9/11 Justice: Would You Accept This? (video to add perspective)

One thing I find amusing is that the debunker side always use this weak and insane argument:

"but we have proven it would require an astronomical amount of resources for it to be an inside job"

But yet, they want us to believe that some fringe radical group of 19 Arab cave dwellers with box-cutters apparently had those same astronomical amount of resources with people and an organisation on the ground leading the operation WITHIN THE BORDERS OF THE GREATEST COUNTRY ON EARTH to pull off by themselves such a complicated and über-advanced operation like 9/11 without any help OR interference whatsoever from U.S or U.S friendly Intelligence-service-operators, IN TOTAL SECRECY WITH NEARLY 100% SUCCESS!

Por favor! give my poor European heart a frakkin' break!

Some of you guys really crack me up!

God bless our American friends!

reply to post by Chevalerous


You're right and in fact, the government does things every day that takes far more resources to pull off. The sad truth of the matter, is that it wouldn't take any more resources for elements within the government to pull this off, then it would with some Islamic extremist group. In fact, it would require less resources for these elements inside government to pull it off.

As far as the cover-up goes, that does take an enormous amount of resources to pull off, though again precendent has shown us that such a task is easy, especially for the neo-con element. Do we not remember the entire Tower Commission and the Iran/Contra/Cocaine/Hostages scandal? Do we not remember the whole "bailouts scandal", to include the MSM participation? What about the USS Liberty, which was basically a failed false-flag attack on a US Navy warship? With the Liberty, we even had the remaining crew that was still alive screaming to high heavens about what happened, yet most of the public is blissfully unaware that a USS Liberty even existed, thanks to the MSM and government cover-up.

If you have an operation that needs resources to pull off, then certain elements within the US government surely have the most resources to pull this off, as they have proven in the years past. In fact, that excuse requires you to ignore the known fact that the US government uses compartmentalization. This means that you could have a million people working on an operation without 99.99% of them even knowing about it.

But then again, the entire OS requires one to ignore a lot of things.



--airspoon


On another note, what really gets me, is that some people (right here on ATS) seem to think that it would be impossible for the US to carry this out, due to the magnitude of the operation, then these same people will go into another thread and relay their theories about government working with ET, keeping it from the public and using the media to slowly disclose that they have been working with "star-people". They seem to think that the TV is sending them messages, in an effort to lightly disclose the UFO phenomenon and the government's cooperation with ET, yet they think it might be too far fetched that the government could have supplied a few resources to a few assets to fly a few planes into several buildings. LOL. It just goes to show the rational that we are up against.

reply to post by snapperski

...and ermmm those few bits at the 2 sites you mention,was they not removed from the crime scene before the investigation was done,infact everything was cut,ripped removed,destoryed,before any real investigation was done

...and ermmm , that's usually what first responders do when they arrive on scene . Oh wait , you weren't aware that they were looking for survivors ?

Of course things were "cut , ripped removed " . They were looking for possible survivors in the carnage .

reply to post by airspoon

is that some people (right here on ATS) seem to think that it would be impossible for the US to carry this out, due to the magnitude of the operation, then these same people will go into another thread and relay their theories about government working with ET, keeping it from the public and using the media to slowly disclose that they have been working with "star-people". They seem to think that the TV is sending them messages, in an effort to lightly disclose the UFO phenomenon and the government's cooperation with ET, yet they think it might be too far fetched that the government could have supplied a few resources to a few assets to fly a few planes into several buildings. LOL.

Is this really true , or is it your attempt to discredit your opposition ? And yes , that is a sincere question . If it is true , then you should have no qualms about sending me a PM with your proof .

reply to post by okbmd


oh hang on you and the de-bunker crew been telling me in another thread,that they knew WT7 was going to collaspe,so they evacuated the building..Hmmm..

reply to post by GoodOlDave


First off, did you just write this so you could say the n word over and over again? Shame dave, shame.

In all honesty, a better analogy would be the book, "The lies of the trusters" where George Bush needed to defend Dick Cheney from waterboarding charges-

9/11 truthers- "I have proven that all the witnesses claiming Osama Bin Laden did it are lying"
Bush- "Yeah, but he's a Muslim, let's invade his country".
9/11 truthers- "but I have proven the CIA was propositioning him and he refused their services"
Bush- "Yeah, but he's a Muslim, let's invade his country".
truthers- "but I have shown Bin Laden had liver cancer and couldn't possibly have done this"
Bush- "Yeah, but he's a Muslim, let's invade his country".
Truthers- "His race doesn't matter. This man is clearly innocent of this crime"
Bush- "Yeah, but he's a Muslim, let's invade his country".

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by snapperski
the world is screaming for a full public independent international inquiry,

They are? Care to provide proof of that claim?

What most truthers refuse to accept is that with their silly conspiracy theories of:
beam weapons, holographic planes, mini nukes, nanoo nanoo thermite, hush a boom explosives and the old standby, THE JEWS DID IT etc etc. they have zero credibility in the real world!

Dereks, the jews didn't do it, you did it. You are covering up for the criminals. The guilt is on your hands, more so than the 19 suicide hijackers who are still alive. When your grandchildren ask why they have to be fondled at the airport security stations, you can say: because I defended the criminals, I spent all my time trying to defend them, I used pseudo-argument after pseudo-argument to defend one of the worst crimes in history, you should be ashamed of me, I'm no more innocent of this crime than Bush and Cheney, I might as well have been working for the CIA and Mossad, will you ever forgive me?

reply to post by airspoon


while i agree with you that there needs to be an independant investigation, it simply isn't going to happen. the government had their dog and pony show of a commission, they presented it to the public, and it's over, done.
all of this ranting of coincidences, and questions will go nowhere. it will simply not be brought up anymore in any serious investigation. you don't need disinfo agents, you just need to be ignored.

Three questions for those in the audience who are so insisting that there be a new investigation:
1) Who will conduct it? After all, it can't be anyone involved with the government - and it can't be anyone involved with the truth movement either.

2) Who will pay for it? Same rules as above.

3) What will the scope of the investigation be?

I can easily imagine the truther civil war, as they try to argue what the answer to number 3 should be

Originally posted by roboe
Three questions for those in the audience who are so insisting that there be a new investigation:
1) Who will conduct it? After all, it can't be anyone involved with the government - and it can't be anyone involved with the truth movement either.

2) Who will pay for it? Same rules as above.

3) What will the scope of the investigation be?

I can easily imagine the truther civil war, as they try to argue what the answer to number 3 should be

1. The people have already conducted it. The independent investigators are the only ones to be trusted, nothing "official" needed. The free market at work.

2. No funding necessary

3. Videos, documentaries, books, radio shows, architectural lectures, political analysis, etc.

I don't support a new investigation by the government, but I do support the real investigation that already happened.

reply to post by roboe

1) Who will conduct it? After all, it can't be anyone involved with the government - and it can't be anyone involved with the truth movement either.

It's not that it can't be anyone involved with the government, it's just that it can't be anyone with a conflict of interest, preferably someone who didn't help obfuscate the truth in the Tower Commission (Iran/Contra). Also, it shouldn't be anyone attached to any administration. Whether you believe or disbelieve in the OS, shouldn't matter. Furthermore, seeing that a truther is simply someone who doesn't believe in the OS or who doesn't believe that the OS has been proven, being a truther shouldn't matter.

Regardless, an investigation should be transparent and should ask all of the pertinent questions. The questions could be comprised by a committee, preferably an open process and no information should be off-limits to them. They could all have security clearances, but it should be up to a panel of independent chairs, which information can be kept secret and what information shouldn't. It is far too easy for certain interests to simply keep everything secret and claim it is all a secret for national security purposes.

Since we live in a Democratic Republic, the questions to be answered -or even asked- should be up to the people, not industry and government insiders. The same goes for what information is secret. Business dealings between private entities and foreign governments should not be kept secret at the tax-payers expense and the American people's burden. When any other crime is committed and people re investigated, they don't get to simply label everything as "secret" and keep it off-limits.

A serious crime has been committed, regardless of whether you believe the OS or not, thus a serious investigation should be done and if we have to create a little inconvenience, then so be it.

2) Who will pay for it? Same rules as above.

Well, the same people who pay for any other investigation, whether it be impeachment or a common crime. The tax-payer. When a crime has been committed, we can't simply not investigate because we don't want to spend the money. The investigation into Clinton's affair received far more funds that the biggest terrorist attack on US soil. The same with the Challenger disaster. For just a tiny fraction of the funds the tax-payers ponyed up for AIG bonuses, we could have a well-funded investigation. For just a small fraction of the cost of the Iraq war (which was, at least in part, as a result of 9/11 and lies pertaining to it), we could have a well-funded investigation.

3) What will the scope of the investigation be?

The scope of the investigation should be everything pertaining to the attacks and thus the aftermath of the attacks. Just as you would investigate a murder, one would need to investigate this. Finances should be investigated, hard evidence, as well as circumstantial evidence. We should also investigate who did it, who might have helped or who might have turned a blind eye. Then we should investigate how this happened, to include either who helped or who could have been in neglect of their duties. We should investigate who, if anyone, exploited the situation for their own gains.

In other words, we should investigate the whole gambit of the subject matter, leaving no stone unturned, At the very least, a bunch of people failed at their duty, yet those who supposedly failed were rewarded, not reprimanded or held accountable. The idea behind a new investigation should be who is responsible for these attacks and if any wrong-doing came out of it, by anyone, to include the resulting policies and any possible cover-ups of the truth for any reason what-so-ever.


--airspoon

Originally posted by jimmyx
reply to post by airspoon

 

while i agree with you that there needs to be an independant investigation, it simply isn't going to happen. the government had their dog and pony show of a commission, they presented it to the public, and it's over, done.
all of this ranting of coincidences, and questions will go nowhere. it will simply not be brought up anymore in any serious investigation. you don't need disinfo agents, you just need to be ignored.

we can't just be ignored anymore,we have to make a stand make the change,and exposeing the 9/11 lie,we have the platform to bring about the end of the neo-con world..being created around us..it's our children that were leaveing to live in this crazy slave world,under the disguise of democracy for socialist gain..

reply to post by snapperski


Wait what?

WTC7 was evacuated after the aircraft struck both towers. The building was empty (save for Jennings and his friend that entered it and got trapped when the Towers came down), and it burned without a drop of water put on it for 7 hours.

Firefighters and on scene engineers saw that the building's integrity was compromised, and was showing signs of failure. So they pulled all rescue personnel from the collapsed towers site. They set up a collapse zone, and waited for it to collapse, and then they returned after the danger passed.

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by snapperski

 

Wait what?

WTC7 was evacuated after the aircraft struck both towers. The building was empty (save for Jennings and his friend that entered it and got trapped when the Towers came down), and it burned without a drop of water put on it for 7 hours.

Firefighters and on scene engineers saw that the building's integrity was compromised, and was showing signs of failure. So they pulled all rescue personnel from the collapsed towers site. They set up a collapse zone, and waited for it to collapse, and then they returned after the danger passed.

thank you GenRadek for backing me expaining to your fellow OS beliver okbmd that the building was evacuated,just like you keep telling me..LOL..your man okbmd was trying his usual trick of trying to belittle me,by saying they were looking for survivors in the building collaspe thats why its was cut up and ripped removed from the crime scene at alarming speed..anyway its off topic..were talking about ways and theories for implementing. a proper independent investigation and is it right to just accept what we been told,in one of the biggest crimes in history,and now we come to realised that the whole commission report and the NIST investigations,was a complete shambles..it's clearly time to do it right,and put this to bed once and for all.

so all your preaching is wasted here..lets leave it to real scientist and engineers to answers our questions unhindered or obstructed with no gain to the outcome open to public scrutiny ..thats what i belive..
and i do belive AIRSPOON laid down a great explanation and framework for a proper investigation to conducted.

Originally posted by Chevalerous
One thing I find amusing is that the debunker side always use this weak and insane argument:

"but we have proven it would require an astronomical amount of resources for it to be an inside job"

But yet, they want us to believe that some fringe radical group of 19 Arab cave dwellers with box-cutters apparently had those same astronomical amount of resources with people and an organisation on the ground leading the operation WITHIN THE BORDERS OF THE GREATEST COUNTRY ON EARTH to pull off by themselves such a complicated and über-advanced operation like 9/11 without any help OR interference whatsoever from U.S or U.S friendly Intelligence-service-operators, IN TOTAL SECRECY WITH NEARLY 100% SUCCESS!

Por favor! give my poor European heart a frakkin' break!

Some of you guys really crack me up!

God bless our American friends!

edit on 6-11-2010 by Chevalerous because: "Something is rotten in the State of Denmark"

Arab hi-jacking has a long history. 9/11 wasn't the first multiple plane hi-jacking. In Sept 1970 attempts were made on 5 aircraft and 4 were successful :-

middleeast.about.com...

It doesn't need a vast organization to get a few fanatics on planes but Al Qaeda has both money and organizers in any event.

What you need a small army for is to fake the whole thing and frame others. To rig skyscrapers for demolition and modify or substitute aircraft without anyone knowing. To fake plane crashes, fake phone calls and all manner of circumstantial evidence, fake radar , fake cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder, fake Air Traffic Control tapes, fake DNA, fake aircraft wreckage, intimidate the press, threaten and murder witnesses, brow-beat the 120,000 plus members of the American Society of Civil Engineers etc etc etc. Oh, and not forgetting to pay me !

post removed,before i get my 3rd warning this week...

reply to post by Alfie1


True, but how do you sneak arabs onto an airplane and not have them show up on the passenger lists?
That's a pretty good trick.

reply to post by snapperski

oh hang on you and the de-bunker crew been telling me in another thread,that they knew WT7 was going to collaspe,so they evacuated the building..Hmmm..

And what , exactly , does that have to do with anything I have posted in this thread ?

You are using a tactic I see quite a bit . I post something , you switch it to something else ...

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by snapperski

 

Wait what?

WTC7 was evacuated after the aircraft struck both towers.

The building was empty (save for Jennings and his friend that entered it and got trapped when the Towers came down),

I don't know why I even bother quoting and replying to your posts; I'm probably on your ignore list so you don't even see my posts...

I'm sure you wouldn't have a use to ellipse this portion had it not been "recorded testimony?"

The building was empty (save for Jennings and his friend that entered it and got trapped when the Towers came down),

WTC7 was evacuated after the aircraft struck both towers.

If the building was evacuated, why was Jennings and his friend allowed back inside- providing they left for a sandwich or whatever excuse can be implemented?

I'm just asking you to review what you are trying to sell people, and ask yourself if it really is such a simple explanation, thanks.

The building was not evacuated, you're welcome to dig up the recorded testimony given by Jennings for review, so you can see where it is you err.

And if you'd like to explain the count-down leading-up to the crumbling of WTC7. That is recorded testimony you are welcome to review as well. And don't ask me to provide links to this material, had you been researching this, you'd know how and where to find it yourself...

Tell your buddy Dave I said what's up, will ya'? I think I earned a slot on his ignore list too. Thanks, and have a good evening.

ETA I used the word testimony because Jennings died for what he said on camera...ETA my answer to the question is a vehement NO, nor should I have to!

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
reply to post by Alfie1

 

True, but how do you sneak arabs onto an airplane and not have them show up on the passenger lists?
That's a pretty good trick.

That hoary old story died a death long ago. What you are referring to are "victim" lists from which the "perps" were excluded :-

www.911myths.com...