Things that do not add up on 911

[Carlos]

This post is meant to get people to ask questions regarding the 911 Commission, and not as an insult to many many people who lost loved ones that day, who are asking for a real investigation too, and not run by Bush's administration pal Zelikow!!

1. NORAD did nothing to stop 4 planes going off course in US air space. This is especially over Washington, which is the most highly secure airspace in the world - with SAM missiles as just part of the defense.
Norman Mineta's testimony to the commission, that Cheney was warned about a plane heading toward the pentagon 50 MILES OUT, was omitted from the 911 commission - why?

2. Bush at school: Official story says that bush was informed that WTC1 had been hit before entering the classroom, but that it was most probably an accident.Even if it was probably an accident, normal procedure would be to get him to a safe locale ASAP.
But as is infamous now, he was then informed of the second plane hitting, and as such is clear to everyone that the US is under attack. His visit to the school had been well publicised, and so logically Bush would be at a very high risk staying there: but he's not one to be a coward, oh no, so he sits there and reads with the children for a while longer. This would never have been allowed, unless they knew that he wasn't a target!!!
One other interesting thing: Bush said (trust him to give it away) that he had watched the first plane strike and thought: "What an awful pilot"... there was no live footage of the first strike - unless he had a private live feed?

3. Flight records from all flights do not show any of the terrorists names, or even any Muslim names. But they "bought tickets" supposedly.
And at least 9 of the original list of terrorists have been found to be alive in other parts of the world. Not to mention the passport of one them was found on the sidewalk, and so survived the initial explosion + fires, and stayed intact after the collapses - even though chairs, desks, filing cabinets all were turned to a fine powder??

4. There have only ever been 3 steel frame buildings in history that have completely collapsed due to fire damage alone (yes the official story says that it was fire alone, and nothing to do with the plane impacts): WTC1, WTC 2, and WTC7 (totally ignored by the 911 Commission). All in one day. And not since, even though a skyscraper in Madrid burned (with much more ferocity) for nearly 24 hours and although the top did come down - the rest of the building did not collapse. Check it out there have been many larger fire in steel frame building that have burned for many more hours than they did on 911.
All 3 building came down at speeds (9 & 11 seconds) that rendered each floor to be essentially thin air - i.e offer no resistance to the force from the floors above. This defies physics as we know it: conservation of momentum.

6. pools of molten steel being brought out of the debris a month later - there is absolutely no way of accounting for this in the 911 commission/NIST models.
Although is a by product of explosive thermite/or thermate - which heats up to very very high temperatures very very quickly, and so is used in controlled demolitions to cut the support columns. the earth at ground 0 was so hot that rescuers had to change boots every other day, as they were melting.

there are more, but this may get you asking questions.

If any of my childhood heroes Mike, Adam, & Adam, happen to read this: it is time for those with some clout to come out, and question your government, and the freedoms being eroded away in the name of that fateful day.

Thank you everyone who took the time to read this.
If you now asking yourself, have i been lied to, please check the following videos out, as they go into much greater details.

911 The Myth and the Reality: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-275577066688213413&q=myth+and+reality
911 Mysteries: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&q=911+mysteries
Improbable Collapse: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=4026073566596731782&q=Improbable
Press for Truth (made by the families of victims of 911) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5589099104255077250

[Carlos]

update1:

This is a letter from an emergency worker that day, another story, that fits with what we were being told by newsreporteers on the ground that day, but in subsequent days was forgotten about, as it just doesn't fit with the governement conspiracy theory that 19 hijackers took control of 4 planes in the most heavily guarded country on the planet.. hmm :rolleyes:

"I don't know what to say, I'm not sure where I stand, and I don't know what to think anymore... not about 9/11, but society in general.
I was a NJ EMT for 6 years. I was in NY at the WTC before, during, and after the collapse. I ran from the falling towers. I hid behind a plexi-glass bus stop panel, as if that would have helped me if anything large came hurtling in that direction. My lungs are full of dust and I can barely breathe without holding back a cough and the ever-present faint taste of blood in the back of my throat. I wake up gasping for air. Those towers fell, and I was there. I don't know why the "official story" of what happened isn't questioned more than it is. Nobody listens to the people who KNOW. The 9/11 commission was made up of puppeteers, and the tesimony was given by the puppets. It's so obvious. It was a failure. If the things I, and hundreds of other people saw, felt, and heard didn't make it into that attrocious failure called the 9/11 Commission Report, then there is no other con clusion than accepting the fact that the whole thing was a whitewash.
Mark... listen to me. There were explosions. There were flashes. There was molten metal running down the I-beams of the basement levels like lava flows. I've never seen anything like it. Yes, planes hit the buildings- anybody who says otherwise is a moron. But the explosions- the rapid, symmetrical, sequential explosions- they happened. We were in the basement, helping a man who had been struck by pieces of flying concrete and rebar, and there was one of the huge steel and concrete support pillars with an 8 foot section blown out of the center of it. We looked around and there were other support columns that were the same. We spoke about it right then and there... we were discussing as we were carrying this man, saying "how could someone have rigged all these explosives?". That sort of thing does not happen from an airplane hitting the building 70, 80 stories up. We stood outside listening to the explosions. One after the other, every minute or so. At one point, about 10 minutes before the first collapse, a 30 foot or so section of the courtyard exlploded straight up into the air. Just before the collapses, a series of deep, below ground explosions, then numerous explosions in the buildings upper floors. Then we ran. We felt the same deep explosions before the second collapse. This was not just the planes. THE BUILDINGS WERE RIGGED. There is no question about it. Hundreds of people know this, Mark. People were told, the crowds of people were TOLD over bullhorns, that building 7 was going to be pulled (and YES that is the term they used). There was a 20 second countdown over the radios, there were bright flashes up and down the sides of building 7, you could see them through the windows...and it collapsed. We all knew it was intentionally pulled... they told us! There was no question about it until a day or so later when the news was reporting that it had collapsed due to fire. We kept wondering when they were going to correct the news reports. Eventually, it became "official story".
I tried to explain that wasn't what happened. I kept telling people there were explosions. I kept explaining what I saw, and wrote to the newspapers, the networks, and the government about what I saw. I called to speak to the FDNY, and NYPD. I told them what I knew and wanted know why the news reports were wrong. I wasn't told I was wrong. I wasn't even given a different explaination. I was just told to "shut up", "forget about it", or "let it go, for my own good". I told my EMT Coordinator In Charge what we saw. The four of us from my squad who went were first congratulated for responding and doing such a good job, and later, two of us (the two that refused to "let it go") were brought up on charges of disorderly conduct, fired, and fined for the uniforms and equipment we used on 9/11 because they were ruined. The other two (who are women, one a mother of two, the other a mother of 3) now ref use to admit they were even there, even to us! They just won't speak about it. The four of us were heroes. Two of us were harrassed and fired, and the other two have to deny ever being there.
There is no doubt in my mind what happened in New York on 9/11. Yes, some of the conspiracy theories are far fetched. A few are even rediculous. But MOST of them, hold much more validity than the "official story". The government has one theory, and it is very weak, at best. Loose Change may be questionable, but that's what it is doing... providing theories and asking questions. Some of those questions get answered, others come up. THAT is why there is a 2nd Edition and a future final cut. Yes, the truth must be updated, of course it does. To say it doesn't is silly. What do you think an investigation is? You formulate a theory, ask questions, and get answers. When you come across new information or rule out false information, you update your theory. Why do you ridicule that concept? Why do you take so much pride in claiming "I didn't know the truth needed a 2n d Edition"? That's like your main motto and it's the weakest thing I've ever heard. Would it make more sense to you to write a story, or make a documentary, and NOT update it if you found new information? Would you want today's school children learning out of a 1977 1st Edition History textbook? Would you criticize an updated edition for them to learn out of? What about following editions? Of course not. My point is this: Loose Change may not be 100% accurate or complete, but it offers more plausible explanations, no matter how diabolical, than the 9/11 commission report fiasco.
In case you are wondering, no. I'm not going to give you my full name or what city I worked for. I had enough trouble having it dragged through local newspapers for two years. I don't want to lose another job. I don't want you unfoundedly slandering my name all over the net like you do with Dylan, Jason, and whoever else offers a point of view other than yours. I'm not giving you my name, so do as you wish with what I've told you. Just remember something. It's very easy to deny something, and even easier to "debunk" it with a simpler story, and simpler still to present that information to millions of people who not only have heard it as truth before, but WANT to believe it. It is much harder to piece together a series of events that makes much more sense, provides a motive, a means, and more capable suspects, and harder yet to present that information to millions of people who not only DON'T want it to be true, but have already heard a much happier story that they would rather believe.
Trust me, I'd much rather believe the official story. I'd also rather believe that Columbus discovered America and DIDN'T torture and murder the natives he encountered on the way here. But history had a 2nd Edition to that story. I can't wait for the Final Cut."

[abcdefz]

I regret that I have but two eyes to roll for my country.

[Waus]

I regret that I have but two eyes to roll for my country.

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(y)

[abcdefz]

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(y)



Gracias. I save that for special occasions. :D

[DroppinScience]

So is drizl back?

[QueenAdrock]

Hahahaha!

Oh, conspiracy theorists.

[Schmeltz]

575 + 337

[QueenAdrock]

^FTW

[Carlos]

well you can choose which conspiracy theory to believe,

either the one where 19 hijackers managed to take control of 4 planes in the most heavily guarded airspace in the world, to be able to crash them into 3 different building, one being in washinton DC, which has is even more heavily defeded with AA guns, and SAMs.
And 3 (yes remember WTC7??!!) steel framed building managed to symetrically come down in one day, the only 3 steel framed buildings to ever have done this before or since.

Or that your governement which lied about Iraq having WMD, and links with Al Quieda - resulting in over 3000 of your brave soldiers dead, and that Iraq had sold nuclear technology to an african country (state of union address) - ALL LIES.. shall i go on?

Bascally either you can trust independent construction experts from around the world (holland to norway, and UK), that what we witnessed that day was PHYSICLLY impossible, from jet fueld fire alone... and dozens of testimonies like the above.

Or the Bush/cheney regime.. I know who I'd prefer to trust.

please watch the videos links in my first post if you have any doubts, do this at least. Then if you still want to believe - cos that what it comes down to, not proof: no proof has been offered by the 911 commission - then that's your right.

[Funkaloyd]

And 3 (yes remember WTC7??!!) steel framed building managed to symetrically come down in one day, the only 3 steel framed buildings to ever have done this before or since.Except for all those other steel framed buildings.

[QueenAdrock]

*yawn*

It's been done before. It's been argued. Three pages worth in one thread (http://www.beastieboys.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=74989), 2-3 pages in another thread. It's tired now.

I think the thing I love most about the conspiracists is that they think that if you don't believe the nutty 9/11 conspiracies, you're "with" Bush and his administration. Like, it's not enough to hate Bush and his cronies, if you don't believe crackpot theories then you're totally a GOP-lover.

[ms.peachy]

Wow, it's so great that we FINALLY have someone here to lift the wool from our eyes and help us see the TRUTH!

yes that's me being facetious, duh.

[Carlos]

If you're tired QueenAdrock, i suggest you go back to sleep ;-)

however, I do appolagise for a small repeat thread... but seeing as this is still affecting the whole of the western world, I feel it is relevant, and topical.

people obviously have their oppinion's, but maybe not everyone is privy to the above info & videos.

And to just label things that do not conform to official media outlets/government as being mere "conspiracy theories", means nothing, and is just semantics. I like to deal in information and not LABELS.

once again I do not want to offend, or bore anyone. But it is vital that as many people as possible see the information, and make up their own mind: I am not here to TELL you what to believe.

:cool:

[Carlos]

Except for all those other steel framed buildings.

please give me links to multi-story steel framed building that came down into their own basement/footprint, at near free fall speed - WITHOUT THE USE OF EXPLOSIVES. :confused:

it just doesn't happen, or more importantly, couldn't.

[Carlos]

need another testimony?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/090207broughtdown.htm

More Ground Zero Heroes On The Record: Building 7 Was Deliberately Brought Down
Testimony of multiple rescue personnel that they were told Building 7 was going to be imploded means FEMA, NIST, Silverstein Properties and federal government all lied, revelations demand immediate grand jury inquiry into insurance fraud, vindicates call for new independent 9/11 investigation

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet
Friday, February 9, 2007

Two more ground zero emergency rescue personnel are on the record as stating they were told Building 7 was going to be brought down on 9/11 hours before its symmetrical implosion, completely contradicting the official explanation of accidental collapse.

The new revelations provoke urgent questions about how a building was rigged with explosives within hours when such a process normally takes weeks or months and why the decision was taken to demolish the building amidst the chaos of the situation on that day.

Yesterday we reported on the testimony of an anonymous EMT named Mike who told Loose Change producer Dylan Avery that hundreds of emergency rescue personnel were told over bullhorns that Building 7, a 47 story skyscraper adjacent the twin towers that was not hit by a plane yet imploded symmetrically later in the afternoon on 9/11, was about to be "pulled" and that a 20 second radio countdown preceded its collapse.

Shortly after this article was released we uncovered more astounding testimony of ground zero rescue workers who are fully public and on the record in repeating the same claims, that Building 7 was brought down deliberately and that its collapse was not accidental as the government claims.

Indira Singh was a volunteer civilian Emergency Medical Technician at the World Trade Center on September 11th. She was a Senior Consultant for JP Morgan Chase in Information Technology and Risk Management. Singh was responsible for setting up triage sites for the seriously injured and walking wounded. These sites were closed down and consolidated one by one as the day wore on. Appearing on the Pacifica show Guns and Butter, Singh describes her experience to host Bonnie Faulkner. Click here to listen with commentary by Alex Jones.

SINGH: "After midday on 9/11 we had to evacuate that because they told us Building 7 was coming down. If you had been there, not being able to see very much just flames everywhere and smoke - it is entirely possible - I do believe that they brought Building 7 down because I heard that they were going to bring it down because it was unstable because of the collateral damage. That I don't know I can't attest to the validity of that all I can attest to is that by noon or one o'clock they told us we need to move from that triage site up to Pace University a little further away because Building 7 was going to come down or be brought down."

HOST: "Did they actually use the word "brought down" and who was it that was telling you this?"

SINGH: "The fire department. And they did use the words 'we're gonna have to bring it down' and for us there observing the nature of the devastation it made total sense to us that this was indeed a possibility, given the subsequent controversy over it I don't know."

As is discussed elsewhere in this article, the feasibility and logic of bringing the building down on 9/11 is up for debate, but what is not debatable is the fact that Silverstein Properties, NIST, FEMA and the federal government have all knowingly lied in claiming in official reports that the building came down solely as a result of damage from the towers and that the collapse of the building was not aided by means of intentionally placed explosives.

The following video from CNN clearly shows firefighters and police telling the public to get back because Building 7 was about to come down and in the words of the cameraman was about to "blow up."



Former Air Force Special Operations for Search and Rescue, Kevin McPadden traveled to ground zero completely of his own accord and spent the next four days searching through the rubble and nearby buildings for survivors.

On September 9 2006, McPadden told an audience at the Community Church in New York City how while he was stationed in a Red Cross operations center, he was told that Building 7 was going to be brought down. Click here for the audio.

McPADDEN: "They said you know you've got to stay behind this line because they're thinking about taking this building down, they're not sure if it's stable or not, so they were holding a line off because they had knowledge that something was gonna happen. Well, they pushed us back a little bit....a couple of minutes later they started coming down....people started coming back out to the street, I watched five New York City buses jam packed with people wanting to do search and rescue head down there towards Building 7 - people walk out into the middle of the street to see these people off, like bon voyage and right then Building 7 came down."

McPadden then describes the scene as a "stampede" as people ran over each other in their attempts to flee.

The testimony of these individuals meshes with others in confirming that Building 7 was deliberately brought down on the day of 9/11, a fact that eviscerates official investigations into Building 7 as nothing more than part of an orchestrated cover-up.

In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. This building's collapse alone resulted in a payout of nearly $500 million, based on the contention that it was an unforeseen accidental event.

A cursory insight into professional building demolition tells us that experts are required to spend weeks and months planning the demolition of any building, ensuring that the explosives are placed in exactly the right spots, that the collapse will not impact surrounding buildings, and that a myriad of sufficient safety procedures are followed.

To imagine that demolition experts could rig such a huge building amidst the chaos of the day, unsure of whether further attacks were coming, in a matter of hours and bring the building down neatly in its own footprint without afflicting major damage to adjacent buildings is beyond belief.

Even if one entertains the notion that this is within the realm of possibility, the fact is that the federal government, FEMA and NIST and Silverstein Properties are all knowingly lying in claiming that the building collapsed by accident as a result of burning debris from the twin towers.

Now it is established that they lied about Building 7, how can we trust their often changing explanations of the collapse of the twin towers, especially considering the dozens and dozens of eyewitnesses who have gone on the record to report the fact that explosives were seen and heard on all levels of both towers, including underground?

We are being asked to put our faith in either the federal government, who deliberately lied about 9/11 in the very days after the attack in telling emergency workers and firemen that the toxic air was safe to breathe, or the emergency workers and other rescue heroes who risked their lives and are still suffering the consequences of their actions.

This testimony demands an immediate grand jury inquiry into both monolithic insurance fraud, potential manslaughter, and a complete re-appraisal and re-investigation into everything else that happened on 9/11 in an effort to discover what else the government lied about concerning the events of that day and its aftermath.

[EN[i]GMA]

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/42181/

Read.

[Carlos]

thanks enigma, i needed a laugh this evenin.

If your gonna post something, maybe post something that will ADDRESS some of the questions were asking, not just paraphrasing. He says he doesn't have the time/space to answer thing sspecifically - then goes on for how ever many lines in a fake commentary between bush and cheney (y)

It is not the 911 truth moverment's place to come up with a water tight explanantion of what exactly happened that day - as non of us were in on it.
However it is everyone's responsisbility to ask questions of things that just do not add up on dozens and dozens of levels.

Now maybe you should look at this video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwjmqkjwnvQ

who knew WTC7 was going to pulled down - because these firefighter knew it was coming down... and the above testimonies show that the countdown was put out over the radio!!!! proves that people had prior knowledge. i.e inside job.

I was glued to the TV that day over here in UK, and ALL the reporters on the ground/news outets were sayig there had been secondaries (explosions) - people were blown up in subway stations (live interview on main news outlets), and in the basements - this could not have been anything to do with the planes.. but then couple days later, you hear nothing of this. Why?

wake up people.. who would you rather listen to - some journalist who is trying to secure his next paycheck from the media corporations, or firefaighters, and rescure workers who were actually at the scene that day. What do they have to gain from saying this NOTHING, except their final paycheck!! as has happened a few times, people blow the whistle, they lose their jobs.

and to say that thousands of people would have had to of known - why? Operation Northwoods(google it) was kept secret for many many years. Compartmentalism is key to keeping power at the top.. very simple really, only a very few have all the knowledge.

Or that the massive power of the US governement and all it's secret agencies is less likely to have the means to carry this out, rather than some Muslims from Afghanistan is fucking hilarious...

But don't believe anything i say, or a journalist - look at the videos i have put links to in first post, make up your own minds people.

[yeahwho]

GMA']http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/42181/

Read.

I must say i usually avoid these conspiracy threads, that link is money. LMAO. Glad I looked in.

CHENEY: And the Pentagon crash -- we'll have to do it in broad daylight and say it was a plane, even though it'll really be a cruise missile.

BUSH: Wait, why do we have to use a missile?

CHENEY: Because it's much easier to shoot a missile and say it was a plane. It's not easy to steer a real passenger plane into the Pentagon. Planes are hard to come by.

BUSH: But aren't we using two planes for the Twin Towers?

CHENEY: Mr. President, you're missing the point. With the Pentagon, we use a missile, and say it was a plane.

BUSH: Right, but I'm saying, why don't we just use a plane and say it was a plane? We'll be doing that with the Twin Towers, right?

CHENEY: Right, but in this case, we use a missile. (Throws hands up in frustration) Don, can you help me out here?

RUMSFELD: Mr. President, in Washington, we use a missile because it's sneakier that way. Using an actual plane would be too obvious, even though we'll be doing just that in New York.

BUSH: Oh, okay.

[Schmeltz]

Or that the massive power of the US governement and all it's secret agencies is less likely to have the means to carry this out, rather than some Muslims from Afghanistan is fucking hilarious


For a guy who knows all about 9/11, you sure say some weird things: there wasn't a single Afghan involved.

[QueenAdrock]

thanks enigma, i needed a laugh this evenin.

Hahahaha...coming from you. Sigh.

[Carlos]

For a guy who knows all about 9/11, you sure say some weird things: there wasn't a single Afghan involved.

er... wow you got me.. ;-)

I know full well that none were from Afghanistan, which just shows that they even misinformed the US public over this too: they went into afghanistan before the 911 commission, and any inquiery into 911: but weren't going, oh non of the hijackers were from afghanistan, but we need to invade it anyway.

The majority were from Saudi Arabia, why not attack saudi and it's many jihad training camps, cos america would be up shit creek if saudi took all it's investment out of US stock markets.

Maybe you are also aware that at least 9 of the 19 have been found alive and well somewhere in the world. And that Ata was wire 100,000 dollars from the heqad of the ISA pakistan intelligence aganecy, who was meeting with pentagon staff on the morning of 911.

but that's just another coincidence..

seriously, rather than writing a 1 line throw bak, why don't any of you people laughing and jeering at me, chcuking out conspiracy blah blah, actually address some of the serious questions that are being raised.

Please if you have a good explanantion of how firefighters, and policemen knew that WTC7 was "about to blow up.." i'd like to know.

or just how a plane ploughs into the pentagon, when NO PLANE WOULD EVER BE ABLE TO BE IN THE SKY ABOVE WASHINTON WITHOUT FULL PERMISSION. PERIOD NO QUESTIONS NOT BUTS... not to mention cheney was warned about it heading toward pentagon 50 miles out, but gave the standwodn order??!!!! that was a sworn testimony by Minets at the 911 commission, but was left out.. why?

but if yor happy trusting your government which has sent over 3000 soldiers to their death in Iraq over a proven lie, then well not much more to say.

[Schmeltz]

Maybe you are also aware that at least 9 of the 19 have been found alive and well somewhere in the world.


Which ones? I'm aware that several of the hijackers were confused with other men with the same or similar names (difficulties arising in connection with transliterating Arabic names into English) and that there were a couple of cases of falsified or lost identification that aided with these errors. But that was all cleared up as the investigation into the attacks proceeded. You'd think these guys would kick up more of a fuss if they had been wrongfully named as the perpetrators of the biggest terrorist incident in history.


Please if you have a good explanantion of how firefighters, and policemen knew that WTC7 was "about to blow up.." i'd like to know.


As I've said before, there was a lot of chaos and confusion on the scene, with lost of false reports and hyperbole floating around. I imagine the workers on the scene, who are not mythic heroes but fallible human beings like the rest of us, were gripped with the same sort of thing - overwhelmed with the magnitude of their surroundings. Honestly, I would trust the opinion of experts empirically reviewing events after the fact more than I would trust the confused and distorted recollection of events by people on the scene - the first thing I learned when I started studying history is that primary source material composed by witnesses to events is extraordinarily valuable but carries its own set of biases and influences. Proximity does not guarantee accuracy; that comes only after comparative analysis of different perspectives.

Perhaps you would like to explain, instead, why the "heroes" whose word we should never question are threatened with nothing more than losing their jobs when the government was apparently more than willing to knock off three thousand people in the course of this caper. Or how it was possible for these buildings to be covertly wired with explosives - which, as you admit, would have taken weeks of concerted effort by hundreds of personnel - with nobody noticing or giving the game away.

There are lots of unanswered questions about 9/11 and, like any event, it's doubtful that anybody will ever know the full, exact truth. But that doesn't mean these conspiracy theories deserve any serious thought, mang. They add up to even less than the official story. Occam's Razor.

[Carlos]

[QUOTE=Schmeltz]Which ones? I'm aware that several of the hijackers were confused with other men with the same or similar names (difficulties arising in connection with transliterating Arabic names into English) and that there were a couple of cases of falsified or lost identification that aided with these errors. But that was all cleared up as the investigation into the attacks proceeded. You'd think these guys would kick up more of a fuss if they had been wrongfully named as the perpetrators of the biggest terrorist incident in history.

check this out: http://www.welfarestate.com/911/ .......not a case of doubled names, as the photos match. and you really think your press would report that properly. It is so tighly controlled - anything that contradicts the establiished 911 conspiracy - er story - doesn't get a look in.

Regarding people's eyewitness testimony, then yes I agree it is never 100% and everyone has their own slant of preceedings, however the above youtube vid blatently shows people being cleared away from WTC7 just before it came down and they are saying get back get back it's gonna blow, couple this with the long witness testiomony even further up (or here: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...roughtdown.htm), i.e when you get many testimonies saying exactly the same thing, even the live TV news footage on the day corroberated it (all news outlets were reporting explosives going off all around WTC's) then maybe just maybe we should sit up and pay some attention.

Not to mention that it is physically impossile for all 3 towers to have come down at near free fall speed, in their own footprint (every suuport would have had to giveway literally at the exact same time), as it basically means that the whole building spontaneously disintegrated, do you realise how much steel and concrete was beneath the affected areas in WTC1 and 2, not to mention that there is no flamable material within the core (http://members.cox.net/damor1/wtc-core.html), and so no the fire would not have been able to take hold in any way - also steel is an excellent conductor and the girders would have acted as a large radiator dispersing the heat, and not concentrating it.

start to think about it.. honestly, I haved studied match and physics at college, and what we witnessed that day (according to 911 commision + NIST) breaks all natural laws of physics.

Schmeltz have you watched either 911 mysteries(http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...=911+mysteries), or improbable collapse (http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...2&q=Improbable)???
please do if you feel like you are an open minded person, not afraid of possibly being a little uninformed. just because you watch them doesn't make you a conspiracy theorist ;-) as we have freedom of thought still, just about

I just want people to watch these videos, ask themselves/whoever a few questions, then do some research, and some more. then you will at least be able to say I know the other sides of the story...

I'm not here to piss people off, or insult anyone, but if somone doesn't even try to engage in the details of what i am raising and throws out an derrogatory comment, it's pretty low.

lol.. as I am writinfg this I am listening to abc news today on BBC: Feith, part of the pentagon tried to falsify information that Iraq and Al Quaeda were tied in some way.. don't you see they will do anything they needed, to further their goal - re-establish control in the middle east. google CFR and PNAC for more info on the stated goal back in 1999/2000. Without 911, american public would never have aloowed an ivasion of Iraq!!!

[Schmeltz]

Yeah yeah, I already went over all this shit with drizl, so I don't see any need to rehash it here. Suffice to say I just don't buy it, sorry.

[Carlos]

fair enough.. you don't have to read it then... but others may not have looked at any of this.

the point is week after week, the evidence grows, more people come out wiith their testimonies, angles of research are fine turned etc.. etc..

It still affects everything we (the west) are doing - I live in the UK, and we have been pulled into a totally illegal and destructive war in Iraq, and completely fictitious war on "terrorism" which basically has no specific enemy.
Resulting in our Muslim population being seen as terrorists, whcich is enraging them and creating more and more extremism.

Rockefeller even stated that it is nameless enemy and so the war on terror could go for as long as needed.
Tradin Places director Aaron Russon on what Rockefeller told him: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1263677258215075609&hl=en

[QueenAdrock]

fair enough.. you don't have to read it then... but others may not have looked at any of this.

No, everything is in the other 2 or 3 threads that we have about the "hoax" of 9/11.

[EN[i]GMA]

thanks enigma, i needed a laugh this evenin.

If your gonna post something, maybe post something that will ADDRESS some of the questions were asking, not just paraphrasing. He says he doesn't have the time/space to answer thing sspecifically - then goes on for how ever many lines in a fake commentary between bush and cheney (y)

Yes, and you missed the point. He's pointing out the absurdity of the plan, how it doesn't make sense.


It is not the 911 truth moverment's place to come up with a water tight explanantion of what exactly happened that day

Yeah, actually, it is.

It's your responsibility to find out what did happen using available evidence. If you cannot do that, you say "I don't know".

It's very simple: either prove it was the government, or don't. And if you don't prove it was the government (which you can't do), don't assert that it is, simply say "I don't know" because, following from point one, you don't.

It's bankrupt to say "I don't know what happened, but here's what happened", which is what you're doing.

- as non of us were in on it.

But other people were. Thousands of them. Ask one of them.


However it is everyone's responsisbility to ask questions of things that just do not add up on dozens and dozens of levels.

And it's also everyone's responsibility to look up answers.


Now maybe you should look at this video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwjmqkjwnvQ

who knew WTC7 was going to pulled down - because these firefighter knew it was coming down... and the above testimonies show that the countdown was put out over the radio!!!! proves that people had prior knowledge. i.e inside job.

Why would the government take down WTC7, a building that none even knows about or gives a shit about?

Oh, so the owners could collect insurance. So the government orchestrated the largest terror attack in the history of the world so a few people could make some insurance money. Wait, that sounds fucking stupid. I know, there were documents in it that had to be destroyed. But couldn't they have just destroyed them by shredding them or something? Fuck. Fuck. Uhh.

See how bad it sounds when you think about it for 5 seconds?

There's no possible motive to take down WT7 in addition to the previous two towers. In fact, it completely contradicts the previous motive simply BECAUSE it brings up obvious questions. If you're going to commit a crime, you want to bring up as little in the way of distracting evidence that you can, right?


I was glued to the TV that day over here in UK, and ALL the reporters on the ground/news outets were sayig there had been secondaries (explosions) - people were blown up in subway stations (live interview on main news outlets), and in the basements - this could not have been anything to do with the planes.. but then couple days later, you hear nothing of this. Why?

Because they found out those reports were untrue.

See, a perfectly simple, valid explanation that you reject out of hand because of your preconceptions.

And if the media were really the lapdog of the conspiracy, why would they even be allowed to mention these things in the first place, giving people like you evidence? If these were news, you would have either heard more about them OR heard from at least one person in the entire news industry mention the obvious censorship.


wake up people.. who would you rather listen to - some journalist who is trying to secure his next paycheck from the media corporations, or firefaighters, and rescure workers who were actually at the scene that day.

Aren't cops and firefighters employees of the same government that carried out and was complicit in these attacks?

What do they have to gain from saying this NOTHING, except their final paycheck!! as has happened a few times, people blow the whistle, they lose their jobs.

And then write a book and make millions.


and to say that thousands of people would have had to of known - why? Operation Northwoods(google it) was kept secret for many many years.

Apparently it wasn't that good of a secret, now was it?

Compartmentalism is key to keeping power at the top.. very simple really, only a very few have all the knowledge.

Like you?


Or that the massive power of the US governement and all it's secret agencies is less likely to have the means to carry this out, rather than some Muslims from Afghanistan is fucking hilarious...


Schmeltz already handled this one.

What I think, my theory, is that you don't really know as much about this topic as your purport to.


But don't believe anything i say, or a journalist - look at the videos i have put links to in first post, make up your own minds people.

I did.

[Carlos]

So Enigma, your rationale is; because you can't understand why someone does something it can't be true. lol


FACT: the fire department, and police knew that building 7 was coming down.

FACT: it came down into it's own footprint - symetrical (probability of all steel supports failing at the precise same moment = nonexistent)

FACT: you can see the explosions going up the side of WTC7 (watch video below)

FACT: Molten steel found at all 3 trade center buildings after the collpases (hydrocarbon fire cannot melt steel), NASA images on 9-16-01 show hot spots in excess of 800F on the top of the rubble pile where WTC7 was

FACT: people heard and felt explosions - dozens and dozens, including reporters.. (but you have so much faith in your news outlets obviously, that in the days follwing they would have gone against what the govenement sources were breifing them on as to what happened - fair enugh you can believe whatever you like.)

there's more, but these are all you need to be able to blow apart the official conspiracy theory!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWwMoJ_Tfdo

[EN[i]GMA]

So Enigma, your rationale is; because you can't understand why someone does something it can't be true. lol


No.


FACT: the fire department, and police knew that building 7 was coming down.

FACT: No they didn't. Watch your own video. They thought it was coming down, they were warning people that it might, but they didn't know it would. It's like a car wreck, they'll tell people to stay away "because the car could explode." Well, it could. And if it does that would hardly incriminate the police force for blowing up or even demonstrate that they had foreknowledge of the explosion.

In any other example you would agree with me 100% that this sort of conjecture on the officer's parts proves nothing, you just can't realize it for this one. Answer every one of these objections to see why you're a wrong, and are probably an idiot:

Why were there firemen and policemen killed at all if they knew the building was coming down? If you say "not all did", why did only some? If those on video did know, and were in on the plot, why did they warn anyone? They're morally OK with killing 3,000 people, but not a few hundred more? Why make this public and then, in turn, keep it silent, if they truly had knowledge that the buildings were coming down? Are they schizophrenic, busting apart the secret at the most critical and vital moment and then covering up forever after?

None of this makes any sense. Even IF there was a conspiracy, it would be par the course for the 'soldiers on the ground' not to anything about it, wouldn't it?

This video does far more to disprove your claim than prove it. Why can't see you that? Why are you so fucking deluded? I try to remain civil with people like you, but you're just as bad, if not worse, than any religious fanatic.

And don't accuse me of prejudging you, you know I'm absolutely correct, as does everyone here.


FACT: it came down into it's own footprint - symetrical (probability of all steel supports failing at the precise same moment = nonexistent)

How is this incriminating? Wouldn't a group of conspirators want to make it look as unlike a controlled demolition as possible by setting the timers to go off differently, to confuse astute people like yourself?


FACT: you can see the explosions going up the side of WTC7 (watch video below)

No, no you can't. Watch it again.

What you can see, however, is a complete contradiction: they take down the WTC and kill 3000 people but empty WTC7 before 'taking it down'?

Why would Larry Silverstein admit to this on video? Doesn't that implicate them? What's the motivation behind taking down WTC7? Is Silverstein meaning 'pull' as in 'pull out' or 'take down'? I don't know.

And even if they did take it down on purpose, what, if anything, would that prove?


FACT: Molten steel found at all 3 trade center buildings after the collpases (hydrocarbon fire cannot melt steel), NASA images on 9-16-01 show hot spots in excess of 800F on the top of the rubble pile where WTC7 was

It's entirely possible that there were conditions that could create molten steel.

Also, 800F isn't particularly hot for the type of fire in the WTC.


FACT: people heard and felt explosions - dozens and dozens, including reporters.. (but you have so much faith in your news outlets obviously, that in the days follwing they would have gone against what the govenement sources were breifing them on as to what happened - fair enugh you can believe whatever you like.)

There could have been explosions. But again, this directly contradicts a controlled demolition.

In a controlled demolition, all the explosions happen at once, right before the collapse, not at random intervals before it.

Think.


there's more, but these are all you need to be able to blow apart the official conspiracy theory!!


Do I win a prize?

Shit, you're probably what's his name back, reneging on his promise to go away.