|
9/11 Documentary - WATCH it in here (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ogvh5150 |
| quote: | Originally posted by St_Andrew
I'm sorry, but what exactly are you implying? Is it that the Bush administration screwed up 9/11 and its aftermath, |
Yes. What do you think the PATRIOT ACT is for? What do you think Homeland Security is for? They admit they were caught with their pants down so they enact a draconian law which no one read thorougly before they voted on it.
| quote: | | or is that they actually planned 9/11 (or let it happen)? |
The evidence is there. You have to sift through it all to come to your own conclusions. It's circumstantial at best but there is no proof to the contrary. No one has come with evidence at all. Just because someone says there is no water in the sea doesn't make it the absolute truth when you just went for a swim at the beach.
| quote: | | If it's the former what you says make sense, but that doesn't really belong in this thread since it's about the latter. |
Infer some more you're too vague.
| quote: | He do got a really good point though, why the didn't they plant WMDs in Iraq after they managed to pull such an ENORMOUS thing such as the 9/11 attacks (which would literaly need thusands of people to shut up about it, since no one has "leaked" so far).
Care to explain? |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
Simple. It would've been way too easy and it would destroy the credibility of the conspiracy theorists. |
Because no one cannot prove that there was no complicity. No one cannot prove that there was not foreknowledge. And since no one can prove either then by ignoring the obvious, then I feel I do not need to answer since no one cares to answer my questions.
It's called cognitive dissonance. You see it here all the time with people arguing how big their favorite DJs phallus is compared to the next. They go on and on about how their favorite set is compared to the other DJs set. It's when someone has it in their mind the truth that was given to them where they cannot, even if refutable, change their mind. It's easy to lie to your friends but not so with your parents. Sort of along those lines. Or in other words you have your theories and I have mine. It's hard to explain to someone they've been lied to when all along they believe they know the truth. But it is so easy for people to believe a movie like the Matrix or the Da Vinci Code as the truth even though they both came from a writers mind. People believe in aliens. People believe that Christ had a child. People believe in Santa Claus. People believe in a lot of things but never the truth. A lie is easier to believe.
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.
Joseph Goebbels
| quote: | Originally posted by donnybrasco
Oh god, whatever.
You're as bad as solgrabber. Do you guys all get instructed on how to talk and think at the same Conspiracy School? |
Funny you should mention school....
| quote: | | You talk in circles and every time someone presents you with any evidence of any kind,...or you start talking in cliche's... |
I can't help you if you can't read. There is a building with windows and a playground around it. Maybe you've heard of it. They call it a school.
If my answers scare you, then you should cease asking scary questions.
| quote: | | you point to this stupid video, ...but you never answer the questions put to you. |
What evidence? All I see is people saying that there was nothing here and nothing there.
What stupid video? The one of the FDNY being told to evacuate because of a bomb in the WTC complex? You call it stupid because it is evidence. You offer nothing but useless rhetoric. Ad hominem attacks by you and others is not evidence. Trolling is just what it is. Quit it and find something worthwhile to argue.
| quote: | | You're not even worth a laugh. Sad. |
It is better to stay silent and let people think you are an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt
Abraham Lincoln |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
I can't help you if you can't read. There is a building with windows and a playground around it. Maybe you've heard of it. They call it a school.
|
Oh...you must mean that place that believes anything right of center is scary...:p |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cyrus King
Hey guys... im not one to beleive much in conspiracy theories.. but all of us know there is SOMETHING fishy that happened predating 9/11 and afterwards. Obviously there are way too many conspiracy throries circling the attacks.. however.... most of them center around the US government being involved in the attacks somehow.
I watched this documentary and it caught my attention.
Click the link and watch the film.. its about an 1:20 hrs and goes into detail about many interesting things.
Tell me what you think.
P.S I know this should have gone into that other massive thread.. but i think it deserved a thread of its own.
[[ LINK REMOVED ]]
|
Truth. Absolutely. See the other thread on this forums that I posted. Operation Northwoods, so much like 9/11. See Wikipedia, if you dont believe it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
Shame on all of you who are denying that government was in no way involved in the carrying out of September 11 attacks. Not only that, they are responsible for letting the attacks happen, yet Bush's popularity increased dramatically after the attacks? Isn't that lame!
Watching these clips, and other information, there is overwhelming evidence to implicate the government in at least some of these heinous schemes. So ask yourself this question: if the government was involved in one of them on that day, what else did they do on that day they knew about and that they covered up?
Stop being ignorant and selfish, and open your eyes! Any one piece of evidence that implicated the US government in 9/11 attacks is enough to implicate the government in all of them, as they are connected!
|
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magnetonium
Shame on all of you who are denying that government was in no way involved in the carrying out of September 11 attacks. Not only that, they are responsible for letting the attacks happen, yet Bush's popularity increased dramatically after the attacks? Isn't that lame!
|
Funny you should mention popularity. W is sliding down the slope when it comes to that. Maybe we wait and see if another attack happens to see his numbers go up again. |
|
|
| donnybrasco |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
The evidence is there. You have to sift through it all to come to your own conclusions. It's circumstantial at best but there is no proof to the contrary. No one has come with evidence at all. Just because someone says there is no water in the sea doesn't make it the absolute truth when you just went for a swim at the beach. |
This assertion that there is "no proof to the contrary" when it comes to your 9-11 conspiracy is absurd. There is certainly WAY more proof that the attacks were exactly what they appeared to be, than there is not.
I can only assume that you think 9-11 is such an outrageous event, that you can't possibly imagine anyone else being more evil than the U.S. Government, so in your minds, you have to turn responsibility back on them, rather than keeping it right where it deservedly should be....which is with the Terrorists and their organizations.
Have you forgotten about the Bali and Spain Bombings? Were those U.S. Government-born attacks too?
Eeesh....I don't know why I waste my typing fingers on this garbage. |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
The evidence is there. You have to sift through it all to come to your own conclusions. It's circumstantial at best but there is no proof to the contrary. No one has come with evidence at all. Just because someone says there is no water in the sea doesn't make it the absolute truth when you just went for a swim at the beach. |
There is no evidence at all?! You got to be kidding. Seriously, people here are starting to scare me.
If you somehow think it is an equal amount of proof of that:
- Osama bin Laden carried out the 9/11 attacks.
- George Bush & co carried them out.
Then you seriously need to study some more, and perhaps apply some ing common sense again!
Actually, the US never landed on the moon, prove me wrong! And the FDA is holding back the medication that could cure everyone in the world, prove me wrong! :rolleyes:
There are too technologies to solve the world's energy crises, the holocast never happend, the south asian tsunami was the work of the US goverment and most importantly of all - the world cup of fotball in 1958 did not happen! Prove me wrong!
(point being, those are all well supported conspiracies with as much facts as the 9/11 ones) |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
To this end, NIST must release the 6,899 photographs and over 300 hours of video recordings – acquired mostly by private parties – which it admits to holding (NIST, 2005, p. 81). Evidence relating to WTC 7 and its mysterious collapse must not be held back. In particular, photos and analyses of the molten metal observed in the basements of both Towers and WTC7 need to be brought forth to the international community of scientists and engineers immediately. Therefore, along with others, I call for the release of these and all relevant data for scrutiny by a cross-disciplinary, international team of researchers. The explosive-demolition hypothesis will be considered: all options will be on the table.
AFTERWORD
In writing this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fires, but through the carefully planned use of explosives/incendiaries. I have presented ample evidence for the controlled-demolition hypothesis, which is testable and falsifiable and yet has not been seriously considered in any of the studies funded by the US government.
At the same time, I acknowledge that other notions have sprung up in the near vacuum of official consideration of this very plausible hypothesis. These notions must be subjected to careful scrutiny. I by no means endorse all such ideas. A March 2005 article in Popular Mechanics focuses on poorly-supported claims and proceeds to ridicule the whole “9-11 truth movement” (Chertoff, 2005). Serious replies to this article have already been written (Hoffman, 2005; Baker, 2005; Meyer, 2005).
Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?
This man has a PhD and I expect the silly little trolls to put him down. |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
Funny you should mention popularity. W is sliding down the slope when it comes to that. Maybe we wait and see if another attack happens to see his numbers go up again. |
His popularity went down because of the so many lies that has surfaced. Also, many of the things he promised in his re-election campaign turned out to be lies. Also, he went too far with his success of 9/11 planning - instead of just invading Afghanistan, he invaded Iraq and I think Iran will be next. I think USA will launch some kind of operation against Iran before the end of Bush administration. Its only a matter of time. Bush understands that his population solely depends on his war moves, so expect another one soon. There's nothing else left for his to do to improve his political situation. Its a win-win situation: create a fake attack or a provocation by Iran, and then attack it, blaming Iran for it. And then install a puppet government there and start pumping the oil out! And then you know what will be next? The oil-rich fields of the Caspian Sea. The Russians are trying hard to establish themselves there before the American arrival.
But the Americans can see this already, and thats why they have 2 pawns at their disposal: a pro-American Georgia and Ukraine, with American puppet leaders who came to power there after American-financed overthrown governments who were previously pro-Russian. These two pawns will provoke Russia into a war (dont forget about volatile Abkhazia/Southern Ossetia/Crimea) and USA/NATO will be able to get into under the pretext of peace (like in Yugoslavia). Subsequently, they will divide the Caucasus, liek they did with Yugoslavia, integrate those areas into Western iinfluence and control, like the European Union is doing with former Yugoslavia, place their armies there and control lets say about most of the world' oil. What an easy scheme! |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
Source
| quote: | Contact: Ed Haas - office (843) 278-5021 mobile (843) 327-7598
[email protected]
http://www.teamliberty.net
May 29, 2006
An Open Letter to the 9/11 Commission
Dear 9/11 Commissioners,
Abraham Lincoln once said, A house divided against itself cannot stand." The United States is now divided on what it believes about September 11, 2001. A CNN poll conducted on March 25, 2006 revealed that 84% of the 52 thousand people polled now believe that the U.S. government has not thoroughly answered 9/11 questions. 84 percent!
Between May 12, 2006 and May 16, 2006, Zogby International conducted a nationwide poll pertaining to the governments account of 9/11. Here are the results:
Bush exploited Sept. 11th attacks 44%
US government and 9/11 Commission are covering up 42%
9/11 should be reinvestigated 45%
I believe this government, our country, cannot endure permanently with tens of millions believing that the government is involved in a cover-up regarding September 11th 2001. The United States of America is divided. The division is so great that resolution must now be found. In my opinion, re-opening 9/11 is a matter of national defense. Debate is the answer. The National 9/11 Debate will be an outward sign of an inward desire to resolve the unanswered and persistent questions that remain about what really happened in the United States on September 11, 2001.
So what should patriotic Americans do with our grievances? We have called for a debate. Not just a few Americans want this debate Tens of millions of Americans are demanding answers to be derived from a public peoples forum. It is the enormity of those that oppose the governments account of 9/11 that has prompted me to draw the line in the sand, to pick a date, time, and location to have a public debate on 9/11. I then sought out the most reputable and credentialed experts from the 9/11 Truth Movement to debate members of the 9/11 Commission and the NIST scientists.
The seven-member debate team that will dispute the government account of 9/11 is as follows:
Philip J. Berg, Esquire is a Former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania, and the attorney for plaintiffs in 9-11 RICO Suit vs. Bush. His web site, 911forthetruth.com covers the RICO lawsuit against Bush, Cheney, and 53 other defendants in Federal Court.
James H. Fetzer a Distinguished McKnight University Professor of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota, Duluth, a former Marine Corps officer, the author or editor of 27 books, and founder and co-chairman of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.
David Ray Griffin is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy and Theology at the Claremont Graduate School, where he taught for over 30 years, retiring in 2004. He has authored or edited over thirty books, including "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11" and Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11.
Steven E. Jones is the co-chairman of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a Professor of Physics at Brigham Young University, an expert in cold fusion and solar energy who earned his Ph.D. at Vanderbilt, and who has authored an influential study of the collapse of the Twin Towers (WTC-1, WTC-2).
George Nelson, Colonel, USAF (retired) is a trained aircraft accident investigator who served as an Aircraft Maintenance Manager for more than 30 years and who was assigned additional duties as a member of aircraft accident investigation teams for the United States Air Force.
Morgan Reynolds is a Professor Emeritus of Economics at Texas A&M. He is the former Chief Economist for the Department of Labor for President George W. Bush. He is also the former Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis. In June 2005, Lew Rockwell published Reynolds article: Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse?
Judy D. Wood is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Clemson University with degrees in Civil Engineering, Engineering Mechanics, and Materials Engineering Science. Professor Wood teaches courses in the areas of engineering mechanics and experimental stress analysis.
If your initial reaction regarding The National 9/11 Debate was negative - to not participate, I ask you to please reconsider for the sake of the nation. I recognize that such a debate could put the government in a vulnerable position, but based on the polls, to ignore the fact that nearly half your countrymen are not satisfied with what the government has reported on 9/11 will only deepen the division that is destroying the United States of America. It is my belief that the lack of support for the War in Iraq is rooted in the fact that nearly half the nation doesnt believe the 9/11 Commission Report. After all, if you believe that the World Trade Center Building Seven collapsed as the result of controlled demolition which it did, then it is easier to believe that the twin towers were also brought down with the aid of pre-planted explosives. With such a belief intact, how can an American support the so-called global war on terrorism and the war in Iraq?
The problem can no longer be ignored. Please take a lead role in assembling a seven-member government debate team that will debate the aforementioned seven-member civilian debate team in Charleston, SC on September 16, 2006. This event will confirm truths, uncover truths, and beg for truths, and while it will not possibly be able to satisfy all people, it will go a long way to heal some open wounds of a troubled nation.
The National 9/11 Debate will receive national media attention. Dont let there be seven empty seats with the names of the 9/11 Commissioners and NIST scientists pasted on them for the world to see. Lets do this debate. Lets get it done.
Yours in Liberty,
E.F. Haas
ACTION ALERT: Please write your own letters to the 9/11 Commissioners and encourage their participation in The National 9/11 Debate.
Thomas Kean Chairman
The National Campaign To Prevent Teen Pregnancy
1776 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20036
Lee H. Hamilton
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center
One Woodrow Wilson Plaza
1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20004-3027
Slade Gorton
Preston Gates & Ellis LLP
1735 New York Ave. NW Suite 500
Washington, DC 20006-5221
Bob Kerrey
The New School in NYC
66 W. 12th St. Rm. 800
NY, NY 10011
James R. Thompson
Winston & Strawn LLP
35 W. Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 606019703
Jamie Gorelick
WilmerHale
1875 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20006
Richard Ben-Veniste
Mayer, Brown, Rowe, & Maw
1909 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006-1101
Timothy J. Roemer
Center for National Policy
One Massachusetts Ave. NW Suite 333
Washington, DC 20001
Fred F. Fielding
Wiley Rein & Fielding LLP
1776 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
John F. Lehman
J.F. Lehman & Co.
2001 Jefferson Davis Highway Suite 607
Arlington, VA 22202 |
|
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
Because no one cannot prove that there was no complicity. No one cannot prove that there was not foreknowledge. And since no one can prove either then by ignoring the obvious, then I feel I do not need to answer since no one cares to answer my questions. |
Here's something I thought that could be added to that. Let me demonstrate it with an analogy. Person X murders person Y. Now typically in an investigation, you'd do some research on person Y's background, figure out who he/she generally associated with, who might have some motive to kill him/her or may benefit from it etc. Then you make a list of suspect and gather evidence to narrow down the list. The suspects are subject to questioning and, possibly, further investigation to determine their guilt or innocence. It doesn't matter who person X is, anyone could be a potential suspct, even someone with a blood relation to person Y. Normally, you wouldn't expect X to be related to Y, but it's still possible. So you wouldn't discount that possibility, hell, X could even be Y's parent. As long as you have reason to believe that a family member could have a motive, he/she is a suspect.
Now, this logic and line of reasoning is widely accepted and no one really has a problem with it. Or take a court case for example; similar concept. A lawyer is supposed to do the same type of research and use simliar reasons to determine who the culprit(s) are in a criminal case. The lawyer's job is essentialy to formulate a theory (with supporting evidence ofcourse). No one really has a problem with this eigther, correct?
But when the goverment is the suspect, it called a "conspiracy theory." Most people abandon all rationality and say you're "nuts" for using the same line of reasoning and logic that would go into a criminal case. That my friend, is complete hypocrisy. Oh, and on top of that, it's highly unlikely any investigation will take place into goverment complicity in the crime/deliberate inaction, especially by an organization affiliated with/selected by/tied to the goverment * hint hint, 9-11 Commision *. And that why it's hard to prove government complicity, because any investigation will be blocked (kind of like how the Bush adminisrtaion stopped any independent investigation into 9-11, and made their bull 9-11 commision :whip: )
Just my 2 cents. |
|
|
|
|
