Regardless of your opinions of 9/11 , you need to read this.

Originally posted by hooper
Start with the 9/11 Commission Report.

Oh, you mean the report that has been deemed a "whitewash" and a "failure" by a few Commission members? Why would anybody want to read the report after that?

Originally posted by hooper
Then move on to the NIST report.

Oh, you mean the report by an organization that admits that most of the "evidence" used cannot be revealed? Or that nothing in the report can be used as evidence in a court of law. A report that used guesses, calculations and made-up computer simulations just to create theories of how the towers collapsed.

A report by an organization that admittedly and deliberately refused to test for explosives and incendiaries. And despite refusing to test, still claims definitively that none were used.


The 9/11 Commission was a failure, the NIST Report is based on theories only. There is very little definitive or factual information in those reports. Unfortunately, there are uninformed people that still peddle these reports as factual when nothing in them can be proven as factual.

Originally posted by tpg65
This thread is almost 3 pages long and has so far acheived nothing .
With all the bright minds on ATS , is this the best we can do ?

Peace.

There's a whole forum full of threads just like this...you're doing well, mine often take a couple months to get this much action.

I'll start...

The evidence I've seen, as shown in other posts, has led me to believe the media was and are an integral part in the 911 operation. Part and parcel to the complicit media, is the Internet, and this forum.

Hence, you will have a tough time getting honest feedback.

reply to post by _BoneZ_

Another voice of reason . Thank you .

I asked hooper to back up his claims and to show some evidence and all he did was name some reports . I asked him to produce evidence that led to said reports and guess what ....... He named reports .

reply to post by hooper


The senior counsel of the 911 Commission (John Farmer) is under the impression that the commision was lied to.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's a well documented fact that Bush and Cheney gave their testimony together refusing to take an oath and in private... not a typical way to give testimony. Why?

The problem with any lie is you can't trust anything from that point forward. Is it one lie? Ten?

There is plenty of evidence to indicate that if the government wasn't complicit, they are at least guilty of being complacent and someone needs to be held to account.

There is plenty of evidence to cause people to question the OS. As this is the worst attack on US soil in decades, it warrants a FULL investigation.

Originally posted by tpg65

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by tpg65

 

And what if you've already heard the truth and insist on perpetuating myths and all out lies? Does that honor the dead also?

What truths have you uncovered ?
Please post your findings on this thread , but please leave aside personal feelings and deal solely with proven facts and I promise your findings will be looked at objectively

Regards.

And what if the physics profession should have settled this simple problem in 2002 and it is totally ridiculous that there is still a controversy?

It is a very peculiar AUTHORITY problem now.

psik

Originally posted by tpg65

Originally posted by DragonriderGal
reply to post by tpg65

 

You have to know that this is a sensitive topic for TPTB.

If too much 'truth' gets "figured out", there may well be a big old fat finger pointing right at them and god knows how many billions of dollars worth of gold gone missing from the bank vaults under the twin towers, of which only 280 million (one truckload worth trapped in an exit tunnel during the collapse) was ever recovered.

So now, do you honestly think they're going to let any version of the 'truth' with them implicated be 'figured out'?

Which is why, despite a lot of what seems quite credible evidence I've seen presented here and elsewhere that very much points to an inside job, probably CIA, it will continue to be ignored by the mainstream media and poo-hooed everywhere, including here on ATS.

Remember, they've got LOTS and LOTS of money and resources (and those billions and billions they got from under the world trade center is coming in handy I'm sure) and own most of the major media. And are doing their darnest to own the internet too. Luckily they've been held off by the guys who love their access to porn and are willing to spend money to do so! *lol*

edit on 23-8-2011 by DragonriderGal because: (no reason given)

Nice reply .
Please tell more about the missing gold , because this is new to me and any evidence will be gratefully acknowledged.

Well, part of why building 7 had to be taken down by them was that the records for just how much gold and who's gold it was, was stored there. The gold was the basis for the currency of several countries, from what I remember reading, and you know they aren't going to want to let it be known that they now have NO gold to back it up. So, that's been hushed up from several levels, I am sure.

As for where I read it... hum... I don't keep urls. It was a newpaper article from a New York newspaper about 7 years ago, that I found online when I was doing some of my own research. But I honestly can't tell you where.

The article discussed the fact that a big truck had been found abandoned in one of the blocked escape tunnels under the trade center and that immediately after the discovery, a bunch of government type guys with guns showed up and wouldn't let anyone near the truck anymore. Firemen and police arrived a bit later and emptied the truck all the while with the men with guns keeping the rest of the workers away.

The writer further referenced the first bombing attack back in '93 on the trade center, in which it was noted at the time that every thing was safe, but that several country's currency gold was stored there with the estimated value of nearly a billion as I recall. The writer then noted that other agencies had since stored their gold there and speculated that there were quite a bit more stored in there by the time 9-11 happened.

Of course this is all from memory, but just now, doing a quick search on gold in the trade center basement vaults pulled up several site, one of them noting that there were large amounts of precious metals missing from the 4th level basement vaults of the world trade center after the 9-11 incident.

www.rumormillnews.com...

Oh and this link has snippets of that article I read. They speculate there could be up to 160 billion in gold and precious metals and jewels that never were recovered.

"...One of the world's largest gold depositories was stored underneath the World Trade Center, owned by a group of commercial banks. The 1993 bomb detonated close to the vault, but it withstood the explosion, as did the towers. One source estimates the 1993 value of the gold at one billion dollars, believed to be owned by Kuwaiti interests. That same source claims that when the World Trade Center was destroyed, the amount of gold "far exceed[ed] the 1993 levels."

reply to post by psikeyhackr


Hi .

Care to elaborate ?
Please keep to the facts .

Originally posted by Yankee451
The evidence I've seen, as shown in other posts, has led me to believe the media was and are an integral part in the 911 operation.

And you couldn't resist the continued spamming of the tv fakery/cgi hoax, hmm? There is no evidence. If there were, we all would be supporting it in some way or another. The tv fakery/cgi garbage is a proven HOAX. That's why those threads are in the HOAX bin. Get it?

Now, for the love of Jesus Christ, stop spamming a known and proven HOAX. Move on and do something constructive with yourself. Everybody knows it's a HOAX and nobody is falling for it.

reply to post by hooper

9/11 Commission Report.

Warren Commission Report. That group was stacked too. Don't believe everything you read

Thomas Kean (chair) director of oil giant Amerada Hess. business ties to Saudis Khalid bin Mahfouz. co-chairman of Homeland Security Project. CFR member.
Lee H. Hamilton (vice chair) member of Homeland Security Advisory Council. former chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and House Select Intelligence Committee. chair of committee investigating Iran/Contra. CFR member.
Richard Ben-Veniste partner in the Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw law firm which represented Westfield Corporation and Westfield America -- insurance beneficiaries of the court-ordered multi-billion dollar payout for the World Trade Center destruction.
5 Bob Kerrey vice-chair of the Senate Committee on Intelligence. Kerrey said in a 1999 Washington Post column that the Vietnam war (which killed over 2 million civilians) was a "just war."
Fred F. Fielding worked for John Dean as White House counsel to Nixon -- "Deep Throat" of Watergate fame, avoided prison time.
Jamie S. Gorelick current and former partner, along with Commission General Counsel Daniel Marcus, of Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering, a law firm representing Prince Mohammed al Faisal against the August 2002 lawsuit by victims' families against several Saudi princes and banks, and the Sudanese government. vice-chair of mortgage giant Fannie Mae. Former deputy to Janet Reno. CFR member.
Slade Gorton served two years on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
John F. Lehman former Secretary of the Navy under Reagan. disgraced in a number of scandals, including Tailhook.
Timothy J. Roemer member of the House Intelligence Committee.
James R. Thompson chairman of the large Chicago-based law firm Winston and Strawn, whose clients have included American Airlines, Boeing, and a number of WTC tenants.
Philip Zelikow member of George W. Bush's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board; member of Bush-Cheney transition team.

911research.wtc7.net...

reply to post by tpg65

Another voice of reason . Thank you .

I asked hooper to back up his claims and to show some evidence and all he did was name some reports . I asked him to produce evidence that led to said reports and guess what ....... He named reports .

And again, the blanket denial.

What is a "fact" here?

reply to post by DragonriderGal


Wow , thank you . That is amazing and well worth discussing .
Can any of it be proven/disproven ?

Regards.

reply to post by Scalded Frog

It's a well documented fact that Bush and Cheney gave their testimony together refusing to take an oath and in private... not a typical way to give testimony. Why?

They are the Executive Branch of a government that constitutionally recognizes that the three branches of government are equals. The Commission was an extension of the Legislative Branch. Hence no oath because it would set a precendent that the Executive could be rendered subervient to the Legislative. This is old stuff. Private because it was dealing with matters of national security.

The problem with any lie is you can't trust anything from that point forward.

Well, thats your take on it. Reason dictates otherwise. A person, out of vanity may lie about their age, that is no reason to reject their other testimony.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by tpg65

 

Another voice of reason . Thank you .

I asked hooper to back up his claims and to show some evidence and all he did was name some reports . I asked him to produce evidence that led to said reports and guess what ....... He named reports .

And again, the blanket denial.

What is a "fact" here?

I'll give you a clue . take a look at the post above yours. That is evidence .

reply to post by DragonriderGal

Well, part of why building 7 had to be taken down by them was that the records for just how much gold and who's gold it was, was stored there.

So you got a building full of records you don't want anyone to see, what sounds like a better option - let it burn to a crisp or make it collapse, put out the fires and let thousands of strangers grope around in the remains for weeks? I would let it burn to a crisp.

reply to post by tpg65

What do you expect to achieve?
What evidence do you expect people to post?
No-one has any actual evidence to bring forth here. The best you're going to get is videos of the towers collapsing. No-one here has access to any of the rubble, no metal fragments or trace chemicals to analyze. No-one has access to any DNA evidence, or previously unseen CCTV footage, or documents tracing the folks who placed all the "put orders" on the airline stock.

All we have are videos and pictures of the scenes, and they've been analyzed and over-analyzed to death, with no absolute proof of anything other than that yes, the towers did come down.

By all means, continue searching for the truth, but your answers won't be found on the internet.

Originally posted by subject x
reply to post by tpg65

 

What do you expect to achieve?
What evidence do you expect people to post?
No-one has any actual evidence to bring forth here. The best you're going to get is videos of the towers collapsing. No-one here has access to any of the rubble, no metal fragments or trace chemicals to analyze. No-one has access to any DNA evidence, or previously unseen CCTV footage, or documents tracing the folks who placed all the "put orders" on the airline stock.

All we have are videos and pictures of the scenes, and they've been analyzed and over-analyzed to death, with no absolute proof of anything other than that yes, the towers did come down.

By all means, continue searching for the truth, but your answers won't be found on the internet.

Don't underestimate the power of the internet or the guile of the individual

Originally posted by tpg65

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by tpg65

 

Another voice of reason . Thank you .

I asked hooper to back up his claims and to show some evidence and all he did was name some reports . I asked him to produce evidence that led to said reports and guess what ....... He named reports .

And again, the blanket denial.

What is a "fact" here?

I'll give you a clue . take a look at the post above yours. That is evidence .

You mean like this "fact":

Fred F. Fielding worked for John Dean as White House counsel to Nixon -- "Deep Throat" of Watergate fame, avoided prison time.

Better check on that one.

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by tpg65

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by tpg65

 

So what wasn't factual about my post? Sept. 11, 2001? Hijackers? 4 planes? The towers of the World Trade Center? The Pentagon?

Can you back up up anything you have just wrote , with facts ?

You mention the attack on the Pentagon , but did you know that there is not one scrap of evidence to prove that it was hit by a passenger jet . If you have evidence to the contrary , then please present it and it will be objectively discussed.

Did you know that there is not one scrap of evidence to prove that it was hit by anything but a passenger jet? That is what people saw and that is what the physical evidence is consistent with.

Well, just looking at the pictures of the place the missle hit.. oh excuse me, the Plane hit.. you can see there isn't anything but an approx. one story round hole. No sign that wings even tried to penetrate the wall. Plus No wing wreckage, in fact not much wreckage at all. No fuselage parts lying about and the head of the 'plane' penetrated how many walls of the solid concrete and reinforced steel (just newly remodeled) building???

Now if you've ever been on a real airplane, you'd know no nose on one of them is going to make it past the first wall.. in fact I doubt they would have made it thru the wall at all.. more like they'd have just smashed flat against it, since they are just a fiberglass shell full of electronic equipment, and if it was a big passenger liner, the hole (if they didn't just bounce off and maybe break a few windows) would have been way much bigger.
But no... of course it was a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon. Uh huh. Sure. *rolls eyes*

In the 10 years since 9/11 , how many people have been brought to trial for the acts of terrorism ?

Zero ?

Don't you find that a little strange, people ?

Originally posted by tpg65
In the 10 years since 9/11 , how many people have been brought to trial for the acts of terrorism ?

Zero ?

Don't you find that a little strange, people ?

edit on 29/05/2011 by tpg65 because: (no reason given)

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...