who attacked the pentagon?

[hobo knife]

dont know if this link has been posted on another thread...


http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryho...ntagon.php#Main (http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main)


let the impeachment begin.

[<KEY3>]

the pentagram?

I dunno.... Jesus?

[imported_dowmagik]

real men wear baphomets

[The Big Lebowski]

It's actually the Pentagon dude

[xen]

Originally posted by dowmagik@Dec 21 2004, 11:16 AM
real men wear baphomets
Quoted post



i have a baphomet tattoo. i guess i'm a real man and am not even doing laundry!!

[hobo knife]

Originally posted by <KEY3>@Dec 21 2004, 11:13 AM
the pentagram?

I dunno.... Jesus?
Quoted post


haha...yeah...thats who we should have declared war against.

[<KEY3>]

hippies.

[spray_man]

yeh if thats not a conspiracy the popes a rastafarian

[ledzep]

but what happened to the hijacked plane? :confused:

[BROWNer]

somebody posted a video thing on this a few months ago..
well i looked into it quite a bit further and there are waaay
too many witnesses for it to be a missile or whatever else
is claimed. or wait...maybe it was all disinfo too...

[!@#$%]

i finally had time to watch this.

pretty fucking riveting.
as a person who believes the u.s. knows far more about 9/11 than it admits, and a person who believed that a hijacked boeing did hit the pentagon, that was an amazing film.

up to this point, i'd had no idea of the amount of cover up associated with this. i knew the implausibilities, but i had no idea it went this deep.

my ex's neighbor died in that crash.
i would very much like to know what happened to the plane that was "supposedly" hijacked. after all, over a hundred people died on that flight. when did they die? where did they go?

a lot of questions that may never be answered.

i knew some people who said they witnessed it,. and also knew others who had witnessed it..i might have to go interrogate them.



i liked the way the film was put together though, this was good.

[ODS-1]

But if the plane didn't hit the pentagon, where is it? A boeing 757 doesn't vanish without a trace.

But the hole in the pentagon doesn't look like an airplane. If you look at a picture of the twin towers, the holes are clearly in the shape of a 757.

[Herbivore]

so what's the theory connected to the object in question being a missile instead of an airplane? who would've fired this missile?

[hobo knife]

I'm finding some more conflicting info about 9/11...

Section 3: The Fictitious Hijackers

If 19 Arabs hijacked the planes, why are there
no Arabic names on any of the passenger lists?
If they used non-Arabic aliases, which of the
"innocents " on the lists are alleged to be the
hijackers?
3:1 http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.cen...11.victims.html (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA11.victims.html)
Passenger and crew list for AA 11 (first WTC crash.)

3:2 http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.cen...77.victims.html (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html)
AA 77 (Pentagon crash)

3:3
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.cen...75.victims.html (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua175.victims.html)
UAL 175 (2nd WTC crash)

3:4 http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.cen...93.victims.html (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua93.victims.html)
UAL 93 (Pennsylvania crash)

If they are alleged to have been using non-Arabic
aliases (19 obviously Arabic men got on board
using non-Arabic ID, with 100% success rate ?),
why did the FBI claim that they were traced through
the use of credit cards to buy tickets in their own
names?

If 9 of the alleged hijackers were searched before
boarding, as claimed in this article
3:5 http://www.policetalk.com/9_hijackers.html
why is there no airport security footage of them?
How did they (allegedly) get on board with knives,
guns, AND electronic guidance systems, while being
searched, but avoiding security cameras and not
being on the passenger lists?
What aliases were they alleged to be using when
they were searched,and if they were not using
aliases, why are they not on the passenger lists?

[robJ]

911 stuff in another forum (http://www.fantasticforum.com/1res/showthread.php?threadid=7174&highlight=planes)


I was trying to find this other website that showed video footage from the 911 attacks at world trade centers. And were the "investergaters" had blown up a piece of video footage from the plane that hit the second building, and it shows that it didn't have any windows (?)

[Carl Winslow.]

Y'all know 9/11 was a conspiracy financed in an attempt to get MC Hammer's rap carreer re-started. It was the perfect set-up.
http://www.mp3.com/images/cover/200/drf000/f032/f03265ob6df.jpg

[robJ]

conspiracy theorist offers $100,000 prize (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=57420)

[oneeightyone]

it was a plane, it might look like it's small but the pentagon is a massive object, the wheels were still in the section next to my cousins office .

[trackstand]

Originally posted by <KEY3>@Dec 21 2004, 10:44 AM
hippies.
Quoted post

[SteveAustin]

pretty fucking interesting. I'd say it raised some good questions and points.

[ODS-1]

How would a 757 "skid on the ground". I mean, they said that guy didn't have the first clue on how to fly. We're talking a 757 here, that's pretty fucking big.

Here is a 757
http://photos.airliners.net/3e47f84ecd091457b2ecbaf2db4a74a2/41cc6747/middle/3/6/8/741863.jpg

http://photos.airliners.net/b02db1fbce6fe1741b61a063f0ee463d/41cc678d/middle/1/8/7/687781.jpg

[ODS-1]

http://photos.airliners.net/c65606c68e8250c6681f2453503eafc7/41cc6892/middle/1/7/6/729671.jpg
Speaking of planes, look at this. :haha: :haha:

[High Priest]

woah.

[T.T Boy]

i dont think cnn would release the fake passenger names, or the arabic ones, like they have joe jameson, survived by son 4, wife 39, from greenside nevada, theyre not going to put mohammed atta, 41, one child ahmed, and wife abdullah, brought down plane, worked for al quaeda for 12 years, a real career man. come on.

[ledzep]

^^if you count the names on those list you'll discover that the hijackers aren't included. in the AA11 list it says that 92 people were on board bu I only counted like 86 - 87.

[Unemployed]

Originally posted by T.T Boy@Dec 26 2004, 06:35 PM
i dont think cnn would release the fake passenger names, or the arabic ones, like they have joe jameson, survived by son 4, wife 39, from greenside nevada, theyre not going to put mohammed atta, 41, one child ahmed, and wife abdullah, brought down plane, worked for al quaeda for 12 years, a real career man. come on.
Quoted post


the wife's name is abdullah? i didn't know mohammed atta was a faggot.

[robJ]

http://www.rense.com/general61/EPENT.HTM (http://http://www.rense.com/general61/EPENT.HTM)

link on the topic.. Good stuff !!!!!!

[haunts]

http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryho...ntagon.php#Main (http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main)

[BROWNer]

i hate this video. and it's been posted already like 3 times.

[fermentor666]

Originally posted by BROWNer@Jan 23 2005, 07:03 AM
i hate this video. and it's been posted already like 3 times.
Quoted post



Exactly.

[haunts]

sorry about that

[BROWNer]

1 (http://thunderbay.indymedia.org/uploads/in_plane_sight_pentagon_pt1.wmv)
2 (http://thunderbay.indymedia.org/uploads/in_plane_sight_pentagon_pt2.wmv)

another one, more 'investigative' except the central problem all these
no plane theories have is they are effective at pointing out there's no plane,
but none of them make any effort to explain where the plane might have been
or how come hundreds of eyewitnesses SAW a 757 fly over them.

[hobo knife]

^^^

A lot of the "eyewitness accounts" that saw a 757 came from ONE reporter that supposedly talked to all these different "people"... where as a lot of the eyewitness acounts that saw a smaller plane came from several different sources...

And as far as what happened with the plane if it wasn't crashed into the pentagon, thats just obvious. First of all you have to understand who was on each of these four planes...each plane happened to have a very low number of passengers, but an usually high number of avionics specialists. Avionics specialists that worked for private and public agencies that specialize in "remote control aviation" the type of technology that would be needed to fly commercial planes into buildings.

After all four planes are "hi-jacked" they land at an undisclosed location and all the passengers are quickly boarded onto fourth plane that crashed in PA. then the other three "hi-jacked" planes are flown to their prospective targets. only the pentagon plane doesn't respond to the remote device. So then, to complete the pentagon strike Andrews Airforce Base disbatches small military jet to carry out the 757's job.

Some of the people that worked on this project didn't know what they were working on they just knew they had to figure out how to guide commercial airliners into targets with remote control deivces...to keep them from putting two and two together they were boarded onto the flight that crashed in PA and then shot down.

Pretty simple, I'm surprised you didn't know this already.

[mental invalid]

what?!

[villain]

Originally posted by mental invalid@Jan 24 2005, 10:19 AM
what?!
Quoted post

[BROWNer]

Originally posted by mental invalid@Jan 24 2005, 07:19 AM
what?!
Quoted post

[imported_Tesseract]

Originally posted by mental invalid@Jan 24 2005, 10:19 AM
what?!
Quoted post



WHAT!?

[mental invalid]

glad i wasnt the only one flabbergasted...

[ledzep]

Originally posted by El Producto@Dec 3 2004, 08:12 PM
rage is gay???
Quoted post

[heavyLox]

you mean rage is happy-go-lucky?

[BROWNer]

hoboknife..can you post up some links in regards
to the info you posted?

[bigdork]

I wouldnt put anything past this adminstration, if it wasnt for 9/11 Bush would go down as the worst president ever by republicans and democrats alike, and he definatley would not of been relected, The gains that him and the neo-cons have achieved through the tragedy of 9/11 make no scenario far-fetched.

[robJ]

some shit on Flight77 and 911 from www.rense.com (http://www.rense.com) ,


http://www.rense.com/general20/hunt.htm

http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm

http://www.rense.com/general61/things.htm

http://www.rense.com/general32/25.htm

http://www.rense.com/general56/lied.htm

[hobo knife]

Marvin Bush, Oh brother where art thou?

THEORY: Marvin P. Bush, with other co-conspirators, knew and permitted the planting of bombs in the World Trade Center on or around September 8 and 9, 2001 for the purpose of destroying and pulverizing the World Trade Center twin towers on September 11, 2001 and killing several thousand innocent people.



On Thursday before 9-11, building security removed the bomb-sniffing dogs that had been safeguarding the World Trade Center against bombs. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday, bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.



On Saturday and Sunday before 9-11, the power was shut down in the twin towers and unidentified technicians „rewired“ the buildings from the 50th floor upwards; it is obvious that this could have been an opportunity to plant demolition charges to later take the buildings down.



The private security company who was responsible for the security of the World Trade Center on 9-11-1 was Securacom, a Bush family company. On the Board of Directors of Securacom was Marvin P. Bush, one of President George W. Bush’s brothers. This Bush family company was a joint venture with the ruling Al Sabah family of Kuwait.



Barbara Bush has admitted that her son Marvin was in Manhattan at the World Trade Center when the buildings were taken down as if to supervise. A nephew of Barbara Bush, James Pierce, apparently was tipped off and vacated his office in the World Trade Center shortly before the very location of his office was hit and blown up in a huge explosion during one of the attacks.



On Terror Tuesday, 9-11-1, bombs exploded in the World Trade Center and demolished the twin towers, killing over two thousand Americans. This was originally explained by Albert Turi, the New York Fire Department Security Chief, and numerous bomb experts, confirmed by dozens of eyewitnesses of the explosions, the seismic measurements of the explosions, the original version of the mainstream TV videos (meticulously documented by Henrik Melvang, Denmark), the huge explosion blasts that rocked at least one helicopter and blew-up otherwise inexplicably huge dust clouds, etc. The bombs were apparently placed in the World Trade Center under the responsibility of a security company entitled ”Securacom” that was controlled by the Bush family.

http://www.cloakanddagger.ca/media/Grossma...0Apocalypse.htm (http://www.cloakanddagger.ca/media/Grossmann/Four%20Horsemen/066%20Four%20Riders%20of%209-11%20Apocalypse.htm)

[BROWNer]

i was actually looking for links in specific reference to your
matter of fact pronouncements of the pentagon hit..
?

[hobo knife]

Originally posted by BROWNer@Jan 25 2005, 11:21 AM
i was actually looking for links in specific reference to your
matter of fact pronouncements of the pentagon hit..
?
Quoted post


Well, here is the best I can find.




Critics of “conspiracy theorists” have tried to nullify talk of remote controlled planes as being the talk of lunatics. Global Hawk (Raytheon) is a large military aircraft that has flown 7000 miles without a pilot as discussed in this Air Force public affairs article, and is being widely used in the current Iraq war.
(Oct 2001) A FedEx 727 cargo plane lands using remote control technology being developed by Raytheon.
Photo by AP/Raytheon

They also make large commercial planes for FedEx that fly by remote control as reported by the Associated Press. The “success” of this operation depended on the planes reaching their destination. Would the planners (be they Arab or otherwise) trust poorly trained “pilots” when this technology was at their disposal?

Reported only in a Portuguese newspaper, The Portugal News Weekend Edition (May 8, 2002) , a group of US pilots deliberated non-stop for 72 hours in an independent analysis of the 911 story. The inquiry stated, “The so-called terrorist attack was in fact a superbly executed military operation carried out against the USA, requiring the utmost professional military skill in command, communications, and control.” Captain Kent Hill USAF Ret, a friend of Chuck Burlingame (the pilot of Flight 77), confirmed the ability of flying aircraft from the ground. An ex Vietnam fighter pilot said, “Those birds either had a crack fighter pilot in the left seat, or they were being maneuvered by remote control.”

And now for the passengers:

The following information is gathered from many sources posted on the Internet.

Dong Lee, Ruben Ornedo, and Chad Keller all worked for Boeing. Lee also worked for the NSA. Stanley Hall, “the dean of electronic warfare,” (along with Peter Gay, David Kolvacin, and Kenneth Waldie on other flights), worked for Raytheon.

William Caswell was a particle physicist who worked for the Navy. His job was so classified that his family had no clue as to what he did and did not know why he was flying to California.

Charles Droz, LCDR USN Ret, was a software developer for EM solutions (manufacturer of Wide Area Networks).

Robert Penniger worked for BAE Systems, (“an industry leader in flight control systems”), whose Board is comprised of many from the intelligence community. BAE has apparently removed their Board of Directors page, but it list a "who's who" of high level connections to the CIA, DARPA, and NSA.

The Outside Directors list read as follows:
[The following Outside Directors were not on Flight 77]

Richard J. Kerr
former Deputy Director of Central Intelligence

Mr. Kerr served in the U.S. Intelligence community for 32 years - from September 1960 until March 1992. He started as a country analyst in the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and ended his career as the senior professional intelligence officer in the U.S. government serving as Deputy Director of Central Intelligence.

Dr. William Schneider, Jr.
former Under Secretary State for Security, Science and Technology

Prior to serving on the board, Dr. Schneider was formerly Under Secretary of State for Security Assistance, Science and Technology (1982-1986). He served as Associate Director for National Security and International Affairs at the Office of Management and Budget (198l-2) prior to being nominated as Under Secretary by the President.

Dr. Robert S. Cooper
former Director, DARPA

Dr. Cooper is currently President, CEO, Director and co-founder of Atlantic Aerospace Electronics Corporation. From 1981 to 1985, Dr. Cooper was Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Technology and simultaneously held the position of Director for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). As Assistant Secretary, he was principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense on the allocation of Department resources to research, exploratory development and advanced development projects.

General Anthony C. Zinni (Ret)
former Commander-in-Chief, CENTCOM

Gen. Zinni was formerly Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Central Command. While in the Marine Corps he held numerous command and staff assignments that include platoon, company, battalion, regimental, Marine expeditionary unit, and Marine expeditionary force command. His staff assignments included service on battalion, regimental, division, base, and service staffs in operations, training, special operations, counterterrorism, and manpower billets. Gen. Zinni most recently served as the United States Special Envoy to the Middle East.

General Kenneth A. Minihan (Ret)
former Director National Security Agency; Central Security Service

LtGen Minihan served more than thirty-three years of active commissioned service to the nation before retiring from the U.S. Air Force in 1999. On his final tour of duty, he served as the 14th Director of the National Security Agency/Central Security Service, a combat support agency of the Department of Defense with military and civilian personnel stationed worldwide. As Director, he was the senior uniformed intelligence officer in the Department of Defense. He also served as the Director of The Defense Intelligence Agency.

Robert L. Prestel
former Deputy Director, National Security Agency

Mr. Prestel served as Deputy Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) from 1990 - . He was the senior civilian presiding over this Defense Agency whose principal missions are the production of foreign Signals Intelligence and the protection of official U.S. Government communications and information systems.
[Didn't want to you get confused about who were the fallen passengers]

Back to More Passengers

Robert Ploger and his wife were added “late” to the original CNN passenger list. He is the son of Major General Robert R Ploger USA, Ret, another “flag” link. The other “late” addition was Sandra Teague, a physical therapist at Georgetown University Hospital.

John Sammartino and Leonard Taylor worked at Xontech (missile defense), another company connected to the intelligence community, also with ties to Boeing.

Vicki Yancey worked for Vreedenberg Corp, yet another company connected to the intelligence community. Her father describes her death as a “planned murder.” Her widower works for Northrup-Grumman.

Mary Jane Booth was in a position to know what was going on at Dulles Airport as secretary for American Airlines general manager.

John Yamnicky, 71, Capt USN Ret, was a defense contractor for Veridian who had done a number of “black ops,” according to his son.

The physicians, lawyers, biotech representatives, and “human interest” victims who were aboard, could also provide important clues, but in the interest of space, we will save for future consideration.

Many readers recall a particular Fox Television TV show called “The Lone Gunman” which was aired on March 2, 2001. In the show, the bad guys control a passenger airplane by remote control with intentions of flying it into the World Trade Center. The villains were from the arms industry; the motive being to inflame the public and thereby increase arms sales to use against “terrorists.” Life indeed imitates art. Here is the synopsis:

It has been reported that some people were warned not to fly that day. One was reported to be Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco. Another was Muslim author Salman Rushdie. The person on that flight MOST likely to be warned was Robert Speisman. He was an executive at Lazare Kaplan, a diamond merchant, and son in law of Maurice Templesman. Templesman was Jackie Kennedy’s long time lover and is highly connected accoring to Time Magazine. Time also reported about about his “special access” to the National Security Council. He has also “stepped out” with Madeleine Albright.

I attempted on three occasions to obtain a final passenger list from American Airlines. They refuse to give a list and in fact won’t even verify that they gave the first list to CNN. Since the list is in the public domain, I find it curious that they would not take ownership nor provide a current, “correct” list.

Would it even be necessary to “lure” all expendables onto the designated death flights? Why not just grab those you want to get rid of and then slip them into the pile later? Have you seen an interview with the check-in personnel for the flights who can tell us who actually got on any of these flights? Not a chance. In fairness, Washington, D.C. and it's suburbs draw a great number of contractors for the military and intelligence communities in their normal course of business. It may be mere coincidence that these passengers were all on the same flight; however; the government refuses to release information which would relieve our concerns.

[POIESIS]

...L-I-N-K-S.

[POIESIS]

hello?

[hobo knife]

http://home.att.net/~professorboris/SPECTR...eret_Matkal.htm (http://home.att.net/~professorboris/SPECTRE/Sayeret_Matkal.htm)

a little info on the anti-terror "israeli hi-jack team" that helped out on 911

[POIESIS]

dude, are you trying to drive me bonkers?
while the above link may be interesting, you still haven't addressed
your initial post with any links or evidence..
these other links are peripheral and do not confirm a whole.
i'm sorry to keep bothering you, but unless you were being sarcastic,
i don't see the obviousness of it..and regrettably, i don't have the
time, patience or motivation to trawl the hundreds of 9/11 conspiracy
sites to find reference to your claims..claims i haven't read anywhere
during a time when i was trawling these types of sites.
why can't you just provide a couple of links backing up your initial
claims? you must have read it somewhere, right?

[MAGS156]

this is what happend to the plane when it hit the pentagon

http://www.filecabi.net/video/planewall.html

that is why there is nothing left

[insane30]

good link mags......really makes it clear what couldve happened to the plane but then again with the pentagon it wasnt that perfect of a crash, or so they say

[Dawood]

even with that, the hole is not big enough for a jet that size to fit in, It's a weird thing, it is.

[Stereotype V.001]

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/opssecurity/case_studies/pentagon911_files/image014.jpg
http://membrane.com/news/petagonfromair.jpg
Looks pretty big to me. If you look at the wall in the video that was designed to "move and absorb energy" it wasn't even completely destroyed, so I think a blast resistant wall for one of the most secure buildings in the world might have been a little resistant.

[I.C.Shadow]

Oprah did it.

wonk.

[Dawood]

Here is a crystal clear photo of the actual damage done to the building.

http://911truth.tripod.com/1a.jpg

Here is an image of a 757 compared to the damage scene. It appears that the wings and tail section extend beyond the area of the damage. You will also see the entry and exit hole after the impact.

http://911truth.tripod.com/3c.jpg

http://911truth.tripod.com/hole1.jpg

http://911truth.tripod.com/hole2.jpg

This image shows firefighters spraying foam on the building prior to the collapse of that section of the wall.

http://911truth.tripod.com/4.jpg

The next image highlights the hole supposedly created by a 757 slamming into the building

http://911truth.tripod.com/4a.jpg

Here we compare images of before and after the collapse.

http://911truth.tripod.com/5.jpg

theres more and it's very interesting

http://911truth.tripod.com/pentagon.html


Global Hawk hit the Pentagon?

[BURLAP]

if it wasn't a plane, then what happened to the people on that flight?
and what about all the eye witnesses who saw a plane cross in front of them on
the highway and slam into the pentagon?

[Dawood]

Originally posted by BURLAP@Jan 29 2006, 02:37 AM
if it wasn't a plane, then what happened to the people on that flight?
and what about all the eye witnesses who saw a plane cross in front of them on
the highway and slam into the pentagon?
Quoted post



A global hawk is a plane, and as for the people on the flight??

I don't know, they make Jimmy Hoffa and Lucky Luciano disappear
as easy as spaghatti and meatballs on Bensonhurst in Brooklyn.
I don't have the answers, bro, Just interesting stuff thats all.

[!@#$%]

on TV this morning i saw three people interviewed who were originally going to be on flight 93 that crashed in PA but missed thier flights or changed their minds

interesting too

[hobo knife]

oh man...

I probably got myself on all types of gov't watch lists with all the research I did on this a year ago...

There are pretty good arguments supporting both the official(officialy bullshit)story and lots of the other explanations of what happened.

Although in my mind there are some questions that the official story just can't explain. All the "conspiracy theories" may not be 100% true but neither is the official story, therefore the gov't has something to hide; most likely their involvement. I don't think the absence of the plane is such a big issue...it's other things....such as why didn't the terrorists find out that section of the pentagon was empty? all that planning just to attack some empty offices. And why did they circle the pentagon and make a very difficult descent and bring the "757" within 10 feet of the ground to strike the bottom floor of the outer ring? They approached from the north and saw the pentagon but decided to circle around to hit the empty south side?? How could this pilot with no flying experience pull that off? Why did our defenses fail? we had over an hour to deploy fighter jets around our capital when we were obviously under attack, there is an airforce base responsible for defending washington just a mile or two away from the pentagon, yet with four planes hijacked we didn't put fighter jets over DC? then they start flying into buildings and there is one headed towards DC and we still didn't have any fighter jets. bullshit. ...Then whats even better is, we were so slow to defend the pentagon, but yet within minutes the fucking cia collected every video camera that could have gotten footage of the attack. ...hahahah.... how stupid do you have to be to believe the official story????

[bobthemothafuckinbuilder]

LOL, this is the stupidest fucking post ever. Don't you think that if indeed it was something else that hit the pentagon osama wouldn't tell us? Get real. It was a plane.

[hobo knife]

haha..oh, yeah, great point! Thanks for putting an end to the debate, you're right...the fact that osama bin laden hasn't come forward and explained to us what it was that hit the pentagon explains everything.... It's awesome that you don't have to argue any other point


...if it wasn't a plane then obviously Osama would tell us what it was. end of discussion.

[Stereotype V.001]

Originally posted by hobo knife+Jan 30 2006, 01:53 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (hobo knife - Jan 30 2006, 01:53 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'> I don't think the absence of the plane is such a big issue...it's other things....such as why didn't the terrorists find out that section of the pentagon was empty? all that planning just to attack some empty offices.
Quoted post
[/b]
Thats alot of dead people for an empty building. (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/pentagon.victims.html)

Originally posted by hobo knife@Jan 30 2006, 01:53 PM
How could this pilot with no flying experience pull that off?
Quoted post

Flight experience of 9-11 hijackers. (http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/staff_statement_4.pdf)

Originally posted by hobo knife@Jan 30 2006, 01:53 PM
Why did our defenses fail? we had over an hour to deploy fighter jets around our capital when we were obviously under attack, there is an airforce base responsible for defending washington just a mile or two away from the pentagon, yet with four planes hijacked we didn't put fighter jets over DC? then they start flying into buildings and there is one headed towards DC and we still didn't have any fighter jets. bullshit.
Quoted post

You can't magically have fighter jets in the air within a few hours, nevermind a matter of minutes, to shoot down civilian air liners that are supposedly hi-jacked (hindsight is 20-20 blah blah, I'm sure you would have made the right call if you were in charge of shit). Its not going to happen.

Originally posted by hobo knife@Jan 30 2006, 01:53 PM
yet within minutes the fucking cia collected every video camera that could have gotten footage of the attack.
Quoted post

Prove it.

<!--QuoteBegin-hobo knife@Jan 30 2006, 01:53 PM
There are pretty good arguments supporting both the official(officialy bullshit)story
Quoted post
[/quote]
http://images.art.com/images/-/You-Got-Served-double-sided--C10122346.jpeg
OOOHHH SNAP!!! YA'LL MUST HAVE BEEN DOIN SOME MAD OBJECTIVE RESEARCH WITHOUT YOUR MIND PREVIOUSLY MADE UP, PIMPIN!! No seriously, I commend you on your reasearch. Good job. It all made alot of sense, and those links proving your statements wrong that I found after 30 seconds on google are pretty hard to find. Teh govermentz is teh illes police statez!!11!!11oneone!!11eleven!!1!

[hobo knife]

haha, whoa, what are you 12?

[Stereotype V.001]

Uhhhh, barely, I'm almost 13.

[hobo knife]

Originally posted by Stereotype V.001@Jan 30 2006, 04:44 PM

You can't magically have fighter jets in the air within a few hours, nevermind a matter of minutes, to shoot down civilian air liners that are supposedly hi-jacked (hindsight is 20-20 blah blah, I'm sure you would have made the right call if you were in charge of shit). Its not going to happen.




An example of how the air defense network normally responds to domestic emergencies is illustrated by the well-reported 1999 case of Payne Stewart's Lear jet. When the golfer's jet failed to respond to air traffic controller communications, F-16 interceptors were quickly dispatched. According to an Air Force timeline, a series of military planes provided an emergency escort to Payne's stricken Learjet starting about 20 minutes after contact with his plane was lost.

http://images.art.com/images/-/You-Got-Served-double-sided--C10122346.jpeg

I guess you should have done more research involving flight interceptions before "you served me" with your favorite movie.

Prove the CIA collected all the video of the crash? haha...ok, I'll just ask them to release some more footage...maybe this time they'll release more than 5 frames of some shitty security camera 200 yards away.


your 30 seconds of googling produced some shit from the 911 commission and some cnn list of casualties? And can you honestly say that when you googled those links your mind wasn't previously made up? I didn't say arguments supporting the official story were hard to find, even someone as un-biased as yourself managed to find them in 30 seconds.

[bobthemothafuckinbuilder]

The plane that hit the pentagon was aimed at the Naval intel section which was heading the intel on al-Qeida. The freedom of information act allowed them to know exactly where that section was.

The pentagon was in fact made to withstand rocket attacks. A plane is much different than a rocket. I'm not going to explain this because I'm drunk and it's pointless cause all of uz are still going to think that bush sent an empty plane into empty offices or whatever the fuck most of this nonsense you're talking about is.

[Stereotype V.001]

So apparently you didn't realize the "you got served" poster was a joke? You have a terrible sense of humor...

No, I have done no research on flight intercepting. I am aware of the leer jet case only because that’s the second time its been regurgitated on here, and I also would like to point out they didn’t shoot the jet down. Do you recall a while back when a student pilot drove into Washington’s airspace on accident and everyone was evacuated? They didn’t have fighter jets up until the pilot had already turned around. But I was simply pointing out that the decision to destroy commercial air liners that are possibly hi-jacked and still carrying civilians isn't going to be made within a matter of minutes. During the hijackings on the morning of 9-11 there were literally thousands of planes still flying in American airspace as well.

And yes, I can honestly say that when I googled the claims you presented as facts I had an open mind. I only typed in key words from your claims to find if there was any proof behind them, which there was not. If the results had came back that there were no deaths in the pentagon from the 9-11 attacks, I would think you are correct in saying that the buildings were empty. If I had not already known that the 9-11 hijackers had gone to flight school in Florida, and seen their graduation photo, then I would agree that the prospect of someone with no flight experience operating an air liner and accurately crashing it is far fetched. And my point of asking you to prove that the CIA stole all the footage was to point out you had none other than your own assumptions and speculation.

Want to think the CNN casualty list is lying to you, feel free. Don't want to believe the findings of the 9-11 commission? Go right ahead. It seems that since conventional wisdom, reputable news sources, and the bi-partisan group put together to review 9-11 disagree with your far fetched theories, you have to imply that the “official story� is some how corrupted and wrong (officially BULLSHIT LOLOLOLOLzzz!!omfg). My point in posting those links was to point out your claims are not based on any facts, and therefore your “research� was probably spent on the same ultra left wing sites you get all of your talking points from, and possibly taking unhealthy amounts of LSD. Save it for when the college midterms come brah.

Post proof that the pentagon was empty, that the hijackers had no flight experience, the media and 9-11 commission are all lying/bullshit, the CIA stole all the footage in the area, and all of the other claims you posted and prove me wrong. Please. I want to know about the “truth� that I have been repeatedly assured “is out there.�

[Stereotype V.001]

Originally posted by POIESIS@Feb 7 2005, 04:43 PM
dude, are you trying to drive me bonkers?
while the above link may be interesting, you still haven't addressed
your initial post with any links or evidence..
these other links are peripheral and do not confirm a whole.
i'm sorry to keep bothering you, but unless you were being sarcastic,
i don't see the obviousness of it..and regrettably, i don't have the
time, patience or motivation to trawl the hundreds of 9/11 conspiracy
sites to find reference to your claims..claims i haven't read anywhere
during a time when i was trawling these types of sites.
why can't you just provide a couple of links backing up your initial
claims? you must have read it somewhere, right?
Quoted post


This is my favorite part of this thread. The last post on here before it was recently revived was you being repeatedly asked for links to provide evidence for your claims, and you being unable to respond with them and eventually ignoring it all together. Its pretty hilarious, and all you have to do is scroll up. Well......do you have any links? Or do you just make this stuff up as you go along?

[Dawood]

Stereotype, Do you get paid to do this?
Seriously, what do you think? Do you think theres a slight possibility that there are govt. trained bloggers and forum crawlers who get paid to push the govt. agenda on forum boards. I don't think that's far fetched.

[bobthemothafuckinbuilder]

Why do you attack somones character instead of providing some proof? He's trying to do what I'm trying to do. Make you guys realize how incredible fucking stupid you are even though you think you are so smart. In this world you are not #1 and you don't know about any of these things. He asked you for proof... now show it. Especially about the 9/11 commission one.

[hobo knife]

Here is the relevant excerpt from 'Meet the Press' Sept. 16 2001:

"Mr. Russert: What's the most important decision you think he made during the course of the day?

"Vice Pres. Cheney: Well, the--I suppose the toughest decision was this question of whether or not we would intercept incoming commercial aircraft.

"Mr. Russert: And you decided?

"Vice Pres. Cheney: We decided to do it. We'd, in effect, put a flying combat air patrol up over the city; F-16s with an AWACS, which is an airborne radar system, and tanker support so they could stay up a long time...

"It doesn't do any good to put up a combat air patrol if you don't give them instructions to act, if, in fact, they feel it's appropriate.

"Mr. Russert: So if the United States government became aware that a hijacked commercial airline[r] was destined for the White House or the Capitol, we would take the plane down?

"Vice Pres. Cheney: Yes. The president made the decision...that if the plane would not divert...as a last resort, our pilots were authorized to take them out. Now, people say, you know, that's a horrendous decision to make. Well, it is. You've got an airplane full of American citizens, civilians, captured by...terrorists, headed and are you going to, in fact, shoot it down, obviously, and kill all those Americans on board?

"...It's a presidential-level decision, and the president made, I think, exactly the right call in this case, to say, "I wished we'd had combat air patrol up over New York."
--NBC, 'Meet the Press' 16 September 2001 (1) Alternate link: http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/nbcmp.htm


And, you're right, I mistakenly said that wedge of the pentagon was empty... that's not true.
That's only because I haven't even thought about all this stuff since I first looked into it... here's some of the info I was getting at.

"This was a terrible tragedy, but I'm here to tell you that if we had not undertaken these efforts in the building, this could have been much, much worse," Evey said. "The fact that they happened to hit an area that we had built so sturdily was a wonderful gift."

The rest of the Pentagon would not have fared as well.

The fire that swept through the building caused the greatest damage in an unrenovated section with no sprinkler system, heavy windows or steel reinforcements. But many of the offices there were empty in anticipation of the renovation.

While perhaps 4,500 people normally would have been working in the hardest-hit areas, because of the renovation work only about 800 were there Tuesday, officials said. [LATimes]http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-091601pentagon,0,2818328.story


oh and I also mistakenly said the CIA collected video after the crash, it was the FBI,

Velasquez says the gas station's security cameras are close enough to the Pentagon to have recorded the moment of impact. "I've never seen what the pictures looked like," he said. "The FBI was here within minutes and took the film."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...repentagon.html (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/12/1211_wirepentagon.html)

I don't know if they collected other videos, I read somewhere they confiscated a hotel video that showed the crash...but the pentagon had a lot more cameras, not just one. They had cameras with better vantage points that would have shown the crash in clear view, not to mention whatever videos the fbi confiscated minutes after the crash. So why did they only release 5 frames from one security camera? And I love the way you took a shot at the freedom of information act for allowing the terrorists to target a section of the pentagon...I'm sure Rush would join you in disgust. And LSD? College Exams?

"You can't magically have fighter jets in the air within a few hours, nevermind a matter of minutes"

Do you make this stuff up as you go along? Or is this a fact that you can back up with links? Or since your a grunt in the military you just know stuff like this already, bra.


I will admit that I wasn't aware they had FAA pilots licenses, and they had logged so many hours of flight simulator training. Although, the pentagon crash has been called a very difficult stunt and would require a seasoned pilot, not someone called incompetent by his flight school instructors.

[Stereotype V.001]

The date from the “meet the press interview� is' Sept. 16 2001, several days after the 9-11 attacks. Giving them a lot longer to make the decision to shoot down a civilian aircraft than the few minutes they had when they realized 9-11 was a terrorist attack in progress. Had you fully read my statement, I said that the decision to take out a commercial air liner within a few minutes is not feasible. I don’t doubt that they eventually would decide to, but some air force traffic controller and his supervisor aren’t going to make that call on their own.

In regards to the FBI stealing all the film, I think that they would like to see the footage of the attack and analyze it themselves. But again, you could not prove that ALL of the footage in the area was taken by government officials like you claimed, and instead you could only prove one case. That case was also government property (taken from your link: “His gas station, open only to Department of Defense personnel�) therefore it is perfectly legal for the government to take their own footage. Had they not taken any footage, I’d be willing to bet you would be saying their lack of interest is sufficient proof of some sort of conspiracy.

Originally posted by hobo knife+Jan 31 2006, 10:37 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (hobo knife - Jan 31 2006, 10:37 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>And I love the way you took a shot at the freedom of information act for allowing the terrorists to target a section of the pentagon...I'm sure Rush would join you in disgust.
Quoted post
[/b]

I love it too. Me and Rush do oxy together before the midterms every year. My mommy pays for it of course.

Originally posted by hobo knife@Jan 31 2006, 10:37 AM
"You can't magically have fighter jets in the air within a few hours, never mind a matter of minutes"

Do you make this stuff up as you go along? Or is this a fact that you can back up with links? Or since your a grunt in the military you just know stuff like this already, bra.
Quoted post


Selective reading much? My full quote was “You can't magically have fighter jets in the air within a few hours, never mind a matter of minutes, to shoot down civilian air liners that are supposedly hi-jacked.� I know they can have fighter jets in the air very quickly, but like stated before they are not going to make the decision shoot down a commercial air liner in a short period of time. If you think they would immediately shoot down a commercial airliner that is supposedly hijacked within 15 minutes, good for you. And the correct spelling is “brah�, a “bra� is an piece of garment females use to prevent the saggage of fun bags.

Originally posted by hobo knife@Jan 31 2006, 10:37 AM
Although, the pentagon crash has been called a very difficult stunt and would require a seasoned pilot, not someone called incompetent by his flight school instructors.
Quoted post


Don’t you think the flight instructors, who didn’t have any red flags go up when their students did not want to learn how to land, are maybe, just maybe trying to make themselves look better? Naaaah.

<!--QuoteBegin-hobo knife@Jan 31 2006, 10:37 AM
And, you're right, I mistakenly said that wedge of the pentagon was empty... that's not true.
I will admit that I wasn't aware they had FAA pilots licenses, and they had logged so many hours of flight simulator training.
Quoted post
[/quote]
Now there is a surprise.

[hobo knife]

Originally posted by Stereotype V.001+Jan 31 2006, 02:28 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Stereotype V.001 - Jan 31 2006, 02:28 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>The date from the “meet the press interview� is' Sept. 16 2001, several days after the 9-11 attacks. Giving them a lot longer to make the decision to shoot down a civilian aircraft than the few minutes they had when they realized 9-11 was a terrorist attack in progress. Had you fully read my statement, I said that the decision to take out a commercial air liner within a few minutes is not feasible. I don’t doubt that they eventually would decide to, but some air force traffic controller and his supervisor aren’t going to make that call on their own.
Quoted post
[/b]

Cheney is saying they made that decision on the day of the attacks, they did deploy fighter jets, and the fighter jets did supposedly have orders to destroy an airliner as a last resort. They happened to have deployed the fighter jets too late.

Originally posted by Stereotype V.001@Jan 31 2006, 02:28 PM
In regards to the FBI stealing all the film, I think that they would like to see the footage of the attack and analyze it themselves. But again, you could not prove that ALL of the footage in the area was taken by government officials like you claimed, and instead you could only prove one case. That case was also government property (taken from your link: “His gas station, open only to Department of Defense personnel�) therefore it is perfectly legal for the government to take their own footage. Had they not taken any footage, I’d be willing to bet you would be saying their lack of interest is sufficient proof of some sort of conspiracy.
Quoted post


I don't have to prove they confiscated all the film the simple fucking fact that no film was released is proof. If they didn't confiscate all the film then why didn't some of it get released to the media? Why wouldn't they release the footage from the gas station?

Originally posted by Stereotype V.001@Jan 31 2006, 02:28 PM
Selective reading much? My full quote was “You can't magically have fighter jets in the air within a few hours, never mind a matter of minutes, to shoot down civilian air liners that are supposedly hi-jacked.� I know they can have fighter jets in the air very quickly, but like stated before they are not going to make the decision shoot down a commercial air liner in a short period of time.
Quoted post


If you know they can have fighter jets in the air that fast then why didn't they have them in the air an hour and a half after the first planes were hijacked?

<!--QuoteBegin-Stereotype V.001@Jan 31 2006, 02:28 PM
Don’t you think the flight instructors, who didn’t have any red flags go up when their students did not want to learn how to land, are maybe, just maybe trying to make themselves look better? Naaaah.
Quoted post
[/quote]

Of course. Why the fuck does that make the flight instructors look better? "Yeah they were really bad pilots, they didn't even want to learn how to land, but we passed them anyway." That really doesn't make any sense. Wouldn't they say the pilots were exceptional and the fact they didn't want to learn how to land was overlooked because of their skill?

[bobthemothafuckinbuilder]

The reason that you didn't see the film was because before it was seen it was deemed as "Top Secret" requiring for you to have a certain US security clerance before you were allowed to see it. I guess the thousands of people who saw that a plane hit the pentagon were all liars and the 12 people who said that it didn't look like a plane are the only ones who weren't brainwashed by the government to lie.

[YourSistersAssCookie]

I know one thing for sure.
That shit wasnt me

[ifaykedmyowndeth]

i live near dc and im telling you there is no way a plane that big could land then run into the building at that angle or even sweep around and do it , theres not enough space there. the highway is so close to it. and oen ting is yes fighter jets supposivley are supposed to follow a commercial jet if it was gone off course for more than 15 minutes without proper communication... not shoot it down but for precautionary reasons.

[Sparoism]

BYU’s Dr. Steven Jones Blows the Roof off a Utah Auditorium

by Philip Sherman Gordon

On Wednesday, February 1, a quiet, “churchy-looking� gentleman in a white shirt and tie walked into a packed auditorium on the campus of Utah Valley State College and electrified the room like a rock star. The 150-seat auditorium was filled to capacity, with every seat occupied, and people sitting in the aisles from the stage floor to the back of the room. Video cameras on tripods lined the back row. Two documentary-film crews were in attendance, in addition to the school’s camera crew, and various independent journalists. Seven “spill-over� rooms, with seating for 40-50 each, were also filled to capacity. On this very conservative campus (in the most conservative county in the most conservative state in the union), where community leaders pulled out all the stops in 2004 to prevent Michael Moore from speaking as part of his anti-Bush, pro-Kerry “Slacker Uprising Tour,� Dr. Steven Jones, this pious professor from the Mormon Church-owned Brigham Young University, calmly, gently, gave a simple physics lesson on the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings, the implications of which awed the audience with a sense of world-historical significance, and implied an indictment of the present administration so utterly devastating that it made Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 look like a Bush apologia.

Dr. Jones argues that the physics behind the government’s explanation of the collapse of the Twin Towers on September 11 do not make sense, and that a better (and perhaps only) explanation for their collapse was that they were demolished, exactly the way structural engineers bring down large buildings, by pre-positioned explosive devices set off in precise sequences. He argues that the 650 degree Celsius temperature of burning jet fuel would not have been hot enough to even bend the steel girders of the WTC Towers, let alone to melt or evaporate them, as recovered beams indicate. And even if it was hot enough to evaporate the steel, the towers should not have collapsed as they did, pancaking so perfectly into their own footprints. On the rare times when such structures have failed (always due to earthquakes), they have toppled over sideways. The towers would have had to have been perfectly sliced, at every point along a horizontal plane at exactly the same instant, for something even resembling a pancaking effect to occur. And even if they did somehow pancake perfectly into their own footprints due to a structural failure, they would not have done it in the time it took for them to collapse, falling at essentially the speed of an apple dropped from the top of one of the towers, with nothing between it and the ground but thin air. The steel and concrete in the floors that collapsed should have taken some measurable time to break, and thus slowed the collapse somewhat as it unfolded. And even if it did collapse, at super speed, phwack phwack phwack, floor by floor, as fast as an apple falling through the air, impelled by the weight of the decapitated structure above it, its solid steel frame severed like a head by a flaming guillotine, that does not explain the molten steel seen at the Ground Zero clean-up site many days after the event. What could have caused such heat? asked Professor Jones.

And on it went, point by point, for almost two hours. Nothing about the physics of “what we know� about 9/11 seemed to add up. And all that’s not to mention the mysterious collapse of the forgotten WTC-7, the third steel-frame building that imploded due to fire, not only that day, but in the history of architectural design--the building that was not hit by a plane, that was surrounded by other buildings equally impacted but structurally undamaged by the collapse of the towers, that, with no jet fuel or violent impact, but allegedly due to a small number of scattered “debris fires,� collapsed, pancaking perfectly into its own footprint, looking exactly like video images of buildings being demolished by pre-positioned explosive devices. Playing the one available video of WTC-7 collapsing at slow speed, Dr. Jones used his laser pointer to indicate the explosive “squibs� clearly seen shooting their way up the sides of the building as it collapsed from the top center down. He showed still images of similar micro-explosions on the sides of the Twin Towers, with steel beams clearly visible, ejected out of the sides of the buildings, ahead of the dust, blown out before the above portions collapsed.

It is a devastating presentation, and one could feel the disequilibrium of 150 minds reeling at once. The defining moment of contemporary American experience suddenly lost its definition. What is the meaning of 9/11? What really happened that day? If these things are true, the implications clearly point to some kind of “inside job� involving the government of the United States of America. (The Department of Defense, the FBI, and the CIA all had offices in the mysteriously collapsed WTC-7. Is it reasonable that outside terrorists could have infiltrated that building and filled it with explosives? ) If the WTC was brought down by pre-positioned explosive devices, somehow facilitated and covered up by the government, it would be the most audacious conspiracy in human history. When before have so many people been so spectacularly bamboozled, with so much death and destruction, and such massive implications for geo-politics? Never, that’s when.

And that is the problem Dr. Jones is facing with his research. People have knee-jerk reactions to “conspiracy theories,� at least to the ones that do not make it into their established and trusted news outlets. And the mainstream media, so far, despite a blip or two in the New York Times, is taking a pass on this story. Yes, my skeptical friends believe that the Bush administration cynically smeared the war records of both John Kerry and John McCain during the 2000 presidential election through the use of shill agencies. Yes, they believe there was suppression of black voters in Florida, and other schemes to cheat their way into the White House in the 2000 election. Yes, they believe the administration conspired to rig the intelligence they used to justify their invasion of Iraq. Yes, if they are regular readers of The New Yorker, they believe that the election fraud was worse in 2004, with rigged ballot machines, in Ohio in particular, being used to great effect. And, yes, they believe in massive wrong-doing and cover-up regarding October Surprise and the Iran/Contra affair, as well as the CIA-orchestrated overthrows of democracies in Chile and Iran, to name only two well-known examples. But no, they don’t believe in conspiracy theories.

These are hardcore leftists who refuse to even entertain the question of whether science supports the conclusion that the planes brought the towers down. “Too many people would have to know about it for them to get away with it,� one friend said. “They’re not that smart,� said another. “It’s just not plausible,� said a third. The issues raised by Professor Jones are not breaking along standard political fissures. People’s relative amounts of skepticism and credulity, rather than their political affiliations, seem to determine their openness to giving the professor’s analysis a hearing. Jones himself claims to have been a lifelong Republican, but now affiliates with no political party. The audience Wednesday night was definitely not the usual suspects of progressive professors and pierced and tattooed activists and students who regularly gather to share criticism of the President, although there were a few of those, too. Mostly, they looked like a cross-section of average middle-Americans. But by the end of the evening, it is no exaggeration to say that most had become political radicals, not of the left and the right, but of the right and the wrong.

------------------------------------

I know this is a little off the subject, but it's something I'vebeen saying all along.

I dated an building engineer for a while, and she showed me a lot of um, "independent research" that her firm did that backs this up.

I'm sure someone has a great answer to this...I'm not contesting that planes flew into the WTC buildings, but if the Pentagon didn't collapse, why did the Towers fall into their own footprints....not to mention WTC-7 (which everyone seems to have forgotten about)?

NOTHING HIT WTC-7, AND IT CAVED IN DUE TO A FIRE?

Even wood frame buildings don't do this.

[CACashRefund]

any visuals to back this up?

hell i can write a paragraph saying the exact opposite


proof sparo, proof...

[Sparoism]

Yeah, I have some links...hang on, I've got to find them.

[Sparoism]

Tons of WTC video footage (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/9-11_wtc_videos.html)

Check out the WTC-7 video....that's the one that shocked me.

There's plenty of links about this (WTC+collape+video) on Google, but this one summed it up pretty well.

[CACashRefund]

I check that link out, one thing that immediately pops out is this:

We are told that the twin towers collapsed due to infernos initiated by the plane impacts, yet eyewitness testimony and firefighters broadcasts prove there were no infernos in the buildings, so why did the buildings collapse within minutes of the aircraft impacts?


they make it seem like it happened within 5-10 minutes

it actually took just shy of an hour from the time of impact to the collapse of the south tower(which was the first to be hit)

56 minutes is a long time for something to burn

right off the bat from this, i know i shouldnt what this site is saying as 100% fact, im gonna browse around and if i find any other discrepencies ill post em up.

[Sparoism]

Definitely look at the WTC-7 collapse videos...you'll see some small explosions going off on the outside of a building that wasn't even directly hit by anything large enough to demolish it..

Something doesn't seem right about that.

[bobthemothafuckinbuilder]

Originally posted by CACashRefund@Feb 10 2006, 04:47 PM
I check that link out, one thing that immediately pops out is this:

We are told that the twin towers collapsed due to infernos initiated by the plane impacts, yet eyewitness testimony and firefighters broadcasts prove there were no infernos in the buildings, so why did the buildings collapse within minutes of the aircraft impacts?


they make it seem like it happened within 5-10 minutes

it actually took just shy of an hour from the time of impact to the collapse of the south tower(which was the first to be hit)

56 minutes is a long time for something to burn

right off the bat from this, i know i shouldnt what this site is saying as 100% fact, im gonna browse around and if i find any other discrepencies ill post em up.
Quoted post


LOL are you guys fucking retarded in the head? This guy is a fire inspector now...

Yea no shit firefighters said there were no fires in the buildings... they weren't on the impact floors obivously.

"fires don't last 56 minutes" lol

Fires can last as long as there are things to burn.


The building collapsed after the fire took 56minutes. The jet fuel mixed with all the plastic and other extremley flammable shit in the offices melted the Iron beams which support the building... once they started melting the seepage went down into the bottom of the building on the iniside and ended blowing up a gas main or some shit.


Man, better not question you guys thoe, I know you're all experts at how builidngs burn down and shit.

[Sparoism]

No, but I have some engineering experience. Every video I've seen from a structural failure due to an outside force being applied to it (earthquakes, floods) shows the building falling AWAY FROM the force.

Buildings only collapse into their own footprints when they are demolished using strategically-placed high explosives. I've seen plenty of videos of those, as well. Guess what the WTC collapses looked like?

Yep, they fell STRAIGHT DOWN. I'm also not buying it when I hear that they were engineered to do this. NO ONE designs a building to cave in on itself. That's insane. Load bearing supports are intended to bear loads, under all kinds of torsional, lateral, and vertical stress- to make a statement to the contrary, if all the workers on the 76th floor of WTC-2 had made up their minds to suddenly start jumping up and down in unison they would have ended up on the 75th floor.

This had very little to do with fire science, and everything to do with simple physics and engineering.

[CACashRefund]

Originally posted by bobthemothafuckinbuilder@Feb 10 2006, 02:03 PM

"fires don't last 56 minutes" lol

Fires can last as long as there are things to burn.




who said this?

my remark of 56 minutes is a long time for something to burn isnt directed towrd me doubting the fire, but the use of the site's language in that the towers collapsed within minutes

reading must not have been your strong point in school

army is a good place for you, dont quit it.

[bobthemothafuckinbuilder]

Originally posted by CACashRefund+Feb 10 2006, 05:36 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CACashRefund - Feb 10 2006, 05:36 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-bobthemothafuckinbuilder@Feb 10 2006, 02:03 PM

"fires don't last 56 minutes" lol

Fires can last as long as there are things to burn.




who said this?

my remark of 56 minutes is a long time for something to burn isnt directed towrd me doubting the fire, but the use of the site's language in that the towers collapsed within minutes

reading must not have been your strong point in school

army is a good place for you, dont quit it.
Quoted post
[/b][/quote]

Being a dick whore is a good place for you, stick to it. If you could read the phrase "USMC" it would also help. Comprehension must not have been your strong point.

How is 56 minutes long for something to burn, it's not a fucking piece of paper it's a huge building.

[BURLAP]

Originally posted by bobthemothafuckinbuilder@Feb 10 2006, 02:03 PM
LOL are you guys fucking retarded in the head? This guy is a fire inspector now...

-Yea no shit firefighters said there were no fires in the buildings... they weren't on the impact floors obivously.
-Fires can last as long as there are things to burn.
-The building collapsed after the fire took 56minutes.
-The jet fuel mixed with all the plastic and other extremley flammable shit in the offices melted the Iron beams which support the building...
-once they started melting the seepage went down into the bottom of the building on the iniside and ended blowing up a gas main or some shit.

Man, better not question you guys thoe, I know you're all experts at how builidngs burn down and shit.
Quoted post


so insightful bob. and so...not ironic.
and i don't know about caca and sparo, but i'm actually retarded in my left ass cheek.

[BURLAP]

bob, you're all like, back-from-iraq krazee, man..watch out!

[CACashRefund]

Originally posted by bobthemothafuckinbuilder@Feb 10 2006, 03:39 PM

Being a dick whore is a good place for you, stick to it. If you could read the phrase "USMC" it would also help. Comprehension must not have been your strong point.

How is 56 minutes long for something to burn, it's not a fucking piece of paper it's a huge building.
Quoted post


i can see youre being all you can be

at ease gi joe

[Stereotype V.001]

hobo knife- (this is going back a bit) That interview with Cheyney did not mention any dates, or state that they made the call to shoot down a commercial airliner while the last hijacked plane was in the air. Also, it was assumed that there had been some sort of mistake and not a terrorist attack until the second plane hit the world trade center. The pentagon was struck shortly thereafter, and fighter jets were immediately in the air even before that. The problem was they were looking for aircraft an hour or so out over the Atlantic. That's all according to the 9-11 commission's report though, which is obvious Bush propaganda even though their interviews with the Bush admin were extremely critical and damaging to him.

About the recent video ect, I will ignore the fact that you don’t seem to mind the obvious bias, and aren’t questioning any of the “facts� for yourself. Too easy. But don’t worry, I’ll question them for you!

�Its demolition placed in the building. You can watch the floors collapse one after another.�
Actually, building demolitions do not detonate floors level by level. This would possibly cause one the top levels to become top heavy if there is no time interval. That is why building demolitions that use strategically placed explosives are detonated SIMULATENOUSLY, not level after level like seen on the WTC. Buildings collapse level after level, but explosives are set off at the same time. For example.... (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5526343190896185363&q=building+demolition)

�Why does each level seem to blast outwards right before it collapses??wtfomfg?!�
Because as the weight from the above levels starts coming down, all of the air and matter in between the levels and the floor has to go somewhere. Some of this is bound to go outwards as the space rapidly decreases, also blasting the windows in an outward direction. Drop a book on a table with dust and the same thing will happen. Unless your table is part of the massive CIA conspiracy. Which it obviously is.

�Jet fuel could not burn the steel supports�
No, but a building that just had three quarters of its upper-mid section taken out by a commercial air liner has NO structural integrity. The buildings designer’s also argued that the world trade center was built so it could withstand a plane crash from a commercial air liner, but anyone who has seen the video can watch the plane cut through it like a knife through butter. With the building only left with one support, and massive structural damage, the levels above the damage are inevitably going to come down after the remaining supports start to buckle. The top half of a sky scraper moving with its own momentum just might crush the rest of the building, while moving downwards instead of sideways since there was no external force pushing it out. Only gravity, pulling it down. That also explains why it didn’t fall over, but collapsed on itself.

This shit is high school physics. Get all sides of the story and try thinking for yourself before you let someone else make up your mind for you.

-Bill Nye the science guy.

PS- Bob, no need to get angry over the internet. Just sit back and laugh at what the 18-25 year old college “hip� graffiti white suburbanite demographic actually thinks. Because on the internet, you can’t cave people’s faces in for making comments like the ones above.

[Sparoism]

Well, since my explanations don't hold water....look at this, (http://www.serendipity.li/wot/wtc_demolition.htm) or this (http://wtc7.net/links.html) and then tell me what you think.

I'm just trying to make sense of it myself. Two buildings, identical in almost every way, are both hit by 767s with half-empty fuel tanks within an hour of each other. About an hour after that, the south tower collapses into itself, and the north tower follows suit a half hour later. Then, if that wasn't enough, another building a block away (WTC-7) does the exact same thing eight hours later, without the aid of a 767.

Or- Three buildings, all in the same zip code, collapse due to fire and/or plane crashes within eight hours of each other.

I wonder what the odds of that are?

I mean, I did pretty good in science...well, I know enough to comprehend that there's no way this could have happened three times in one day without some kind of intervention.

However, since the "official" explanation dovetails so well with what everyone wants to believe, I guess I'm a crank for thinking otherwise. Maybe someone didn't pay the physics bill in Lower Manhattan? Mmmm....nahhh...four-fold dimensional cross-rip? UFOs? L. Ron Hubbard? Could be anything...

[im not witty]

heres the info youve all been looking for in one neat package. be warned its an hour and a half long (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose)

everyone who keeps trying to refute the conspiracy nuts with "oh wow so youre a scientist now", should sit still and at least consider the information here. including discussions of melting points of the steel used to build WTC vs the maximum temp of burning jet fuel, comparisons of other skyscraper fires throughout history, including one where a fucking plane hit one...for those who refuse to watch. lets just say that in the history of large scale skyscraper fires, only 3 buildings have ever collapsed on themselves. ill let you guess which 3. interviews with the people responsible for building it (WTC), and also with people such as NYC firefighters and employees of WTC, who might i add, have alot more insight than any of us.
granted its a documentary with an agenda, but even if you buy one or two of the facts presented out of the hundreds jammed into this film, its enough to make you scratch your head. keep an eye out for osamas "confession" tape towards the end.

[im not witty]

i know this part of the forum is slow, but im bumping anyway.

[Stereotype V.001]

“everyone who keeps trying to refute the conspiracy nuts with "oh wow so youre a scientist now", should sit still and at least consider the information here.�

I have read about this topic from the Jones side and watched most of these videos a while back as they originally came out, with an open mind. I also got the “official� side of the story with an open mind, minus the sarcastic quotes and preconceived notions of it being government lies that some of you obviously have. Then I made up my own mind. For example, like stated earlier if the WTC was demolished using professional explosives, it would have been simultaneous. Also, if it was blown up with strategically placed explosives some of the survivors would have seen people on multiple areas of every floor placing them there. There have been zero reports of any kind from survivors of the WTC attacks about that, or any strange occurrences from the time before the attacks. Its also common sense that after the massive structural damage and loss of supports, the section above is going to eventually come down and take the building with it, so all of these videos ect rely entirely on the fire theory and ignore the actual damage and loss of more than 3/4ths of the building’s supports. The conspiracy theories are full of holes, and don’t add up with what actually happened.

Sparo- If it wasn’t a terrorist attack but pilot errors both hitting the world trade center, then yes the odds would be extremely poor. But keeping reality in mind, the WTC is a symbol of American power that was already attacked less “successfully� some years prior by the same group. And there were two air liners manned by terrorists who had extensive flight training and planned every detail of hitting the world trade center heading towards them determined to die. That makes the odds of 9-11 increase dramatically. Also they had full fuel tanks, they specifically got on flights headed for the other side of the continent and across the Atlantic. After a building is hit by a commercial air liner in the way the WTC was, it would be highly unlikely if it didn’t crash. Here are some clips, not from a biased documentary, that shows the plane hitting the first tower, and a close up of the initial collapse. Decide for yourself.

1 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5946840100426387774&q=plane+wtc)
You can see the plane cut through the building, and taking out more than 3/4ths of the building’s supports and severing the top and bottom portions.

2 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4763320529356355623&q=wtc+collapse)
You can see the supports buckle inwards from the pressure, and then the top section build momentum up until it crumbles down. A demolition wouldn’t have buckled the support inward, but sent it outward.

There are a lot of clips from video.google, I don’t feel like looking at them anymore so search for more and watch for yourself.

And WTC7 was directly next to the world trade centers, not a block away. It was damaged by falling debris and fire, if you have a video of its collapse I would appreciate it because I can’t find one (although I remember watching it before).

[Stereotype V.001]

I have to hand it to Alex Jones, he is an excellent public speaker. Very enthralling. He is selling conspiracy theories to rich American college kids that previously were only bought into by dirt poor, illiterate Pakistani madrassa students.

[CACashRefund]

Originally posted by Sparoism@Feb 11 2006, 04:55 AM
hit by 767s with half-empty fuel tanks within an hour of each other.
Quoted post



this is wierd to me,
one of the planes was headed to san francisco, the other to los angeles, i looked around but couldnt find any info on whether there were any stops on the way, so im gonna go ahead and say there were non.

so how could a plane have a half empty fuel tank, when it hadnt even gone a fourth of its way.

from the time flight 11 was hijacked around 8:15am to the time it hit the north tower, 8:46am. i seriousl doubt it spent that much fuel.

likewise, flight 175 was hijacked around 8:45am, it hit the south tower around 9:03am.

[im not witty]

stereotype

im laughing at you because all of these things youre adressing and saying havent been talked about and youve never seen are in the video i just fucking posted. i know youve had your fill of conspiracy talk and arent inclined to watch it...but its still funny.

[Sparoism]

Well, all I'm saying is that what I've seen doesn't square with what I know about physics or engineering. I'll agree to disagree with you, and leave it at that.

I'm not too interested in the conspiracy theories regarding the motives behind 9/11, but I am fascinated by the cover-up. I believe that whoever was behind it had a lot of juice w/the FBI and NSA, though- before, during, and after the fact.

I also believe that if Bin Laden was involved- I'm not convinced, but I wouldn't rule him out- and the feds REALLY, REALLY wanted to find him, he would have been picked up by October of 2001. Instead, he gets ghost for five years...not only that, he's hiding among a high concentration of US and UK troops. Sometimes I wonder if he's "hiding in plain sight"- all he'd really need to do is get a shave and a haircut, start herding goats, and keep his mouth shut.

It doesn't sound any more unlikely than some of the other scenarios I've heard. I just doubt that he could go more than a year without saying "Neener neener neener, can't get me...."

[CACashRefund]

what would capturing/killing him accomplish though?

al qaeda isnt just gonna go away


and sparo the reason im not gonna argue on the negineering stuff is that when it comes to that and the proof thats abounded

i dont have the knowledge to credit or disprove it

so rather than pretend like i do, im gonna leave it at that

[bobthemothafuckinbuilder]

Originally posted by CACashRefund@Feb 12 2006, 12:51 AM
what would capturing/killing him accomplish though?

al qaeda isnt just gonna go away


and sparo the reason im not gonna argue on the negineering stuff is that when it comes to that and the proof thats abounded

i dont have the knowledge to credit or disprove it

so rather than pretend like i do, im gonna leave it at that
Quoted post


Numer 1. I'm drunk.
Number 2. Killing motherfuckas that deserve it makes me feel realllll good.
Number 3. Motherfuckas like Saddam, osama, motherfuckas that are raveging african nations need a good ol' bullet to the fcae. For csure.

[bobthemothafuckinbuilder]

Also fuck al-qudiea an muslim extremeist.... killing those bitches for days.

[~KRYLON2~]

i did shhhhh dont tell anyone

[BURLAP]

i'm not witty...
i watched that vid with my girl last week. pretty interesting, however, apart from the narrator's irritating as shit voice(whiney white college kid?), i really can't stand how these sorts of 'documentaries' put all this effort into debunking some official part of the 9/11 storyline, then flippantly make their own totally speculative and unfounded assertions as a counter storyline. like..for one...the pentagon hit..they spend all this time on forensics, rummaging around to pull out expert opinions on exotic little details and such, then in the span of 2 seconds claim it was not a plane, but a cruise missile.
PFFFF. seriously ruins shit for me. not to take away from the fact i think there are serious flaws with parts of the story that have yet to be answered, but this type of shit is kneejerk irresponsible skewage.

[Stereotype V.001]

I watched some of that video, the nasally pre-pubescent voice and that annoying hip hop instrumental was killing me. And "im not witty", the bulk of my post adressed the central theme of that video and all the other links ect posted on here, that the WTC was taken down with high explosives, would be impossible given the videos of the collapse. I'm personally laughing that noone mentions that part on here, or how a plane severing the building just might be related with the collapse. And that kid's voice.

[El Mikinbin De Miami]

The twin towers, theres' no denying what happened...The Pentagon, is a whoole other story. THIS SHIT STINKS REAL BAD! Video is great. What I dont get is...WHY??? Why would our own government want to cover up what happened there??

[Issac Brock]

for those of you loving this, first of all, welcome to last year, heh, had to say that, har ahr ahr i'm cooler than you because i saw it before you lawlezj12

anyway, this thing has poor quality pictures and absolutely no credible sources, interesting theory, anything is possible, but anything shown on that thing could easily be bullplop!

[Ishbel Bullen]

yeah im not buying that shit

[ODS-1]

I don't get why people are saying "oh the building should have fell this way" or something like that. More than likely it is impossible to tell how a building is going to fall. Unless it's a controlled demolition (i'm not saying it was) there is no definite way to tell how and when a building is going to collapse. It's pretty unpredictable.
Also, the planes were going over 500 miles per hour when they hit (which is over the maximum speed they are supposed to go without having a structural failure.) The designers who said the towers would be able to withstand an airplane attack were most likely thinking of a plane trying to land at LaGuardia or Kennedy or Newark, not a plane going over it's maximum speed.

[ODS-1]

Originally posted by CACashRefund+Feb 11 2006, 09:15 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CACashRefund - Feb 11 2006, 09:15 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Sparoism@Feb 11 2006, 04:55 AM
hit by 767s with half-empty fuel tanks within an hour of each other.
Quoted post



this is wierd to me,
one of the planes was headed to san francisco, the other to los angeles, i looked around but couldnt find any info on whether there were any stops on the way, so im gonna go ahead and say there were non.

so how could a plane have a half empty fuel tank, when it hadnt even gone a fourth of its way.

from the time flight 11 was hijacked around 8:15am to the time it hit the north tower, 8:46am. i seriousl doubt it spent that much fuel.

likewise, flight 175 was hijacked around 8:45am, it hit the south tower around 9:03am.
Quoted post
[/b][/quote]
Well there's some 767 variants that could fly from Boston to LA on roughly half their full fuel load. Some 767's (the planes that hit the towers) can fly up to about 6000 nautical miles non stop. Boston to LA- San Francisco is roughly about 2000 nautical miles. It's definitely possible that the planes weren't carrying the maximum fuel load.

And one more thing: The whiney kid on the video, all these conspiracy theorists, and so on are probably not engineers, architects, construction workers, or pilots. Chances are they are probably making uneducated guesses about what happened.

[Ishbel Bullen]

and have art majors...

[El Mikinbin De Miami]

So I have no party affiliation..no hidden agenda...I'm just asking..What's up with all the conspiracy theories and the controversy?? Been seeing ALOT of it lately...Like this:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8...&q=loose+change (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848&q=loose+change)
THere's alot of crazy shit in there that gets me thinking..
So I went into the Wash DC thread and asked if anybody was on that highway and saw what happened...Thought it would be better here for Chan. Zero. So can anybody talk about this without having a titty fit?

[Gunm]

no

[GamblersGrin]

i saw an internet video where they said 9-11 was made up and didnt even happen, kind of like how people say the holocaust never happened. i think i may be beginning to believe 9-11 never happened.

[the shitz]

WTF? 911....as in the planes?!

oh..........wtf the jews made up the holocaust didnt they?


edit* i retract that holocaust statement, i dont want to get fired.

[CACashRefund]

the holocaust is overrated, stalin killed more jews than hitler ever did

[El Mikinbin De Miami]

obviously planes crashed into the towers...But what the hell was that in the pentagon?

[FunTimePartyTeam]

www.911proof.com (http://www.911proof.com)

[CACashRefund]

Originally posted by El Mikinbin De Miami@Mar 13 2006, 12:08 PM
obviously planes crashed into the towers...But what the hell was that in the pentagon?
Quoted post


explosive nerf ball

[the shitz]

a lady that worked in the pentagon had her hands amputated because the heat that came from the explosion made it like she was in a microwave.

[FunTimePartyTeam]

I bet they just did that so she couldnt keep up a blog.

[podrido]

you know what some of these conspiracy theories are kinda crazy. but what the fuck is up with the 911 story in our money
now thats just too much.
if u dont know what im talking about
try folding a 5 10 20 50 and 100 dollar bill into a plane the same way . the old ones.... and yeah
there u go

[El Mikinbin De Miami]

controlled demolition at the towers..boom, boom, boom, boom..floor after floor..

[the shitz]

Originally posted by El Mikinbin De Miami@Mar 13 2006, 12:23 PM
controlled demolition at the towers..boom, boom, boom, boom..floor after floor..
Quoted post



ok you lost me at .....what are ....whattt.....i dont get it.

[El Mikinbin De Miami]

watch the video.

Mods can you move this to CROSSFIRE? Dont know how..

[Some1]

Originally posted by GamblersGrin@Mar 13 2006, 03:06 PM
i saw an internet video where they said 9-11 was made up and didnt even happen, kind of like how people say the holocaust never happened. i think i may be beginning to believe 9-11 never happened.
Quoted post


I never saw the twin towers ever i have only seen the hole...so maybe it was never their maybe you people arent even their the world IS A LIE AHHHHHHHHHHHH

[imported_El Mamerro]

My best friend was attending classes at George Washington University at the time. She def heard a plane.

[El Mikinbin De Miami]

Originally posted by symbols@Dec 21 2004, 09:21 PM
i finally had time to watch this.

pretty fucking riveting.
as a person who believes the u.s. knows far more about 9/11 than it admits, and a person who believed that a hijacked boeing did hit the pentagon, that was an amazing film.

up to this point, i'd had no idea of the amount of cover up associated with this. i knew the implausibilities, but i had no idea it went this deep.

my ex's neighbor died in that crash.
i would very much like to know what happened to the plane that was "supposedly" hijacked. after all, over a hundred people died on that flight. when did they die? where did they go?

a lot of questions that may never be answered.

i knew some people who said they witnessed it,. and also knew others who had witnessed it..i might have to go interrogate them.



i liked the way the film was put together though, this was good.
Quoted post


Was your ex's neighbor in the pentagon or in the plane?
That video is alright..This one goes waaay more into detail about both the pentagon AND the towers. AND Pennsylvania. You gotta watch this one...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8...&q=loose+change (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848&q=loose+change)

[!@#$%]

this is what i'd posted before mams edited the two topics together:

there are already a few threads on this
please search before you start a new thread.


several friends of mine were living in D.C. at the time so they experienced the ensuing chaos, one of em said he saw the plane, and another one of my friends knew a person who saw the plane while iin traffic on the capitol beltway.

an exboyfriend was the son of a CIA agent who lives in northern virginia (in a neighborhood full of gov't employees)
one of his neighbors was actually ON the plane that crashed, leaving behind two small sons and a wife.

[MAR]

what are you going to do? everytime anything like this happens someones going to try to twist it in to some sort of government conspiracy theory.

[El Mikinbin De Miami]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. But tooo many things STINK about it.

[!@#$%]

there were some hijackers
they were from the middle east
they hijacked some planes and crashed them into u.s. targets

that much, i believe


everything leadng up to that event...phew..
dunno.

[BURLAP]

ayo, what happened to the anthrax attack investigation yo.....
and yo, ayo, what happened to that niguh binladen?
and shit yo, what the fuck, was the 9/11 commission report even a real investigation?
and what the fuck was up with bush in the classroom son?

yyoooooo...

[lord_casek]

operation northwoods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods)

scans of the real documents (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html)

if you don't know what operation northwoods is, you need to read that.


operation endgame (http://www.ice.gov/graphics/dro/endgame.pdf)


the end result is american gulags for political dissidents.

if you don't agree with the govt., you get thrown in a camp.
ICE is going under the guise of getting rid of illegals (immigrants),
but if you read further in, it talks about citizens and dissidents.

[Juan Fuentes]

compiracy theories? there is no "theory" its reality...

[lord_casek]

Originally posted by Juan Fuentes@Mar 13 2006, 11:48 PM
compiracy theories? there is no "theory" its reality...
Quoted post



you can't say that about all of it.
there's alot of bullshit in the world,

looking at what's happening in the world,
how the elite flaunt what they are doing
right in front of our faces, that is reality.

it's in the news. those anti-muslim cartoons...psy-ops.
the french riots...psy-ops....it's all to engrain in us anti-muslim sentiments.
even back to september 11th of '01. why did 7 of the hijackers list pensacola naval air station as their homes on the visas? were they just lying or completely flaunting it in front of our faces?

[BURLAP]

alex jones, is that ^you?

anyhooey..this stuff gets a little hard to stand behind after you read through 50 different web sourced articles by people that you have really no way of verifying how legitimate they are and such..especially when the claims get demonstrably outrageous. i mean, i learned about northwoods by reading james bamford books, but at least he's got some credentials that mean something. alex jones is a dude who uses kinda shitty tactics in his presenting his theories, which is interesting. like i noticed he likes to use kinda creepy/spooky ambient soundscapes for some of his docs, implying quite effectively some inherently nefarious and deeply disturbing reality that pretty much resembles a fearmongering sort of angle. i remember hearing some radio show and they had some callers phone in and they were defending jones with just hilarious shit...like 'how do you know jones is telling the truth maam?'...'he just is-HE JUST IS DAMMIT!'.
if people have these deep urges to question the govt, wicked-awesome, they and everybody should on a regular basis. as i mentioned earlier though, if you're going to spend 25 minutes of detailed debunkery on say, the pentagon hit, don't follow it up with a completely ridiculous and unverifiable 10second soundbyte accusation it was actually a patriot missile. it just undermines what probably took months in about the 1 second it takes to absorb the accusation.

[El Mikinbin De Miami]

Yea.^ They bring up TONS of good points and excellent questions, but then he sometimes throws everyone off with one of his crazy sounding conclusions that he comes to. Then most everybody just shrugs it ALL off. Like most of the world. It doesn't matter if they're making good points, if they say 1 stupid thing everything else is down the tubes..Much like our friend H. Dean was kicking some ass up until his famous,"and california, and then washington d.c. to take back the white house....yyaaaaaaahhh!!" ...-instantly lost all his credibility with that yelp.

[lord_casek]

Originally posted by BURLAP@Mar 14 2006, 03:40 AM
alex jones, is that ^you?

anyhooey..this stuff gets a little hard to stand behind after you read through 50 different web sourced articles by people that you have really no way of verifying how legitimate they are and such..especially when the claims get demonstrably outrageous. i mean, i learned about northwoods by reading james bamford books, but at least he's got some credentials that mean something. alex jones is a dude who uses kinda shitty tactics in his presenting his theories, which is interesting. like i noticed he likes to use kinda creepy/spooky ambient soundscapes for some of his docs, implying quite effectively some inherently nefarious and deeply disturbing reality that pretty much resembles a fearmongering sort of angle. i remember hearing some radio show and they had some callers phone in and they were defending jones with just hilarious shit...like 'how do you know jones is telling the truth maam?'...'he just is-HE JUST IS DAMMIT!'.
if people have these deep urges to question the govt, wicked-awesome, they and everybody should on a regular basis. as i mentioned earlier though, if you're going to spend 25 minutes of detailed debunkery on say, the pentagon hit, don't follow it up with a completely ridiculous and unverifiable 10second soundbyte accusation it was actually a patriot missile. it just undermines what probably took months in about the 1 second it takes to absorb the accusation.
Quoted post



it was quite obviously a plane that hit the pentagon.
good for you, you know what northwoods is. do you
not see a connection? a govt willing to sink passenger ships, blow up planes, etc in the 60's is probably more willing to do it in 2001 if it fits in
their plan.

alex jones is telling the truth. he does back up what he says. he's obviously not trying to make money by giving people writes to copy and pass out his movies.

don't listen to jones if you don't want to. just read the news.
watch it happening.

[lord_casek]

Originally posted by El Mikinbin De Miami@Mar 14 2006, 10:39 AM
Yea.^ They bring up TONS of good points and excellent questions, but then he sometimes throws everyone off with one of his crazy sounding conclusions that he comes to. Then most everybody just shrugs it ALL off. Like most of the world. It doesn't matter if they're making good points, if they say 1 stupid thing everything else is down the tubes..Much like our friend H. Dean was kicking some ass up until his famous,"and california, and then washington d.c. to take back the white house....yyaaaaaaahhh!!" ...-instantly lost all his credibility with that yelp.
Quoted post



that was a rebel yell. no one heard it, though. they just heard dean "being crazy". sad country. should be ashamed of ourselves.

[Stereotype V.001]

Originally posted by lord_casek+Mar 14 2006, 12:02 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lord_casek - Mar 14 2006, 12:02 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>it's in the news. those anti-muslim cartoons...psy-ops.
the french riots...psy-ops....
Quoted post
[/b]

Ohhh, so those really weren't Muslims rioting and burning embassies and trampling eachother across the globe. Well that is comforting.

Originally posted by lord_casek@Mar 14 2006, 12:02 AM
alex jones is telling the truth.
Quoted post


<!--QuoteBegin-lord_casek@Mar 14 2006, 12:02 AM
the end result is american gulags for political dissidents.

if you don't agree with the govt., you get thrown in a camp.
Quoted post
[/quote]

If Alex Jones was somehow privy to all of this secret information, wouldn’t he already be in one of these facilities? And if the government was willing to start locking up political dissidents, wouldn’t common sense say that someone who knows all these secret details of the government’s evilness and so publicly proclaims these secrets from the mountain tops be discretely imprisoned or killed? Hmmm, that’s a real chin scratcher right there.

[lord_casek]

Originally posted by Stereotype V.001+Mar 14 2006, 05:02 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Stereotype V.001 - Mar 14 2006, 05:02 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Originally posted by lord_casek@Mar 14 2006, 12:02 AM
it's in the news. those anti-muslim cartoons...psy-ops.
the french riots...psy-ops....
Quoted post


Ohhh, so those really weren't Muslims rioting and burning embassies and trampling eachother across the globe. Well that is comforting.
they were muslims, but did you notice how many danish flags they were burning? have you ever walked into a store and seen danish flags?
how do you think all those danish flags just appeared ready for burning and tv cameras?

how about the cartoons? all those others, for example mohammed getting fucked in the ass by a dog...that wasn't printed in the paper. it was just lumped in with a pile of other disturbing cartoons and the one that actually made it into the newspaper. why? i'll tell you. to cause civil unrest with the muslims and make the west even more "afraid". fear drives wars.


Originally posted by lord_casek@Mar 14 2006, 12:02 AM
alex jones is telling the truth.
Quoted post


<!--QuoteBegin-lord_casek@Mar 14 2006, 12:02 AM
the end result is american gulags for political dissidents.

if you don't agree with the govt., you get thrown in a camp.
Quoted post


If Alex Jones was somehow privy to all of this secret information, wouldn’t he already be in one of these facilities? And if the government was willing to start locking up political dissidents, wouldn’t common sense say that someone who knows all these secret details of the government’s evilness and so publicly proclaims these secrets from the mountain tops be discretely imprisoned or killed? Hmmm, that’s a real chin scratcher right there.
Quoted post
[/b][/quote]


there is no fucking secret. the elite flaunt this shit every single day. have you ever read that autobiography of rockefeller? he openly flaunts what is going to be done with america by way of one world govt.
several of these fuckheads do it in their autobiogrpahies. read more. talk out of your ass less.


as for alex jones: most people just laugh at him like he's crazy. it's more sane in this country to go to a football game with your face all painted up, waving a big giant foam finger and getting drunk off your ass than it is to read the news. alex jones backs up every claim he makes with real facts straight from the news and from govt. documents.
can you say that about yourself?

[angelofdeath]

i like alot of what alex jones says, does and stands for. i do double check everything he says.
just curious lord casek... do you agree with alex's hardcore christian views and his backing "110%" of the constitution party in 2004?

[lord_casek]

angelofdeath: i double check everything he talks about, as well.
not because i disbelieve him, but because i care. ya know?

as for his hardcore christian views: no, i don't agree with alot of that stuff.
i'm not a christian. i do however agree with him that this country was founded on us having liberties (god given so to speak) and that our constitution outlines and does not give us these liberties. we were born with these freedoms.

the constitution party: hmm....i'm liberatarian. i do back our constitution and what our country was founded on. i think that's probably the best way to put it.

[angelofdeath]

alright. got ya. its good to know someone else on here truely understands that about the constitution. that it doesnt GRANT us any rights, that it was created soley to protect them from government and that the government is not doing its job.

[lord_casek]

here's something i think highly of.

eisenhowers final speech (of his presidency).
i almost picked up this autobiography today. huge book. simply amazing.


Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035- 1040

My fellow Americans:

Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.

This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.

Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.

Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.

My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.

In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.

II.

We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.

III.

Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.

Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology -- global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger is poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle -- with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.

Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.

But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.

The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.

IV.

A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.

Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present

* and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite.

It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.

V.

Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we -- you and I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.

VI.

Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.

Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.

Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war -- as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years -- I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.

Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.

VII.

So -- in this my last good night to you as your President -- I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find some things worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.

You and I -- my fellow citizens -- need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals.

To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing aspiration:

We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.


we should all give a good hard look at what he said. he was our last real president warning us of what was to come.

__________________________________________________ ___________
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades." thsoe words should echo in your brain.

[BURLAP]

well i can only take so much jones before he starts getting a little too kooky. you gotta admit he gets pretty revved up and kooky casek..
anyway, i've said it before, his scene in waking life is one of the best in that whole movie.
his worldview isn't so much an issue for me, it's how he fills in the blanks. and i'm sorry, but he does not have documents to prove all of his claims. besides, since when are news articles official documents....

[lord_casek]

Originally posted by BURLAP@Mar 14 2006, 09:00 PM
well i can only take so much jones before he starts getting a little too kooky. you gotta admit he gets pretty revved up and kooky casek..
anyway, i've said it before, his scene in waking life is one of the best in that whole movie.
his worldview isn't so much an issue for me, it's how he fills in the blanks. and i'm sorry, but he does not have documents to prove all of his claims. besides, since when are news articles official documents....
Quoted post



well, yeah, he does get all revved up, but he is a patriot. he wants our country to be what it was founded to be. what it was. what it has the potential to be.

how he fills in the blanks....are you talking about the illuminati type stuff? the masonic stuff? that is all very real. shit, man...half our damn major corporations are using masonic symbolism in their company logos, washington dc is layed out on masonic plans with full masonic symbolism
for everyone to see, so is paris france. how much more do you need?
skull & bones is a chapter of the masonic order. coincidence that our political leaders as well as corporate heads were groomed there? coincidence that alot of them go to bohemian grove with a giant owl named molech where they do mock child sacrifices and have full blown order of the scottish right (masonic) rituals?

i know how crazy it sounds. believe me. i'm not an idiot who follows like a lost sheep everything i hear. it still doesn't make sense to me, not all of it, or even half of it. but there is something to it.

look, our first president in his full masonic regalia
http://www.gwmemorial.org/Tour/MemorialHall/images/Statue.jpg

creepy, huh? he was a good guy. i have nothing much to say about him
other than that. but you do have to look at this stuff a little more closely than what it appears to be. appearances can be deceiving (yes, i realize that).

[NightOwl]

great.. that link just notified the secret service that im a potential terrorist

thanks a lot

[AerosolTerrorist]

All the "Hijacked planes" flew over the same United States airbase and vanished off of the radars for the exact same time one A lil' later.

one thing to say "Operation Northwoods"..

I'm associated w/ people in the revelation,Also know "Ex Demons" if you know what I'm talking about.

Anyone Want more info on this stuff,Talk w/ me At [email protected]

[Dawood]

“Ideological warfare is a modern term which refers to a set of efforts in which a nation engages in order to conquer or influence another nation, so that (the attacked nation) takes a particular course of direction.

It is far more serious than military warfare, since it aims at secrecy, seeking to achieve subtle objectives initially; so that the attacked nation does not perceive it, nor prepare to halt it, nor stand in its way - thereby falling victim to (such an attack). The eventual result of this onslaught is that this nation becomes sick in mind and sense; loving what the enemy wants it to love and hating what they want it to hate. It is a chronic disease which attacks and destroys nations, doing away with its personality, removing such meanings as foundations and strength. The nation which is struck by this (ideological attack) does not even feel what has hit it, or what it even is! That is why curing it becomes somewhat difficult, and making [the attacked nation] understand the ways of righteousness becomes a struggle.

This war takes place by means of school curriculums, general education, media, small and large size publications, and other such channels (that influence the thoughts of its people). Through this the enemy hopes to deviate the nation from its beliefs; becoming attached to what the enemy throws at it. We ask Allaah for safety and protection from this.�

[rattleytins]

http://911review.com/pm/markup/docs/0305911-lead-lg.jpg

now that the picture's got ur attention...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

WATCH THAT!!!!!!!!!!

im sure theres already links to it on here but seriously watch it through and tell me if you dont believe in the conspiracy theories

[Dawood]

yeah, I watched it a while ago, the evidence is pretty thick.

[lord_casek]

dylan avery is a smart guy.
23 years old i think. 21 or so when
he produced that.

of course, it really doesn't take a
genius to put two and two together.
but avery really did a great job
at piecing it together.

[Larry Pubes]

that documentary is a disgrace. he did a 'great job' because it fits perfectly with your ideology, even though the way he put it together makes grand assumptions and is full of speculative 'evidence' and omits alot of other information in the process. it's great he's pissed and wants answers, but come on...

[rattleytins]

i believe it

you just can't answer a lot of that stuff,

like why did the fbi take the security camera tapes, why did the towers collapse so quickly, where did the recording boxes go
and all the other unanswered stuff

i've always thought that the government know a lot that we don't,
and after watchin that i find it hard not to believe it

[CACashRefund]

yeah that video sucks

[rattleytins]

that you for contributing to the thread

[El Mamerro]

Please refer to the previous page where the exact same video was posted and discussed already.

I'm with Burlap on this one.

[rattleytins]

I check that link out, one thing that immediately pops out is this:




they make it seem like it happened within 5-10 minutes

it actually took just shy of an hour from the time of impact to the collapse of the south tower(which was the first to be hit)

56 minutes is a long time for something to burn

right off the bat from this, i know i shouldnt what this site is saying as 100% fact, im gonna browse around and if i find any other discrepencies ill post em up.

yeah but an hour of fire shouldn't cause a building like the world trade centre to collapse,

http://www.admit-one.net/webimages/empirestatecrash.jpg
thats the empire state building after a crash, the following is copy and pasted from the abc news website:

"The last time a plane crashed into a New York City skyscraper was July 28, 1945. A U.S. bomber flying through thick fog at about 200 mph crashed into the Empire State Building, one of the most recognized structures in the world.
Fourteen people were killed, and dozens injured. "
"About $1 million in damage was reportedly done to the building."

fourteen people, and althought there is a hole in the side of the wall and $1 million damage, is that even similar to what happened to the world trade centres?

[El Mamerro]

^ I DON'T SEE ANY AIRPLANE DEBRIS THERE. THAT HOLE IS WAY TO SMALL FOR A BOMBER.

THAT WAS A CRUISE MISSILE.

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

It's a convincing video...to those who felt poorly of it, can you point out any specific examples that undermine the overall point? I'm open minded - I beleive something was amiss, but I'm still undecided on how deep it goes...

[famous amos]

yea but that bomber that flew into the empire state building is a hell of a lot smaller and held a hell of a lot less fuel then a commercial airliner. im no conspiracy theorist but i do think something is not completely right about the situation

[lord_casek]

http://www.miramarevents.com/dreammachines/media-images/B-25-300dpi.jpg

that is a b-25 bomber.

that crashed into the empure state building.

anyone want to do some fact checking and compare the size to a 747?

did it have any live ammo on board?

[El Mamerro]

It was a joke dude.

[lord_casek]

no, mammero. i didn't even see your comment. i was replying to the guy who brought up the plane crash in '45. sorry you misunderstood. i'm genuinely interested in size comparison.
it it much smaller, but how much smaller than a 747?

i should have made myself clear. on what i was saying.

[El Mamerro]

i'm genuinely interested in size comparison.


*Insert Beavis and Butthead laugh*

[lord_casek]

<shakes head>

[rattleytins]

LOL

well that does look a lot smaller than the 747 and 767 yeah good point.

did you know that in feburary 1971 there was a big fire in the world trade centre that lasted 40 mins?
i couldnt get a lot of info on the web tho.

i would also be interested in counter arguments, i dont know if i believe it, there is a lot of evidence, but could even bush be that evil?

[lord_casek]

molten steel in the basement nearly 2 months afetr the distaster implies they used thermite
to compromise the structural integrity of the support beams.

those towers were built to withstand plane hits, fires, etc.

[100%juice]

there is no question of the US governments direct involvement and planning for the destruction of several of its own landmarks, for the purposes of an ultra-inflated "security" budget.

[Larry Pubes]

a-to-b logic doesn't make it 'no question'. but just for the sake of argument, how do you guys suppose such a dastardly plot was carried out and there have been no credible leaks to indicate such a plot? unless of course select individuals in the upper echelon of the M/I complex have an army of mind control slaves, then shit, obviously it was an inside job.
like i said before, i think there are some big questions the US govt needs to come clean on, but i believe pornographic detail is needed on this subject, not all this bullshit speculation based on a handful of shifty events that seems to indicate whatever fits your worldview. you can't dissect one part of an event and then propose another based mainly on a hunch.

[Dawood]

one thing that makes me wonder about it being an inside job is where would they find a few good americans to smash a couple planes into the towers. Doesn't seem feasable.

Unless of course you consider the possible Bush/Bin laden connection.

[Ski Mask]

I think its horrible how easily people buy into this shit. it more or less ensures none of the real questions people should be asking get answered. its a distraction that makes real dissent about the events around 9/11 easily dissmissable by its association with the conspiracy nuts. about 95% of whats being floated by these documentaries can be explained if you really want to look at it critically.

this Popular Mechanics article is probably the best refutal I've seen to date. it definately answers alot of the questions that people have been claiming are "unrefuted" in the last few pages. including the fuel temp/controlled demolition nonsense.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=1&c=y

[Larry Pubes]

I think its horrible how easily people buy into this shit. it more or less ensures none of the real questions people should be asking get answered. its a distraction that makes real dissent about the events around 9/11 easily dissmissable by its association with the conspiracy nuts. about 95% of whats being floated by these documentaries can be explained if you really want to look at it critically.

couldn't have said it better myself.

[Larry Pubes]

snaffed from another board and worth the read if you give a shit..

The 9/11 Conpiracy: A Skeptics View
Shooting down the "controlled demolition" and "no plane" conspiracy theories
By Ernest Partridge

“No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish…” – David Hume, On Miracles

This essay is certain to make many readers very angry with me. But ya gotta do what ya gotta do.
Last month, I was a guest on a progressive radio talk show. About half-way through the hour-long program, the conversation was going well, until I expressed some doubts about the “controlled demolition” hypotheses of the collapse of the World Trade Center. That comment sealed the fate of the remainder of the hour, as it prompted an unvarying succession of angry rebuttals and a deluge of alleged “facts” supporting the view that the WTC towers were brought down by pre-set demolition charges, and that the Pentagon was not struck by a Boeing 747. And so I felt obliged to take a closer look at the theories and evidence regarding the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
After many hours watching videos this weekend of long presentations by David Ray Griffin, Steven Jones and James Fetzer, several other videos both affirming and rejecting “the official version” (OV), and reading numerous articles, it appears to me that the OV of the destruction of the World Trade Center is not credible. Too many anomalies are not explained. A closer look at the conspiracy theories (CTs) indicates that these too can not be true. Too many improbable assumptions. Thus one must conclude that the 9/11 attack on the WTC never took place.
No wait, that’s absurd. Of course it took place! So what we are left with is an abundance of contrary claims, unconfirmable “evidence” leading to utter confusion and no firm conclusions – none, that is, regarding the World Trade Center attack. The Pentagon attack, however, should present little doubt: American Airlines Flight 77 struck the building.
The Evidence Problem:
All accounts of the attacks, whether the official version or any of the numerous conspiracy theories, rest upon weak evidence – “weak,” that is, to all those who did not examine the evidence at the scene, or did not have access to evidence with a secure “chain of custody.” For all others, including myself and presumably all who read this, the evidence is 2nd, 3rd and Nth-hand hearsay. The best evidence available to us, when relevant, are photographic and video images, and even these are subject to various interpretations.
Until recently, the public could rely on published evidence from government scientists and government-supported scientific research, as well as reputable media. But no more. We now know that the Bush Administration alters or withholds scientific reports to conform to policy, dogma and pre-conceptions. The Bushites also lie outright in defense of their policies. As for the media, even that most reliable and respected “newspaper of record,” The New York Times, has become a font of misinformation, including the Clinton Whitewater non-scandal, false and misleading reports of the Florida 2000 vote count, and Judith Miller’s notorious reports of Saddam’s alleged WMDs.
Even so, the critical reader should be capable of identifying and dismissing bizarre assertions, such as Morgan Reynold’s claim that no aircraft struck the twin towers on 9/11 – this in spite of thousands of eye-witnesses and a vast number of photo and video images.
The same critical reader can identify and set aside pronouncements that are devoid of supporting evidence, such as this narrative by James Fetzer of the fate of American Airlines Flight 77 which, if it didn’t hit the Pentagon, as Fetzer contends, must be somehow accounted for:
Flight 77 went off the radar screen in the vicinity of the Kentucky/Ohio border. This whole dotted path [on a map displayed by Fetzer] is a hypothetical or an imaginary path that the plane may have taken, but it was not recorded on radar. And my belief is in fact the plane actually went down in the Kentucky Ohio vicinity… Then a plane, probably an A-13 Sky Warrior was substituted here very close to Washington DC.
Fetzer gives us no citation of the alleged disappearance from the radar screen. (I have heard nothing about this “radar disappearance.” Have you?) Then it gets much worse: “hypothetical or imaginary path,” “may have taken,” “my belief.” Not a shred of evidence is offered in support of this fantasy.
The World Trade Center
Much of the “evidence” presented by the WTC conspiracy theorists is demonstrably false, fallacious or irrelevant. For example:
“The temperatures were not hot enough to melt steel.” True but irrelevant. This is a persistent criticism by the CT. However, the OV does not claim that the steel melted at the impact points (melting temperature, 2700°F), only that it was weakened. The temperature sufficient to weaken steel by fifty-percent (1170°F) was well within the range of the burning jet fuel and office supplies.
“The debris was quickly collected without inspection and shipped off to Asia for recycling.” False. It was relocated to a collection site at Staten Island, where it was examined by forensic engineers, and where personal effects were identified. (Here, here, and here are three of the 54,000 Google hits from a search for “World Trade Center” and “Staten Island” and “Debris”)
“No steel frame building has ever collapsed because of a fire.” Another “fact” repeatedly asserted by CT-s. Irrelevant, even if true. The WTC towers were brought down by a combination of fire and structural damage caused by the impact from the planes. (The collapse of WTC Building #7 was not caused by either fire or impact from planes – a problem for the CV which we will discuss later).
Now look very carefully at these images of the collapse of the WTC towers, here (north tower, 35:20. 36:40), here (south tower, 5:37), and here. (The numbers in parenthesis indicate the time locations in the videos). Notice that the collapse begins at the points of impact. Below the points of impact, the towers remain in place as the disintegration proceeds from the top down.
Next look at these video images of controlled demolitions (131:40) and also the collapse of WTC #7 (1:05). In all these cases, the collapse begins at the base, where the charges were set.
Assume now what your eyes plainly tell you: that (a) the collapse of each tower begins at the point of impact, and (b) that the collapse proceeds from that point downward. Next, try to weave these assumptions into the standard CT hypothesis that the towers were brought down by pre-located explosive charges. What results is this highly improbable scenario:
Charges had to be set beforehand at the points of impact, the 94th to the 98th floors of the north tower, and the 78th to the 84th floors of the south tower. Both aircraft, in stunning feats of piloting skill, succeeded in striking precisely at those pre-arranged locations. However, all charges placed below those points of impact were either duds or were insufficient to precipitate collapses. The towers stood firm as the demolition moved downward from the impact points.
In rebuttal, one might point out that the towers were supported by both the outer walls and an inner core. Might not the charges at the base have caused the collapse of the inner core, while the outer walls remained intact? This would account for the downward vertical plunge of the north tower.
Nice try, but it won’t wash. If the core collapsed within, the accumulating debris from above would have demolished the outer walls below. This did not happen.
However, the official version is not without problems, and the conspiracy theory is not yet out of the contest. There remain some troubling anomalies for the OV:
Foremost among these is the collapse of WTC Building No. 7. Five hours after the towers came down, this forty story structure collapsed. And this time, as you can see here (1:05), the collapse followed the exact pattern of a controlled demolition: beginning at the base and falling uniformly on its own “footprint.” The best that the OV can offer as explanation is that the foundation was weakened by fire, by seismic shock of the collapsing towers, and by the overload of debris from the towers. It is not a compelling explanation, to say the least. Perhaps this explains why an account of the collapse of WTC #7 is missing from the 9/11 Commission report.
Prof. Steven Jones, to my mind the most credible of the 911 critics, claims that melted and congealed steel was found in the rubble, and that it originated at the base of the standing buildings. The only plausible cause of melting with these properties, Jones claims, would be a high temperature explosive such as thermite. Jones is well-qualified to make this assessment. He is a professor of physics at Brigham Young University, with a specialty in metal-catalyzed fusion.
And this is just the beginning of a long list of anomalies that undercut the official version. Among them:
There were numerous reports of explosions below the impact points at the time the towers were hit. Others report that there were explosions before the planes hit.
Tapes of interviews with air traffic controllers were destroyed.
When news of the attack reached the Florida school where Bush was visiting, the Secret Service failed to remove the president from that previously publicized location.
There was a flood of put options (anticipations of loss) on American Airlines and United Airlines stock, within the week before 9/11.
The website, 911research.wtc7.net lists numerous additional anomalies, no doubt, many of these are bogus, but there are others that are troubling.
The governments, New York City and State, and the Feds still have a lot of splainin’ to do.
The Attack on the Pentagon
Unlike the WTC attacks, the Pentagon is rather simple and cut-and-dried. The official version is correct: The west side of the building was struck by American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757. The evidence is clear, unequivocal and overwhelming. The alternative conspiracy theories (impact by a fighter plane or cruise missile) are plainly false, and at times simply pathetic.
This conclusion is compelling when we apply “the David Hume test” to the conspiracy theory: namely, the improbability of CT being true, despite the evidence for OV. Specifically, for CT to be true, we must also assume that:
Hundreds of eyewitnesses on the George Washington Parkway at morning rush-hour were either (a) victims of mass-hallucination, or (b) taken aside and threatened or bribed to testify falsely that they saw a commercial aircraft.
Immediately after the impact, squads of conspirators rushed to the scene (including the inside of the burning Pentagon) to plant body parts, personal effects, and bogus aircraft parts (some, like the engines and landing gear weighing several hundred pounds). Others dumped aviation fuel, to “falsely” suggest involvement of an airplane.
Alternatively, eyewitness testimony of those claiming to find these parts were also coerced, and published photographic evidence faked. All press reports were also concocted to give credence to the official version.
Finally, some explanation must be presented as to the fate of Flight 77 and its passengers, which somehow disappeared without any further trace at the precise time the alleged military aircraft or cruise missile approached and struck the Pentagon.
Sorry, but its just too much for me to swallow.
What Does it all Mean?
How then are we to explain the Bush Administration inaction before 9/11, and its willingness to take full advantage of this “new Pearl Harbor?” I don’t know, but that doesn’t keep me from speculating. So here’s my hunch – and it’s only a hunch which I am willing to revise or abandon if and when more evidence appears. The Busheviks were forewarned (“Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S.”), but they expected attacks on the scale of the USS Cole and the African embassies: perhaps a few dozen casualties—“acceptable.”. They did not take countermeasures because they saw a strategic advantage in such a “mini-Pearl Harbor.” For such a purpose, the attack on The Pentagon would suffice. They did not expect the destruction of the World Trade Center. However, after 9/11 the die was cast, and so they eagerly launched their “the war on terror, along with the policy outrages that were to follow: the USA PATRIOT ACT, Abu Ghraib, Gitmo. The Iraq War, we now know from Richard Clarke and the Downing Street memos, was on the drawing boards long before 9/11, awaiting just such an event to set it in motion.
All that is little more than a guess. But we can arrive at some more substantial conclusions from our unresolved examination of the 9/11 attacks.
First of all, it is clear that the 9/11 Commission is a travesty. Too many phenomena are unexplained. The evidence must be revisited and validated, and the critics’ anomalies explained. And this must be done fearlessly and independently of any political biases or agendas.
Second, the critics of the official version should, as much as possible, get their facts straight, whereupon they must then cease presenting falsehoods as evidence; e.g., that the debris was shipped immediately, uninspected, to Asia; that the the OV assumes and claims that steel melted; that no physical evidence of the plane was found at the Pentagon, etc.
Third: There is no shame in suspending belief – i.e., in being skeptical. Conversely, it is shameful to jump to a conclusion and a conviction on insufficient and conflicting evidence. Acceptance of the official version, or conversely of the conspiracy theory, are not our only alternatives. Both views are vulnerable and leave many crucial questions unanswered. Far better that we admit to ourselves and tell the world that we simply do not know. Suspension of belief is not a conspicuously American trait. But it is a stock-in-trade of honest scholars and scientists. And it is spur to further investigation, which is most assuredly called for in this case.
Finally, partisan passions should not get in the way of a rational assessment of the evidence. Personally, my web publications testify that I yield to no one in my contempt for Bush and his crime syndicate. I would like as much as anyone to see these crimes pinned on Bush, Inc. But the evidence (however weak) is what it is.
What happened on 9/11? Who is responsible? The questions remain open even as they remain urgent. The American people deserve answers, and more immediately, competent and sustained investigation leading to these answers.

Dr. Ernest Partridge is a consultant, writer and lecturer in the field of Environmental Ethics and Public Policy. He has taught Philosophy at the University of California, and in Utah, Colorado and Wisconsin. He publishes the website, The Online Gadfly co-edits the progressive website, The Crisis Papers. His book in progress, Conscience of a Progressive, can be seen here. Send comments to: crisispapers at hotmail.com.

[loose leaf]

peep it and weep
http://www.1984videos.com/

[Ski Mask]

once again. the problem is nobody really wants to look at anything critically, despite claiming to be intrested in the "truth" about 9/11.

snaffed from another board and worth the read if you give a shit..




There remain some troubling anomalies for the OV:
Foremost among these is the collapse of WTC Building No. 7. Five hours after the towers came down, this forty story structure collapsed. And this time, as you can see here (1:05), the collapse followed the exact pattern of a controlled demolition: beginning at the base and falling uniformly on its own “footprint.” The best that the OV can offer as explanation is that the foundation was weakened by fire, by seismic shock of the collapsing towers, and by the overload of debris from the towers. It is not a compelling explanation, to say the least. Perhaps this explains why an account of the collapse of WTC #7 is missing from the 9/11 Commission report.

this one seems like its been clearly debunked by facts already. see the PM article I quoted earlier http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=5&c=y
the official version isnt contending that it was merely shock and fire that did it, just the prelim report.
there was much physical damage:
NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out."
and a design abnormality caused signifigant failures that contributed to the building failing in such a way that it more or less fell straight down on itself. again, check the link for details.


Prof. Steven Jones, to my mind the most credible of the 911 critics, claims that melted and congealed steel was found in the rubble, and that it originated at the base of the standing buildings.

this part is difficult to debunk given that no source for this information is quoted. was prof. jones the only one to find the congealed steel?

The only plausible cause of melting with these properties, Jones claims, would be a high temperature explosive such as thermite. Jones is well-qualified to make this assessment. He is a professor of physics at Brigham Young University, with a specialty in metal-catalyzed fusion.

Prof. Jones isnt a nut or anything, so I'm not going to question his scientific reasoning here, but its all tying back to somthing that he has no proof was there to begin with.

And this is just the beginning of a long list of anomalies that undercut the official version. Among them:
There were numerous reports of explosions below the impact points at the time the towers were hit.

there was a signifigant explosion at the base caused by the severing of the elevator shafts and loss of jet fuel during the impact, that much has been established by a few sources. but again, this one is too vague to debunk. the 9/11 documentary by the naudet brothers shows lots of footage from the lobby, and gives you an idea of just how disoriented and out-of touch everyone was at the time. people are refusing to factor human psycological issues in here. people get paniced, confused, and disoriented at a time like this. even firefighters were prone to this, so the claims of a couple of terrified survivors is hardly the lynchpin to a conspiracy.

Others report that there were explosions before the planes hit.

again, too vague. nothing that can be proved or disproved.

Tapes of interviews with air traffic controllers were destroyed.

this one is very well documented at least. heres the times article on it http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/06/national/06CND-TAPE.html?ex=1146888000&en=db1708ce58d5d5e3&ei=5070
looks more like an exercise in ass-covering that turned into some kind of boss/union squabble. stupid? yes. sign of a conspiracy? don't see it.


When news of the attack reached the Florida school where Bush was visiting, the Secret Service failed to remove the president from that previously publicized location.

given that none of the hijackings were occuring anywhere near his location, I dont see the need. wisking the president away from a public media attended event so far away from the actions isnt going to do anything but trigger panic. but to be fair, this does raise eyebrows, but we'll never know the logic behind it I guess.


There was a flood of put options (anticipations of loss) on American Airlines and United Airlines stock, within the week before 9/11.

FALSE. snopes clears this one up. http://www.snopes.com/rumors/putcall.asp the summary of whats snopes tells us, is that 95% of those PUT orders are tied to one entity, and they were a part of some stock manuevering that also involved buying substantial American Airlines stock. no nefarious plot here.

The website, 911research.wtc7.net lists numerous additional anomalies, no doubt, many of these are bogus, but there are others that are troubling.
The governments, New York City and State, and the Feds still have a lot of splainin’ to do.
The Attack on the Pentagon
Unlike the WTC attacks, the Pentagon is rather simple and cut-and-dried. The official version is correct: The west side of the building was struck by American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757. The evidence is clear, unequivocal and overwhelming. The alternative conspiracy theories (impact by a fighter plane or cruise missile) are plainly false, and at times simply pathetic.
This conclusion is compelling when we apply “the David Hume test” to the conspiracy theory: namely, the improbability of CT being true, despite the evidence for OV. Specifically, for CT to be true, we must also assume that:
Hundreds of eyewitnesses on the George Washington Parkway at morning rush-hour were either (a) victims of mass-hallucination, or (b) taken aside and threatened or bribed to testify falsely that they saw a commercial aircraft.
Immediately after the impact, squads of conspirators rushed to the scene (including the inside of the burning Pentagon) to plant body parts, personal effects, and bogus aircraft parts (some, like the engines and landing gear weighing several hundred pounds). Others dumped aviation fuel, to “falsely” suggest involvement of an airplane.
Alternatively, eyewitness testimony of those claiming to find these parts were also coerced, and published photographic evidence faked. All press reports were also concocted to give credence to the official version.
Finally, some explanation must be presented as to the fate of Flight 77 and its passengers, which somehow disappeared without any further trace at the precise time the alleged military aircraft or cruise missile approached and struck the Pentagon.
Sorry, but its just too much for me to swallow.
What Does it all Mean?
How then are we to explain the Bush Administration inaction before 9/11, and its willingness to take full advantage of this “new Pearl Harbor?” I don’t know, but that doesn’t keep me from speculating.

So here’s my hunch – and it’s only a hunch which I am willing to revise or abandon if and when more evidence appears. The Busheviks were forewarned (“Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S.”), but they expected attacks on the scale of the USS Cole and the African embassies: perhaps a few dozen casualties—“acceptable.”. They did not take countermeasures because they saw a strategic advantage in such a “mini-Pearl Harbor.” For such a purpose, the attack on The Pentagon would suffice. They did not expect the destruction of the World Trade Center. However, after 9/11 the die was cast, and so they eagerly launched their “the war on terror, along with the policy outrages that were to follow: the USA PATRIOT ACT, Abu Ghraib, Gitmo. The Iraq War, we now know from Richard Clarke and the Downing Street memos, was on the drawing boards long before 9/11, awaiting just such an event to set it in motion.
All that is little more than a guess. But we can arrive at some more substantial conclusions from our unresolved examination of the 9/11 attacks.

ok, I also gotta find fault with his conclusions here. he's saying that he thinks they had foreknowledge and decided that it would just be advantageous to let it happen, and run with it. minimal loss, maximum gain, and all that. yet he just finished alleging things like explosions not caused by the planes, controlled demolition and all that. well, what theory is it then??

[dailycrunch]

An example of how the air defense network normally responds to domestic emergencies is illustrated by the well-reported 1999 case of Payne Stewart's Lear jet. When the golfer's jet failed to respond to air traffic controller communications, F-16 interceptors were quickly dispatched. According to an Air Force timeline, a series of military planes provided an emergency escort to Payne's stricken Learjet starting about 20 minutes after contact with his plane was lost.

http://images.art.com/images/-/You-Got-Served-double-sided--C10122346.jpeg

I guess you should have done more research involving flight interceptions before "you served me" with your favorite movie.

Prove the CIA collected all the video of the crash? haha...ok, I'll just ask them to release some more footage...maybe this time they'll release more than 5 frames of some shitty security camera 200 yards away.


your 30 seconds of googling produced some shit from the 911 commission and some cnn list of casualties? And can you honestly say that when you googled those links your mind wasn't previously made up? I didn't say arguments supporting the official story were hard to find, even someone as un-biased as yourself managed to find them in 30 seconds.


As an example of how idiotic you are, I would like to point out that it took 90 minutes for the golfer's jet to be met by the airforce

[heirkb]

FROM PAGE 1, SYMBOLS, ill tell you what happened. the same thing that happened to all the people that have been on planes that the US planted assassination bombs on. im talkin about all the assassination attempts against communist leaders and how the US plants bombs, then the guy doesnt take the plane but the bombs stays and kills the people.
peace

[lord_casek]

here's a screen grab from the pensacola news journal from sept 17th of '01
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/pensacola_link.htm

U.S. Sen. Bob Graham is requesting information on published reports of a possible Pensacola Naval Air Station tie-in to last week's terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, D.C.

As many as four of 19 suspected hijackers may have participated during the 1990s in the base's flight training program for foreign military trainees, according to reports in The Washington Post and Newsweek magazine.

In addition, The New York Times reported that one of the four also may have lived at the Fountains apartment complex near the University of West Florida, leaving about a year ago.

Graham, D-Miami Lakes, who is chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, was briefed early Sunday on the latest intelligence information, but there was no mention of suspected hijackers having been enrolled as pilot trainees in Pensacola, said his spokesman, Paul Anderson.

Since then, Anderson said, Graham has requested more information on the possible Pensacola tie-in as well as updates on suspected hijackers who may have been receiving civilian flying lessons at commercial training academies elsewhere in Florida.

Graham and a number of state lawmakers returned to Florida aboard a Florida Air National Guard flight Saturday. He could receive the requested information today, Anderson said.

It's not unusual for foreign nationals to train at Pensacola-area bases.

Pensacola NAS and Whiting Field train many of the more than 6,000 foreign military students who receive flight training each year at U.S. military institutions.

The students are instructed in everything from warfare specialty training to air navigation meteorology and land/water survival, according to the NaPentagon and local military officials refused to comment on the media reports on Sunday. They referred calls on the subject to the FBI, which also refused comment.

The news articles caution that there are slight discrepancies between the FBI list of suspected highjackers and the military training records, either in the spellings of their names or in their birth dates. They also raise the possibility that the hijackers stole the identities of military trainees.

Tracking names

The Newsweek article says U.S. military officials gave the FBI information suggesting that five of the alleged hijackers received training in the 1990s at secure U.S. military installations.

It says three of them listed their address on driver licenses and car registrations as 10 Radford Blvd. on Pensacola NAS, a base road on which residences for foreign- military flight trainees are located.

Those suspects are:

Saeed Alghamdi, believed to have helped hijack United Airlines Flight 93 that crashed in rural Pennsylvania.

Ahmad Alnami, who also was aboard Flight 93.

Ahmed Alghamdi, who is suspected of helping commandeer United Airlines Flight 75, which hit the south tower of the World Trade Center.

Saeed Alghamdi listed the address in March 1997 to register a 1998 Oldsmobile; five months later, he used the same address to register a late-model Buick.

The other two used the address on driver licenses issued in 1996 and 1998.

The Newsweek article cites two other suspects with possible U.S. military training: One may have been trained in strategy and tactics at the Air War College in Montgomery, Ala., and one may have received language training at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio.

A Washington Post article adds a fourth suspect who may have trained in Pensacola:

Hamza Alghamdi, who also is believed to have been aboard Flight 75.

A New York Times article, using an alternative spelling, says that Ahmed A. al-Ghamdi lived in the Fountains near UWF. The article says he moved out about August 2000 and does not specify how long he may have lived there.

The Fountains, off University Parkway, caters to UWF students and also has a number of military personnel, according to several residents. The apartment manager could not be reached on Sunday.

The FBI's official list of suspected hijackers gives the most recent addresses of the four with possible Pensacola links as possibly Delray Beach.

Complicating the effort to learn if the suspects ever trained in Pensacola is the fact that Alghamdi is an extremely common name. Scores of people with that name live throughout Florida.

Foreign trainees

Naval Education and Training Security Assistance Field Activity, which administers training of foreign aviation students for the Navy, is headquartered in Pensacola.

Robert Pemberton, the technical director, declined to comment Sunday. But the group has estimated that 15 percent of aviation students on any given day are foreign nationals.

They come from as far away as Egypt, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Norway.

Locally, foreign pilots contribute to the Pensacola-area economy, spending an estimated $10 million a year in local malls, restaurants and shops, the Security Assistance group has estimated.

A consulting firm that conducted an international business opportunities study for the Pensacola Area Chamber of Commerce four years ago said the local economy would receive a boost by increasing the number of foreign flight and aircraft maintenance students training at area bases.

News Journal reporter Amie Streater contributed to this story.

should say enough right there.

[dailycrunch]

[QUOTE=ese]I think its horrible how easily people buy into this shit. QUOTE]

Word. Its very alarming. I feel like a German intellectual in 1938 watching my kids get indoctrined into the hitler youth and brainwashed by a decade of propaganda. Fuck that would have been horrible.

Really, I don't know how so many people can be so shortsighted and naive

[Ski Mask]

[QUOTE=ese]I think its horrible how easily people buy into this shit. QUOTE]

Word. Its very alarming. I feel like a German intellectual in 1938 watching my kids get indoctrined into the hitler youth and brainwashed by a decade of propaganda. Fuck that would have been horrible.

Really, I don't know how so many people can be so shortsighted and naive

as much as most of these people buying into this are type of people who are trying to rebel against being indoctrinated by the media and the government, they're falling into a trap thats the result of being raised by that same media and government. people are buying into this cause it looks like some shit out of a hollywood movie. swapped planes, controlled demolitions, massive shadowy conspiracies. The brutal truth is that most of the real shady shit going on here is boring, and definately not sexy or exciting. the worst attrocities are being carried out in plain sight and on public record. its just burried in boring political semantics and procedure.

[thinksucks]

So I have no party affiliation..no hidden agenda...I'm just asking..What's up with all the conspiracy theories and the controversy?? Been seeing ALOT of it lately...Like this:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8...&q=loose+change (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848&q=loose+change)
THere's alot of crazy shit in there that gets me thinking..
So I went into the Wash DC thread and asked if anybody was on that highway and saw what happened...Thought it would be better here for Chan. Zero. So can anybody talk about this without having a titty fit?


you may not find someone here, but i can assure you that there would have been bumper to bumper traffic on I-395 at that time of the morning.

[lord_casek]

symbols ex boyfriend or something was on the highway and saw a plane.
i wouldn't dispute that it was or wasn't a plane, i'd just say that there is something fishy going on and people ned to get their heads out of their asses

[!@#$%]

noooo

two old friends worked in d.c. at the time
they said they knew several people who saw the plane (it was a married couple)


and my ex bf's neighbor died on that plane.

[lord_casek]

noooo

two old friends worked in d.c. at the time
they said they knew several people who saw the plane (it was a married couple)


and my ex bf's neighbor died on that plane.

oh yeah. i knew in had seen you say something about it.

[lord_casek]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGtOFudmHG8&search=alex%20jones

[yumone]

[QUOTE=ese]I think its horrible how easily people buy into this shit. QUOTE]

Word. Its very alarming. I feel like a German intellectual in 1938 watching my kids get indoctrined into the hitler youth and brainwashed by a decade of propaganda. Fuck that would have been horrible.

Really, I don't know how so many people can be so shortsighted and naive
haha not to blow your own trumpet or anything, poor analogy as well.

[lord_casek]

AA manager destroyed 9/11 tapes
by Matthew L. Wald,
The New York Times

May 6, 2004

WASHINGTON, May 6 -- At least six air traffic controllers who dealt with two of the hijacked airliners on Sept. 11, 2001, made a tape recording that same day describing the events, but the tape was destroyed by a supervisor without anyone making a transcript or even listening to it, the Transportation Department said in a report today.

The taping began before noon on Sept. 11 at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center, in Ronkonkoma, on Long Island, where about 16 people met in a basement conference room known as "the Bat Cave" and passed around a microphone, each recalling his or her version of the events a few hours earlier.

But officials at the center never told higher-ups of the tape's existence, and it was later destroyed by an F.A.A. official described in the report as a quality-assurance manager there. That manager crushed the cassette in his hand, shredded the tape and dropped the pieces into different trash cans around the building, according to a report made public today by the inspector general of the Transportation Department

The tape had been made under an agreement with the union that it would be destroyed after it was superseded by written statements from the controllers, according to the inspector general's report. But the quality-assurance manager asserted that making the tape had itself been a violation of accident procedures at the Federal Aviation Administration, the report said.

The inspector general, Kenneth M. Mead, said that the officials' keeping the existence of the tape a secret and the decision by one to destroy it had not served "the interests of the F.A.A., the department or the public" and could foster suspicions among the public.

Mr. Mead had been asked by Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican who is chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, to look into how well the aviation agency had cooperated with what is widely known as the 9/11 commission, a bipartisan, independent panel investigating the terror attacks.

On the tape, the controllers, some of whom had spoken by radio to people on the planes and some who had tracked the aircraft on radar, gave statements of 5 to 10 minutes each, according to the report.

The tape's value was not clear, Mr. Mead said, because no one was sure what was on it, although the written statements given later by five of the controllers were broadly consistent with "sketchy" notes taken at the time by people in the Bat Cave. (The sixth controller who spoke on the tape did not give a written statement, apparently because that controller had not spoken to either of the planes or observed it on radar.)

One of the central questions about the events of that morning is how the F.A.A. responded to emerging clues that four planes had been hijacked. A tape made within hours of the events, as well as written statements given later, could help establish that.

A spokesman for the 9/11 commission, Al Felzenberg, said that Mr. Mead's report was "meticulous" and "came through the efforts of a very conscientious senator." He said the commission would not comment now on the content of the report but that it "does speak to some of the issues we're interested in."

The tape was made because the manager of the center believed that the standard post-crash procedure would be too slow for an event of the magnitude of 9/11. After an accident or other significant incident, according to officials of the union and the F.A.A., the controllers involved are relieved of duty and often go home; eventually they review the radar tapes and voice transmissions and give a written statement of what they had seen, heard and done.

People in the Ronkonkoma center at midday on Sept. 11 concluded that that procedure would take many hours, and that the controllers' shift was ending and after a traumatic morning, they wanted to go home.

The center manager's idea was to have the tape available overnight, in case the F.B.I. wanted something before the controllers returned to work the next day, according to people involved.

"It was never meant as a permanent record," said Mark DiPalmo, the president of the local chapter of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, who made the deal with the center manager.

He said the session was informal, and that sometimes more than one person at a time was speaking. "We sat everyone in a room, went around the room, said, `What do you remember?" Mr. DiPalmo said in an interview.

Mr. Mead's report said that it was conceivable that without that deal, the tape would not have been made at all.

The quality-assurance manager told investigators that he had destroyed the tape because he thought making it was contrary to F.A.A. policy, which calls for written statements, and because he felt that the controllers "were not in the correct frame of mind to have properly consented to the taping" because of the stress of the day, Mr. Mead reported.

Neither the center manager nor the quality-assurance manager disclosed the tape's existence to their superiors at the F.A.A. region that covers New York, nor to the agency's Washington headquarters, according to the report, which identified none of the officials or controllers by name.

Other tapes were preserved, including conversations on the radio frequencies used by the planes that day, and the radar tapes. In addition, the controllers later made written statements to the F.A.A., per standard procedure, and in this case, to the F.B.I. as well.

The quality-assurance manager destroyed the tape between December 2001 and February, 2002. By that time, he and the center manager had received an e-mail message sent by the F.A.A. instructing officials to safeguard all records and adding, "If a question arises whether or not you should retain data, RETAIN IT."

The inspector general attributed the tape's destruction to "poor judgment."

"The destruction of evidence in the government's possession, in this case an audiotape particularly during times of a national crisis, has the effect of fostering an appearance that information is being withheld from the public," the inspector general's report said. "We do not ascribe motivations to the managers in this case of attempting to cover up, and we have no indication that there was anything on the tape that would lead anyone to conclude that they had something to hide or that the controllers did not carry out their duties."

The inspector general also noted that the official who destroyed the tape had no regrets or second thoughts: "The quality-assurance manager told us that if presented with similar circumstances, he would again take the same course of action."

Mr. Mead wrote that this attitude was "especially troubling" and that supervisors should take "appropriate administrative action."

Although the matter had been referred to the Justice Department, the Mead report added, prosecutors said they had found no basis for criminal charges.

An F.A.A. spokesman, Greg Martin, said that his agency had cooperated with the 9/11 commission and that that was how the tape's existence had become known at the agency's headquarters.

"We believe it would not have added in any way to the information contained in all of the other materials that have already been provided to the investigators and the members of the 9/11 commission," he said.

Nonetheless, Mr. Martin said that "we have taken appropriate disciplinary action" against the quality-assurance manager. For privacy reasons, he said, he could not say what those actions were or identify any of the employees involved.


Published by
The New York Times

[dailycrunch]

SO WHAT ?

[lord_casek]

SO WHAT ?

you apparently don't love your country
enough to care that there is a cover up.

[lord_casek]

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

[religion]

I think its obviosly the work of the "behind the scenes government" in the states. People get pissed at Bush, but really I think hes just a puppet or corporate interests. My vote: The American Corporation did it. I've done my research.

[lord_casek]

I think its obviosly the work of the "behind the scenes government" in the states. People get pissed at Bush, but really I think hes just a puppet or corporate interests. My vote: The American Corporation did it. I've done my research.

not necessarily one corporation, and not necessarily just american.
sure, our economy needed a boost. war does that.
why the boost? build profits for corporations like halliburton, kbr, etc.
what's in it for us? besides oil a nice place in the middle east to build bases.
one fo the largest is going up now. absolutely huge. dwarfs saddams most extravagent palaces. what do we need bases for? invading more countries. one world govt is on its way in.