Genuine facts mixed in with hilarious interpretations of events, all wrapped in myriad links, I suppose designed to lend it an air of "legitimacy".

When one links garbage to garbage, though, it is still garbage. In fact its garbage squared.

Mixing fact with fantasy is always fun if you are writing a work of fiction, but here in the real world tis best to stick with reality.

Rather than discuss each of your "points" (and I use that term loosely), suffice it to say that those of us who have experience looking at and working with radar systems and display scopes and the related things that make up aerial surveillance systems, understand that the term "ghost tracks" is a very real phenomena and means exactly what it seems to mean - tracks that remain on the scope and/or in the system after an aircraft is no longer being tracked.

THAT is what was being tracked by the White House and others in the DC area, and it wasn't AA 77 - it was the ghost track of United 93.

For example, Cheney watched flight 77 approach the Pentagon from many miles out, but instructed the military to do nothing (as shown in the testimony of the Secretary of Transportation...)

Mineta didn't even get to the White House until after the Pentagon was hit (0940), based on an analysis of the time line it would take for him to be in his morning meeting at the DOT building, be notified of the WTC impacts, witness on the television and react to the second WTC impact, consult with Jane Garvey, cancel his meeting, take call from CEO of United Airlines, call CEO of American Airlines, receive an update from assistant Flaherty, told to go to White House, gets manual, papers, alerts driver and security guy who travel with him, leave office, go to car, leave building for White House, arrive at White House security, pass through Security, go to situation room, arrive at situation room, talk to Richard Clarke for "four or five" minutes, leave situation room, go to PEOC.

ALL that can be traced from his witnessing the second impact of WTC. Mineta might have been a good Transportation Secretary (depending on your point of view), but he was a horrible estimator of time.

Fighter jets were also sent far off-course over the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of the attacks

As far as flying out over the water when alert fighters were launched, that is standard operating procedure when lacking specific guidance and operational orders. Nothing wrong or strange about that. The alert aircraft involved were on alert with NORAD, who's mission has been and was at that time to defend against attacks from with-out the US, not with-in. All staging and marshalling areas for NORAD-launched alert fighters are offshore in designated Military Operating Areas (MOAs) or Warning (W) areas ("whiskey" areas). They go there so the aircraft can be in the air and ready for tasking immediately, rather than keeping them on the ground.

Additionally, this diagram shows that the hijacked planes flew over numerous military bases on 9/11 before crashing.

This is so laughable… Did you even look at that map? Is this supposed to mean anything? What bases were they? Were they “military bases “or merely military complexes or ranges? Were they even active? Did they have alert aircraft ready to launch? Who would have know those aircraft were hijacked at that time? Who had launch authority for aircraft at those bases? Let me ask you this – would those “military bases” have had surface-to-air missiles in battery? One of the ”military bases” that map has AA 11 flying over is the US Military Academy at West Point. Why didn't they launch their anti-aircraft missiles!!!!! Oh, the humanity! There is a stand down!!!!!!

Get real.

reply to post by SPreston

*Clap*


*Clap*


*Clap*

Wow SP, did you figure all that out by yourself or did youtube help?
I was going to leave your post alone because I don't want it to look like I'm defending the gov or their position on anything. That is NOT what I am doing AT ALL. But this is just too good to pass up

So...it was the big bad Neocons, lol. The neocons with (according to you guys) godlike powers but can do absolutely nothing right.

The NeoCONs needed a 'New Pearl Harbor Event' to carry out their plans for domination of the Middle East, which they wrote about publicly long before Dubya became pResident. Try doing a little bit of study and you will learn all about it.

Couple questions
1) Why did they let Clinton become president?
2) Why didn't they just "dominate" the Middle East when they were there the first time when they had 5x more troops than they have there now and 90+% support? Don't tell me the all powerful neocons caved in to the UN? Say it ain't so.
3) Why would you attack just two countries if you wanted to "dominate"
4) Why are they about to let Obama or McCain win?

Part of the reason we 9-11 Truthers have been so vocal is to force the traitors to hesitate about attempting another 9-11 event.

LOL please.
If they're as powerful as you say they are, you all being vocal means absolutely NOTHING. You guys would be irrelevant to them.

This also brings up a question I asked earlier in why there hasn't been another attack? If the attack was to get support why not another one seeing support is nearly gone now and has been for years?

blah blah blah blame Israel blah blah blah...Apparently the remainder have been cowed into silence by the corrupt and murderous Bush Regime.

BS
The Bush admin can do NOTHNG right, what makes you think they could possibly silence or frighten anyone.

Truthers openly questioning the event and demanding a real independent investigation into 9-11.

BS again
If that real independent investigation still does not match up with your beliefs you all will just claim they were paid off by the government, etc. They are only looking for what you want to hear, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

No we do not. Not one of the four aircraft involved in 9-11 has been verified by serial number. Unlike 90% of aircraft crash investigations, these four aircraft have not been verified. Apparently an effort to identify the four aircraft was deliberately not taken by the Bush Regime and their FBI and controlled Federal agencies.

Obviously if the Passengers are dead, then it would be simple to keep them quiet, wouldn't it? Apparently some of them were in on it, and a large multi-million dollar bribe along with resettling their families in the witness protection program should suffice in keeping them quiet.

1. This is just funny
2. You contradict yourself. If there were no planes then there would be no passengers.
Now these planes were watch from Boston to NY visually, vocally (we have the tapes between the planes and ATCs), and by radar/transponder. We also have many of the bodies.
So these people who started off in Boston, got on planes, then got off of the planes (magically apparently), where driven to NY, killed and mangled along the way, then their bodies were dumped secretly at the WTC site? Is that it?
Why go through all that when you could have just left them on the planes?

Also, there isn't enough money in the world to keep all the families quiet about something like that. Especially seeing as there were inner city school kids on the Pentagon flight. I'm sure they're parents happily agreed to let them die for the neocons right
BS

Yes and it has been proven beyond any doubt that the decoy aircraft flew over the Naval Annex and north of the Citgo.

More nonsense.
1. No it hasn't. And that makes no sense.

2. NOTHING can be proved without a doubt until the time machine is invented.




Round and round we go. *sigh*

Originally posted by pinch
When one links garbage to garbage, though, it is still garbage. In fact its garbage squared.

garbage times garbage is garbage squared, pinch. Get your maths right, please.

I'm glad that you decided to type about garbage though... have you managed to find the proof to support this claim yet?

Originally posted by pinch
Its already proven. The FBI had/have the piece-parts to the aircraft, including all the various serial numbers for N644AA and are not releasing the evidence as per standard ongoing-investigation procedures.

Remember, without proof, your statement is garbage.

reply to post by ThatsJustWeird


I have to ask, since “you” have made yourself the foremost expert on 911, what is the truth? I would appreciate an honest answer from you.
Remember this topic is about 911 conspiracy Facts- Incriminating.
You obviously feel you have done your research and you know all the facts, so what are the facts that are incriminating?

9/11 was such an insane event. My dad woke me up and told me "...this is something that has never happened, this is historic..." Now I know just how historic it really was. A lot of people lost their lives in that attack, normal people just living were killed for no reason on a normal day. Thats what really sucks about it. The people behind the whole thing had the audacity to do it and we could do nothing about it. It makes you feel like a pawn in a giant chess game.

There are so many incriminating facts about the 911 conspiracies, it make one wonder how cleaver these conspirators think they are. I find the NIST and the FEMA reports are very incriminating, it is a slap in our faces, and a disgrace on the scientific community in this Country. NIST report dose not stand up to real science, and it dose not stand up to scientific logic, or real scientific critical thinking. What I have read in the NIST and FEMA reports, is a play on our intelligent. I have to really wonder, if these scientists working for NIST really think we Americans are that stupid. To this day NIST refuses to answer any of our basic questions, and the few they have answered were outright lies such as NIST said, they did not look into explosions that brought down the WTC, because there were no eyewitnesses. Really!! One would have to wonder if these scientists were paid to deflect the truth from the American people, and with this in mind, this make them part of the cover-up. It really amazes me how easy people are bought and paid for, and willing to throw years of education in the garbage along with their reputations for the dollar. What happened to doing the right thing? it seems to me this was not just some scientists, but all of them went along with this incriminating report. I could only imaging they all voted to do this and made a pack to keep this a secret.

In the end, this group of deceptive scientists will pay dearly because when the truth is all revealed they will have some explaining to do, furthermore they will find it imposable to be employed in this field of work, because no one will want to higher a known liar, a scientist who fudges their own reports.

Originally posted by cashlink
I have to ask, since “you” have made yourself the foremost expert on 911

What? By asking questions??

what is the truth? I would appreciate an honest answer from you.
Remember this topic is about 911 conspiracy Facts- Incriminating.
You obviously feel you have done your research and you know all the facts, so what are the facts that are incriminating?

I didn't give that title, but I will give you a fact:

Fact - 2,998 people died


Now, I'd like you to quote me where I said I have all the facts. Thanks!
If you can't do that, then I'd appreciate it if you stop putting words in my mouth or making false assumptions....

What is the truth? Well once I get my time machine, I'll go back and give you a full report. What does it matter anyway? If what I report doesn't match up with your beliefs you still won't believe me.

I have been suspicious of the OS since 09-12-2001.

I am aware of the tremendous anomalies, one site listed over four hundred of them.

Another site does a timeline from 1995 to 2002 of all the players, war games, attacks on American interests.

I am also old enough to have seen the Kennedy, John assassination live on television.

Do I like the deja vu feeling I had on 09-11-2001?

Not at all. The reality that we do not have to propose alternate theories and alternative scenarios is a good point.
The Kennedy assassination way finally partially solved when the Senate reinvestigated it in 1976. It was found to be a classic military operation with seven shots fired in a withring crossfire in Dealey Plaza.

If I can retain my emotional composure and stick to just picking apart the official story, then the official story will begin to unravel.

The multiple 9-11 truth web sites are informative.

Thank you OP for pulling some of these threads together again.

I have only been on this website for about three months. I have done my own searching and web browsing for the past seven years outside of posting my thoughts and findings on a web site.

I think that the Gov. knew with foreknowledge and made 9-11 happen.

Read some of Al Martin's books about the Bush family, and their dealings with Iran-Contra, Oliver North and others. The Shocking Expose of Criminal Government.

The biggest problem I have with these theories is this:

A lot of staggering and never-seen-before events occured that day. People were not prepared. I doubt much happened "by the book." Many physical interactions (planes into buildings, huge buildings collapsing, planes flying into concrete reinforced buildings, etc) also happened, that we've just not seen before.

And for every one of those occurences, people assume that there is a conspiracy each one. It's not possible that all the air in the twin towers, which was a LOT of air, escaped by blowing out windows. No... it had to be explosives going off. It's impossible that a jet could knock down light poles like it did, or that it created a certain size hole in the Pentagon. As if we crash jets into reinforced buildings all the time to find out.

So instead of trying to logically look at each of these, they proclaim it proves without a shadow of a doubt, that there was a conspiracy. I watched an expert on construction and engineering, who studies these sorts of things, claim after hundreds of hours of investigation, that the plane did indeed, crash in as said. He was one of the first on the scene. And yet some bumpkin with no knowledge at all other than a passing knowledge gleamed from reading stuff on the Internet, claims they know for a fact it isn't possible. No wonders that guy was disgusted with those people who say it didn't happen. If I knew 100% based on my 30 years in a field that something did happen, and some conspiracy guy comes along and claims I am wrong.. I'd be po'd to.

How many "truthers" out there have ACTUALLY fairly given all possibilities merit and study? Other than a very biased one? Just wondering.

Originally posted by fleabit
It's impossible that a jet could knock down light poles like it did,

According to the FAA flight path simulation, the alleged plane wasn't in a position to knock down the light poles. It flew North of Citgo.

Please explain why you think that the FAA simulation disagrees with the alleged plane knocking down light poles?

[edit on 21-10-2008 by tezzajw]

reply to post by ThatsJustWeird


Ya! I didn’t think you could, thank you for your response You have a nice day.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
1) Why did they let Clinton become president?
2) Why didn't they just "dominate" the Middle East when they were there the first time when they had 5x more troops than they have there now and 90+% support? Don't tell me the all powerful neocons caved in to the UN? Say it ain't so.

3) Why would you attack just two countries if you wanted to "dominate"
4) Why are they about to let Obama or McCain win?

It's part of the whole process, leading up to the events of past to present day. Clinton was their for the purpose of that time, the same as Bush had his purpose for this time, but it still doesn't say any less that its all connected to the present now. Of course it is. Clinton was there to fall and jump where he was supposed to, as so is George.

But Today, people are waking up now, Since the Bush administration weren't so clever at keeping the ball rolling their way

The fact that you have asked these question's, is step in the right direction. Every action that lead us to asking these questions, should tell us something. It sparks off our awarness. Governments hate that word

The questions You have asked were on the Government agendas and what are the what if's and buts to these events. such as 9/11.

It's call agendas, and everyone has one, A man will let you know an agenda, but never show you everything. Neocons, have created these regimes so carefully, processed and cautiously in the the hope that you don't wonder the deception, or ask the questions of the real agendas behind the scenes, the ones they hide from you. This is exactly the reason, why I applaud you asking the really obvious and simple question we don't ask.

The Neocons/Coops/Admins could do all you have asked and wondered above. But in order, to do the nasty gritty work. They need the good image behind them, right. Good image is what we the sheeple are fooled by.
So they can continue to follow their own Agendas with your backing (with the wool over your eyes). Please really learn that fact. I mean a dumb society to hop when you say hop is good model for the neo cons to have behind them in their agenda's don't you think? Let's face it, this is what's happening.

You know we all seem to think the obvious holds true, But it's almost always the opposite, in politics anyway. Good image is really important for the good guys in politics, yup naturally, but it's even more important for the bad guys in politics "Good guys" out there can actually be bad. Isn't this the reason why Con artist's are so succesfull at what they do? Or some Politicians like George Bush get away with murder. There is much logic there for you to grasp. Sorry to state the obvious, but again it need's to be said.

We are led to believe that the governments agendas and interest's are with the people. Is this the case going back over history? I mean let's be real!


Your last question, was a good question to point out. They "could" just go in and dominate go the ME and wipe out a few million But would this represent the people afterall? Neocon's need you to fight these wars afterall. They need your power too, it's your blood that's on the line. So your right they could just, but they have done the job much better by having your power on their side, to reach their interest's effeciently.

Neocons are nothing without sheeple.

If they're as powerful as you say they are, you all being vocal means absolutely NOTHING. You guys would be irrelevant to them.

They are powerful, for one reason only, the people below give their own power to them. So the people you dismiss are really relevant to this fact too.

This also brings up a question I asked earlier in why there hasn't been another attack? If the attack was to get support why not another one seeing support is nearly gone now and has been for years?

I don't think you understand the bigger picture. It's involves alot more groundwork and man hours than that, to "oh just blow up a few buildings"


It takes years to carefully plan an event like 9/11. The atrocity was for a purpose, and one purpose only. You have to really brainwash people's mindsets prior to such an event. We are talking about people's lives, We are talking about not just affecting people within a country, but million's all over the world. Billions of dollars are put into the setting. time and creation of an event of such. You also have to of course brainwash the people of the country to believe that they are terrorists out there plotting to attack the country, and are in fact terrorists etc. i.e Muslims for example (muslims are not terrorists btw). This is another big job, and we alll now aware that the media does this. Look at the crap the Media sprayed over 9/11

You really need to look at the bigger picture for christ sakes. The Neocons have to even gather the whole hypothsis of such an event, of what the risks of planning out a global scale atrocity, How the world will react, the leakouts, truthers, conspiracy watchers, the media and the people within the governments etc. It's mind boggling and incredibly dangerous to carry out these acts, knowing your up against the world, if the world ever did find out what the neocons did. What would then happen? It's not just plan A bomb twin towers. The neo cons, had plan B, C, D and F lined, up for the what ifs, and the oh no's. This all has to be done so top secret bear in mind, under a city that never sleeps.

The neocons would have to make sure they have such a safeguard plan, to so carefully assign and reassure that they will forever look squeaky clean througout the whole atrocity. It's like a murder investigation but on world scale. This is a really serious event, that has serious repercussions on every level. It really isn't that easy.

God you need to sort out your mind set pal

The Bush admin can do NOTHNG right, what makes you think they could possibly silence or frighten anyone.

In what context, do you mean they didn't do nothing right, in what respect?

Their goals, or your perception of thier goals? What they did was wrong, but they acheieved their goals. To them they did right by themselves, by getting the job done. However wrong it was to you.

If that real independent investigation still does not match up with your beliefs you all will just claim they were paid off by the government, etc. They are only looking for what you want to hear, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

Who will claim what?

It does seem like, you trust the government in any course of action.

Now these planes were watch from Boston to NY visually, vocally (we have the tapes between the planes and ATCs), and by radar/transponder. We also have many of the bodies.
So these people who started off in Boston, got on planes, then got off of the planes (magically apparently), where driven to NY, killed and mangled along the way, then their bodies were dumped secretly at the WTC site? Is that it?
Why go through all that when you could have just left them on the planes?

Also, there isn't enough money in the world to keep all the families quiet about something like that. Especially seeing as there were inner city school kids on the Pentagon flight. I'm sure they're parents happily agreed to let them die for the neocons right

BS

As I said, an event like 9/11 took many years to gradully come to frution, it is all very possible, that everything played out as it did, and the neocons could have perfectly done this successfully. But time is real perfection Time is catching up and leaks are appearing.


[edit on 21-10-2008 by mind is the universe]


One clue look at the government now, look at how they are reacting, look at Bush when he's asked about 9/11.

[edit on 21-10-2008 by mind is the universe]

[edit on 21-10-2008 by mind is the universe]

Originally posted by fleabit
How many "truthers" out there have ACTUALLY fairly given all possibilities merit and study? Other than a very biased one? Just wondering.

We think your logic is biased. To assume that the government tale is the truth and then to use that faulty standard as a basis for your logic is extremely biased. Especially when that same government proves almost daily that it will deliberately lie to its citizenry, and its corruption level is beyond belief.

When an honest person applies investigative logic to the tale of 9-11, (id est who gains (cui bono) from 9-11) it becomes obvious that the US government (Bush Regime) and its corporate sponsors had everything to gain from 9-11 and the alleged 'hijackers' almost nothing. In fact the Bush Regime had already poised invasion troops into Afghanistan before 9-11. And the NeoCONs infesting the Bush Regime had made no secret about needing a New Pearl Harbor Event to enable their world hegemony.

Why would the 'hijackers' fly two aircraft into two towers when simple logic would indicate that two aircraft into one tower at widely separated levels would be much more likely to cause the most destruction.

And why in the world would said 'hijackers' decide to fly an impossible flight path into a 1st floor under construction area of the Pentagon, when flying straight into the main offices on the top floor would be much simpler and cause 10 times the destruction?

Then that same government (Bush Regime) which is the most likely suspect, desperately attempts to block all investigations into 9-11. You are far more biased than we are.

reply to post by mind is the universe

Thank you for your response. It's late right now and my brain cells are more concerned with resting than responding
I'll do it tomorrow, but I just wanted to say thank you. I'm weeping over here in seeing an actual intelligent response

[edit on 22-10-2008 by ThatsJustWeird]

reply to post by SPreston


I agree with you on our post, however I would like to add, that the highjackers could have flown the airplanes in our nuclear plants. They would have done a whole lot of damage killing hundreds of thousand maybe a few million people. I know, the nuclear power plants are in a no fly zone, infact, so was the WTC. It is a fact; the highjack planes flew over the power plants and were not intervene. These radical Islamic terrorist if they had the knowledge to really penetrate our defense system they would have not target the WTC it is ludicrous to think that a group of terrorist who hate our Country, hate our freedoms, these people want blood and they want all of it. It would have been much easier to take out one or two power plants that day. (Since most people, who believe in the Government story, believe the terrorist, seem to have prior knowledge that our Government would be staging war games on the morning of 911.) It would have been so easy to target the power plants and not two building in New York.


When the new 911 commission would have written their phony white wash, fairy tail, to sell to the grieving public, wanting to know what happen that fatal day they would have gotten the same crap! NORAD had no idea there was real highjack airplanes flying around Oh No! You all need to talk to FAA we were not inform there was a situation!


That is how this scenario would have played out, however I “believe” there are some evil people in the Bush administration, who have been planning for this event to happen. I am convinced they were looking to kill as few people as possible. Like casualties in a war is how our military leaders were looking at this. One thing that was needed to carry out this evil caper was the media. The scripts were handed out in advance and the so call experts on terrorists, and of course, the expert on Osama Bin Laden would be ranting and convincing the TV viewers that foreign enemy has attack us. I do recall, how casual the new people were on reporting this tragic event, it was almost hypnotic. I was in a state of shock just watching this whole event unfold on TV.

However, the Bush administration could not pull 911 off without the help of our media.
A tool the Pentagon uses when it is propaganda an event (nothing new here.) I found it amazing that all the TV news were showing all the same exact camera angles around the same time the event were unfolding.

Anyway, with out the media, the Bush administration would not been able to put on their show, and enraged the American public who wanted revenge for attacking us. I have to believe the Neocons knew they would finally get their war. A war that was already on the Pentagons table before Bush was reeled in as President.

I am convinced that 911 was an inside job! it would be ignorant to say it was not.

Nonsense, I think they hit targets that a terrorist would most likely hit. The most "American" targets in our country. They weren't trying to kill as many people as possible, they were attacking the icons of our country. If you wanted to pound your chest as a terrorist cell to the world, what better than to hit our tallest buildings, the command center for our military branches, and who knows where the PA plane was headed. These are people that happily tie bombs to themselves at the age of 15, and blow themselves up for their cause. You really don't know how their minds work.

After the prior two wars, which included flimsy lack of evidence about WMD, we were able to go to war. Why in the world would we first of all, need to do something this extreme to do so again, and moreso, why to this extent? Flying two planes into the twin towers wouldn't be enough? Why would they need to plan even more?

If I were a terrorist, I'd plan as many targets as possible, in case some don't work our (ala PA plane). If I were the government, I'd choose a large, single target, so that there was a much lower chance of being found out. And why WOULD we choose the Pentagon? We'd attack and kill our own soliders and leadership? That makes no sense at all.

As far as believing the government, that's not really the case. I am believing common sense, the mass of media coverage (especially the day off), and the preponderence of evidence available. The burden of proof falls on those claiming our own government would commit mass-murder, not on those who already have established a solid mountain of evidence.

Why when asked about the more salient and blaring facts, they are ignored by those who claim there was a coverup? I've been following the Pentagon scene in perticular. When asked very directly about many points, the responses were either nonexistant, or the theories wild and unsubstantiated.

For example, someone above claimed the supposed flight path was not the real one (it instead flew north of the Citgo). What was their proof for this? Apparently a handful of eyewitnesses. I think 13? If even that? And because of the bias, they take all these witnesses say at face value. They cannot possibly be wrong, mistaken, lying. However, the much LARGER body of eyewitnesses who actually saw it fly into the Pentagon are ALL wrong, lying, or mistaken. See how that works? It's not hard to make your case, when you discard all other theories and witnesses except your own.

And no one has yet to come up with a firm and believable theory to many other facts, such as the bodies studied by a large forensic team over 60 days, positively identifying them, the wreckage on the lawn (apparently planted in plain view, or even before it happened, and no one noticed.. astounding!), eyewitness testimonies, personal effects recovered from the scene, cell calls made before the crash, and so on.

When I asked about the eye-witnesses who say they say the plane hit the Pentagon, I was pointed to a "list" that supposedly proved they were false. When checked, the list was LESS then 50% complete. They had not even talked to half of the people. And some they did, the notes were left out. And for the rest, BIASED remarks were made (undependable.. lying.. etc.). Biased research doesn't prove your point. Solid, hard, concrete facts do. Ignoring anything that doesn't work with your personal belief again, proves nothing. That's sloppy and unprofessional.

Let's take the simple example of windows blowing out down the floors of the WTC buildings, as they collapsed. The theory is that explosive charges cutting down supports was causing this (although, how people wired the entire building with explosives, and no one noticed, is baffling). The expert opinion is a simple one: Those buildings are full of a lot of air. When that much weight collapses that quickly, it has to go somewhere. The air was blowing the windows out.

Why is that premise false? Because it doesn't support your coverup claims? Explain to me where the air went as the building collapsed. Why couldn't it be that? Oh yea, because you can't make the government out to be the bad guys, if it was something as simple as that.

I have no doubt whatsoever, if there was a fire in a tall building caused by faulty electronics in the middle of a city, that you folks would have NO trouble whatsoever pinning it utterly on the government, the Illumunati, the NWO, or something else. In a chaotic situation, it's easy to find anomolies, that you can then twist to mean whatever you want.