New Hampshire Underground

New Hampshire Underground => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kat Kanning on September 06, 2005, 05:45 PM NHFT

Title: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 06, 2005, 05:45 PM NHFT
I'll start adding evidence, as I see it.

Where's the plane?  I checked on an air disaster site:  http://www.airdisaster.com/ and plane crashed leave visible debris...lots of it.  Where's the plane from flight 93? 

Article from the time it happened:
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912crashnat2p2.asp



[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 06, 2005, 05:47 PM NHFT
There's so much evidence, it'll take me a while to put it up here.  I'll be adding to this gradually.   Obviously that one item doesn't mean 9-11 was an inside job.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: tracysaboe on September 06, 2005, 05:49 PM NHFT
There are definitely a lot of questions. I currently don't believe the government did it, but I do believe they knew it was coming and choose to not do anything about it, so they could use it as a "pearl Harbo" event.  Several neo-cons said they wanted such a thing prior to 9/11.  The political classes definitely had motive.

Tracy
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 06, 2005, 05:59 PM NHFT
I've checked out a lot of this, but not all.  I haven't found anything to be untrue.


The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie

by Dr. David Ray Griffin

In discussing my second 9/11 book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, I have often said, only half in jest, that a better title might have been ?a 571-page lie.? (Actually, I was saying ?a 567-page lie,? because I was forgetting to count the four pages of the Preface.) In making this statement, one of my points has been that the entire Report is constructed in support of one big lie: that the official story about 9/11 is true.

Another point, however, is that in the process of telling this overall lie, The 9/11 Commission Report tells many lies about particular issues. This point is implied by my critique?s subtitle, ?Omissions and Distortions.? It might be thought, to be sure, that of the two types of problems signaled by those two terms, only those designated ?distortions? can be considered lies.

It is better, however, to understand the two terms as referring to two types of lies: implicit and explicit. We have an explicit lie when the Report claims that the core of each of the Twin Towers consisted of a hollow steel shaft or when it claims that Vice President Cheney did not give the shoot-down order until after 10:10 that morning. But we have an implicit lie when the Commission, in its discussion of the 19 alleged suicide hijackers, omits the fact that at least six of them have credibly been reported to be still alive, or when it fails to mention the fact that Building 7 of the World Trade Center collapsed. Such omissions are implicit lies partly because they show that the Commission did not honor its stated intention ?to provide the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11.? They are also lies insofar as the Commission could avoid telling an explicit lie about the issue in question only by not mentioning it, which, I believe, was the case in at least most instances.

Given these two types of lies, it might be wondered how many lies are contained in The 9/11 Commission Report. I do not know. But, deciding to see how many lies I had discussed in my book, I found that I had identified over 100 of them. Once I had made the list, it occurred to me that others might find this summary helpful. Hence this article.

One caveat: Although in some of the cases it is obvious that the Commission has lied, in other cases I would say, as I make clear in the book, that it appears that the Commission has lied. However, in the interests of simply giving a brief listing of claims that I consider to be lies, I will ignore this distinction between obvious and probable lies, leaving it to readers, if they wish, to look up the discussion in The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. For ease in doing this, I have parenthetically indicated the pages of the book on which the various issues are discussed.

Given this clarification, I now list the omissions and claims of The 9/11 Commission Report that I, in my critique of that report, portrayed as lies:

1. The omission of evidence that at least six of the alleged hijackers---including Waleed al-Shehri, said by the Commission probably to have stabbed a flight attendant on Flight 11 before it crashed into the North Tower of the WTC---are still alive (19-20).

2. The omission of evidence about Mohamed Atta---such as his reported fondness for alcohol, pork, and lap dances---that is in tension with the Commission?s claim that he had become fanatically religious (20-21).

3. The obfuscation of the evidence that Hani Hanjour was too poor a pilot to have flown an airliner into the Pentagon (21-22).

4. The omission of the fact that the publicly released flight manifests contain no Arab names (23).

5. The omission of the fact that fire has never, before or after 9/11, caused steel-frame buildings to collapse (25).

6. The omission of the fact that the fires in the Twin Towers were not very big, very hot, or very long-lasting compared with fires in several steel-frame buildings that did not collapse (25-26).

7. The omission of the fact that, given the hypothesis that the collapses were caused by fire, the South Tower, which was struck later than the North Tower and also had smaller fires, should not have collapsed first (26).

8. The omission of the fact that WTC 7 (which was not hit by an airplane and which had only small, localized fires) also collapsed---an occurrence that FEMA admitted it could not explain (26).

9. The omission of the fact that the collapse of the Twin Towers (like that of Building 7) exemplified at least 10 features suggestive of controlled demolition (26-27).

10. The claim that the core of each of the Twin Towers was ?a hollow steel shaft?---a claim that denied the existence of the 47 massive steel columns that in reality constituted the core of each tower and that, given the ?pancake theory? of the collapses, should have still been sticking up many hundreds of feet in the air (27-28).

11. The omission of Larry Silverstein?s statement that he and the fire department commander decided to ?pull? Building 7 (28).

12. The omission of the fact that the steel from the WTC buildings was quickly removed from the crime scene and shipped overseas before it could be analyzed for evidence of explosives (30).

13. The omission of the fact that because Building 7 had been evacuated before it collapsed, the official reason for the rapid removal of the steel---that some people might still be alive in the rubble under the steel---made no sense in this case (30).

14. The omission of Mayor Giuliani?s statement that he had received word that the World Trade Center was going to collapse (30-31).

15. The omission of the fact that President Bush?s brother Marvin and his cousin Wirt Walker III were both principals in the company in charge of security for the WTC (31-32).

16. The omission of the fact that the west wing of the Pentagon would have been the least likely spot to be targeted by al-Qaeda terrorists, for several reasons (33-34).

17. The omission of any discussion of whether the damage done to the Pentagon was consistent with the impact of a Boeing 757 going several hundred miles per hour (34).

18. The omission of the fact that there are photos showing that the west wing?s fa?ade did not collapse until 30 minutes after the strike and also that the entrance hole appears too small for a Boeing 757 to have entered (34).

19. The omission of all testimony that has been used to cast doubt on whether remains of a Boeing 757 were visible either inside or outside the Pentagon (34-36).

20. The omission of any discussion of whether the Pentagon has a anti-missile defense system that would have brought down a commercial airliner---even though the Commission suggested that the al-Qaeda terrorists did not attack a nuclear power plant because they assumed that it would be thus defended (36).

21. The omission of the fact that pictures from various security cameras---including the camera at the gas station across from the Pentagon, the film from which was reportedly confiscated by the FBI immediately after the strike---could presumably answer the question of what really hit the Pentagon (37-38).

22. The omission of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld?s reference to ?the missile [used] to damage [the Pentagon]? (39).

23. The apparent endorsement of a wholly unsatisfactory answer to the question of why the Secret Service agents allowed President Bush to remain at the Sarasota school at a time when, given the official story, they should have assumed that a hijacked airliner might be about to crash into the school (41-44).

24. The failure to explore why the Secret Service did not summon fighter jets to provide air cover for Air Force One (43-46).

25. The claims that when the presidential party arrived at the school, no one in the party knew that several planes had been hijacked (47-48).

26. The omission of the report that Attorney General Ashcroft was warned to stop using commercial airlines prior to 9/11 (50).

27. The omission of David Schippers? claim that he had, on the basis of information provided by FBI agents about upcoming attacks in lower Manhattan, tried unsuccessfully to convey this information to Attorney General Ashcroft during the six weeks prior to 9/11 (51).

28. The omission of any mention of the FBI agents who reportedly claimed to have known the targets and dates of the attacks well in advance (51-52).

29. The claim, by means of a circular, question-begging rebuttal, that the unusual purchases of put options prior to 9/11 did not imply advance knowledge of the attacks on the part of the buyers (52-57).

30. The omission of reports that both Mayor Willie Brown and some Pentagon officials received warnings about flying on 9/11 (57).

31. The omission of the report that Osama bin Laden, who already was America?s ?most wanted? criminal, was treated in July 2001 by an American doctor in the American Hospital in Dubai and visited by the local CIA agent (59).

32. The omission of news stories suggesting that after 9/11 the US military in Afghanistan deliberately allowed Osama bin Laden to escape (60).

33. The omission of reports, including the report of a visit to Osama bin Laden at the hospital in Dubai by the head of Saudi intelligence, that were in tension with the official portrayal of Osama as disowned by his family and his country (60-61).

34. The omission of Gerald Posner?s account of Abu Zubaydah?s testimony, according to which three members of the Saudi royal family---all of whom later died mysteriously within an eight-day period---were funding al-Qaeda and had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks (61-65).

35. The Commission?s denial that it found any evidence of Saudi funding of al-Qaeda (65-68).

36. The Commission?s denial in particular that it found any evidence that money from Prince Bandar?s wife, Princess Haifa, went to al-Qaeda operatives (69-70).

37. The denial, by means of simply ignoring the distinction between private and commercial flights, that the private flight carrying Saudis from Tampa to Lexington on September 13 violated the rules for US airspace in effect at the time (71-76).

38. The denial that any Saudis were allowed to leave the United States shortly after 9/11 without being adequately investigated (76-82).

39. The omission of evidence that Prince Bandar obtained special permission from the White House for the Saudi flights (82-86).

40. The omission of Coleen Rowley?s claim that some officials at FBI headquarters did see the memo from Phoenix agent Kenneth Williams (89-90).

41. The omission of Chicago FBI agent Robert Wright?s charge that FBI headquarters closed his case on a terrorist cell, then used intimidation to prevent him from publishing a book reporting his experiences (91).

42. The omission of evidence that FBI headquarters sabotaged the attempt by Coleen Rowley and other Minneapolis agents to obtain a warrant to search Zacarias Moussaoui?s computer (91-94).

43. The omission of the 3.5 hours of testimony to the Commission by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds?-testimony that, according to her later public letter to Chairman Kean, revealed serious 9/11-related cover-ups by officials at FBI headquarters (94-101).

44. The omission of the fact that General Mahmoud Ahmad, the head of Pakistan?s intelligence agency (the ISI), was in Washington the week prior to 9/11, meeting with CIA chief George Tenet and other US officials (103-04).

45. The omission of evidence that ISI chief Ahmad had ordered $100,000 to be sent to Mohamed Atta prior to 9/11 (104-07).

46. The Commission?s claim that it found no evidence that any foreign government, including Pakistan, had provided funding for the al-Qaeda operatives (106).

47. The omission of the report that the Bush administration pressured Pakistan to dismiss Ahmad as ISI chief after the appearance of the story that he had ordered ISI money sent to Atta (107-09).

48. The omission of evidence that the ISI (and not merely al-Qaeda) was behind the assassination of Ahmad Shah Masood (the leader of Afghanistan?s Northern Alliance), which occurred just after the week-long meeting between the heads of the CIA and the ISI (110-112).

49. The omission of evidence of ISI involvement in the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Reporter Daniel Pearl (113).

50. The omission of Gerald Posner?s report that Abu Zubaydah claimed that a Pakistani military officer, Mushaf Ali Mir, was closely connected to both the ISI and al-Qaeda and had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks (114).

51. The omission of the 1999 prediction by ISI agent Rajaa Gulum Abbas that the Twin Towers would be ?coming down? (114).

52. The omission of the fact that President Bush and other members of his administration repeatedly spoke of the 9/11 attacks as ?opportunities? (116-17).

53. The omission of the fact that The Project for the New American Century, many members of which became key figures in the Bush administration, published a document in 2000 saying that ?a new Pearl Harbor? would aid its goal of obtaining funding for a rapid technological transformation of the US military (117-18).
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 06, 2005, 06:00 PM NHFT
Continued....


54. The omission of the fact that Donald Rumsfeld, who as head of the commission on the US Space Command had recommended increased funding for it, used the attacks of 9/11 on that very evening to secure such funding (119-22).

55. The failure to mention the fact that three of the men who presided over the failure to prevent the 9/11 attacks?-Secretary Rumsfeld, General Richard Myers, and General Ralph Eberhart---were also three of the strongest advocates for the US Space Command (122).

56. The omission of the fact that Unocal had declared that the Taliban could not provide adequate security for it to go ahead with its oil-and-gas pipeline from the Caspian region through Afghanistan and Pakistan (122-25).

57. The omission of the report that at a meeting in July 2001, US representatives said that because the Taliban refused to agree to a US proposal that would allow the pipeline project to go forward, a war against them would begin by October (125-26).

58. The omission of the fact that Zbigniew Brzezinski in his 1997 book had said that for the United States to maintain global primacy, it needed to gain control of Central Asia, with its vast petroleum reserves, and that a new Pearl Harbor would be helpful in getting the US public to support this imperial effort (127-28).

59. The omission of evidence that some key members of the Bush administration, including Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz, had been agitating for a war with Iraq for many years (129-33).

60. The omission of notes of Rumsfeld?s conversations on 9/11 showing that he was determined to use the attacks as a pretext for a war with Iraq (131-32).

61. The omission of the statement by the Project for the New American Century that ?the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein? (133-34).

62. The claim that FAA protocol on 9/11 required the time-consuming process of going through several steps in the chain of command--even though the Report cites evidence to the contrary (158).

63. The claim that in those days there were only two air force bases in NORAD?s Northeast sector that kept fighters on alert and that, in particular, there were no fighters on alert at either McGuire or Andrews (159-162).

64. The omission of evidence that Andrews Air Force Base did keep several fighters on alert at all times (162-64).

65. The acceptance of the twofold claim that Colonel Marr of NEADS had to telephone a superior to get permission to have fighters scrambled from Otis and that this call required eight minutes (165-66).

66. The endorsement of the claim that the loss of an airplane?s transponder signal makes it virtually impossible for the US military?s radar to track that plane (166-67).

67. The claim that the Payne Stewart interception did not show NORAD?s response time to Flight 11 to be extraordinarily slow (167-69).

68. The claim that the Otis fighters were not airborne until seven minutes after they received the scramble order because they did not know where to go (174-75).

69. The claim that the US military did not know about the hijacking of Flight 175 until 9:03, when it was crashing into the South Tower (181-82).

70. The omission of any explanation of (a) why NORAD?s earlier report, according to which the FAA had notified the military about the hijacking of Flight 175 at 8:43, was now to be considered false and (b) how this report, if it was false, could have been published and then left uncorrected for almost three years (182).

71. The claim that the FAA did not set up a teleconference until 9:20 that morning (183).

72. The omission of the fact that a memo by Laura Brown of the FAA says that its teleconference was established at about 8:50 and that it included discussion of Flight 175?s hijacking (183-84, 186).

73. The claim that the NMCC teleconference did not begin until 9:29 (186-88).

74. The omission, in the Commission?s claim that Flight 77 did not deviate from its course until 8:54, of the fact that earlier reports had said 8:46 (189-90).

75. The failure to mention that the report that a large jet had crashed in Kentucky, at about the time Flight 77 disappeared from FAA radar, was taken seriously enough by the heads of the FAA and the FBI?s counterterrorism unit to be relayed to the White House (190).

76. The claim that Flight 77 flew almost 40 minutes through American airspace towards Washington without being detected by the military?s radar (191-92).

77. The failure to explain, if NORAD?s earlier report that it was notified about Flight 77 at 9:24 was ?incorrect,? how this erroneous report could have arisen, i.e., whether NORAD officials had been lying or simply confused for almost three years (192-93).

78. The claim that the Langley fighter jets, which NORAD had previously said were scrambled to intercept Flight 77, were actually scrambled in response to an erroneous report from an (unidentified) FAA controller at 9:21 that Flight 11 was still up and was headed towards Washington (193-99).

79. The claim that the military did not hear from the FAA about the probable hijacking of Flight 77 before the Pentagon was struck (204-12).

80. The claim that Jane Garvey did not join Richard Clarke?s videoconference until 9:40, after the Pentagon was struck (210).

81. The claim that none of the teleconferences succeeded in coordinating the FAA and military responses to the hijackings because ?none of [them] included the right officials from both the FAA and the Defense Department?---although Richard Clarke says that his videoconference included FAA head Jane Garvey as well as Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and General Richard Myers, the acting chair of the joint chiefs of staff (211).

82. The Commission?s claim that it did not know who from the Defense Department participated in Clarke?s videoconference---although Clarke?s book said that it was Donald Rumsfeld and General Myers (211-212).

83. The endorsement of General Myers? claim that he was on Capitol Hill during the attacks, without mentioning Richard Clarke?s contradictory account, according to which Myers was in the Pentagon participating in Clarke?s videoconference (213-17).

84. The failure to mention the contradiction between Clarke?s account of Rumsfeld?s whereabouts that morning and Rumsfeld?s own accounts (217-19).

85. The omission of Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta?s testimony, given to the Commission itself, that Vice-President Cheney and others in the underground shelter were aware by 9:26 that an aircraft was approaching the Pentagon (220).

86. The claim that Pentagon officials did not know about an aircraft approaching Pentagon until 9:32, 9:34, or 9:36---in any case, only a few minutes before the building was hit (223).

87. The endorsement of two contradictory stories about the aircraft that hit the Pentagon---one in which it executed a 330-degree downward spiral (a ?high-speed dive?) and another in which there is no mention of this maneuver (222-23).

88. The claim that the fighter jets from Langley, which were allegedly scrambled to protect Washington from ?Phantom Flight 11,? were nowhere near Washington because they were mistakenly sent out to sea (223-24).

89. The omission of all the evidence suggesting that the aircraft that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77 (224-25).

90. The claim that the military was not notified by the FAA about Flight 93?s hijacking until after it crashed (227-29, 232, 253).

91. The twofold claim that the NMCC did not monitor the FAA-initiated conference and then was unable to get the FAA connected to the NMCC-initiated teleconference (230-31).

92. The omission of the fact that the Secret Service is able to know everything that the FAA knows (233).

93. The omission of any inquiry into why the NMCC initiated its own teleconference if, as Laura Brown of the FAA has said, this is not standard protocol (234).

94. The omission of any exploration of why General Montague Winfield not only had a rookie (Captain Leidig) take over his role as the NMCC?s Director of Operations but also left him in charge after it was clear that the Pentagon was facing an unprecedented crisis (235-36).

95. The claim that the FAA (falsely) notified the Secret Service between 10:10 and 10:15 that Flight 93 was still up and headed towards Washington (237).

96. The claim that Vice President Cheney did not give the shoot-down authorization until after 10:10 (several minutes after Flight 93 had crashed) and that this authorization was not transmitted to the US military until 10:31 (237-41).

97. The omission of all the evidence indicating that Flight 93 was shot down by a military plane (238-39, 252-53).

98. The claim that Richard Clarke did not receive the requested shoot-down authorization until 10:25 (240).

99. The omission of Clarke?s own testimony, which suggests that he received the shoot-down authorization by 9:50 (240).

100. The claim that Cheney did not reach the underground shelter (the PEOC [Presidential Emergency Operations Center]) until 9:58 (241-44).

101. The omission of multiple testimony, including that of Norman Mineta to the Commission itself, that Cheney was in the PEOC before 9:20 (241-44).

102. The claim that shoot-down authorization must be given by the president (245).

103. The omission of reports that Colonel Marr ordered a shoot-down of Flight 93 and that General Winfield indicated that he and others at the NMCC had expected a fighter jet to reach Flight 93 (252).

104. The omission of reports that there were two fighter jets in the air a few miles from NYC and three of them only 200 miles from Washington (251).

105. The omission of evidence that there were at least six bases with fighters on alert in the northeastern part of the United States (257-58).

106. The endorsement of General Myers? claim that NORAD had defined its mission in terms of defending only against threats from abroad (258-62).

107. The endorsement of General Myers? claim that NORAD had not recognized the possibility that terrorists might use hijacked airliners as missiles (262-63).

108. The failure to highlight the significance of evidence presented in the Report itself, and to mention other evidence, showing that NORAD had indeed recognized the threat that hijacked airliners might be used as missiles (264-67).

109. The failure to probe the issue of how the ?war games? scheduled for that day were related to the military?s failure to intercept the hijacked airliners (268-69).

110. The failure to discuss the possible relevance of Operation Northwoods to the attacks of 9/11 (269-71).

111. The claim---made in explaining why the military did not get information about the hijackings in time to intercept them---that FAA personnel inexplicably failed to follow standard procedures some 16 times (155-56, 157, 179, 180, 181, 190, 191, 193, 194, 200, 202-03, 227, 237, 272-75).

112. The failure to point out that the Commission?s claimed ?independence? was fatally compromised by the fact that its executive director, Philip Zelikow, was virtually a member of the Bush administration (7-9, 11-12, 282-84).

113. The failure to point out that the White House first sought to prevent the creation of a 9/11 Commission, then placed many obstacles in its path, including giving it extremely meager funding (283-85).

114. The failure to point out that the Commission?s chairman, most of the other commissioners, and at least half of the staff had serious conflicts of interest (285-90, 292-95).

115. The failure of the Commission, while bragging that it presented its final report ?without dissent,? to point out that this was probably possible only because Max Cleland, the commissioner who was most critical of the White House and swore that he would not be part of ?looking at information only partially,? had to resign in order to accept a position with the Export-Import Bank, and that the White House forwarded his nomination for this position only after he was becoming quite outspoken in his criticisms (290-291).

I will close by pointing out that I concluded my study of what I came to call ?the Kean-Zelikow Report? by writing that it, ?far from lessening my suspicions about official complicity, has served to confirm them. Why would the minds in charge of this final report engage in such deception if they were not trying to cover up very high crimes?? (291)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 06, 2005, 06:08 PM NHFT
Look into Operation Northwoods.  It was a plan by the Us government to attack our own people, including crashing planes & substitution of planes mid-air as a pretext to start a war in Cuba.  It shows that they're willing to do such things.  It admits they've done it in the past, i.e. The Maine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

This is the declassified document released under the Freedom of Information Act.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf 
The PDF is a little hard to read in places, but you can get the relevant info if you stick with it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 06, 2005, 06:25 PM NHFT
7. The omission of the fact that, given the hypothesis that the collapses were caused by fire, the South Tower, which was struck later than the North Tower and also had smaller fires, should not have collapsed first (26).

B.S. alert.  The second airplane hit lower down the tower than the first one, thus leaving far more weight upon the structure of the tower.  This is why it appeared to split in half when it collapsed, as opposed to the other tower that pancaked floor upon floor as it collapsed.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 06, 2005, 06:25 PM NHFT
Look into Operation Northwoods.? It was a plan by the Us government to attack our own people, including crashing planes & substitution of planes mid-air as a pretext to start a war in Cuba.? It shows that they're willing to do such things.? It admits they've done it in the past, i.e. The Maine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

This is the declassified document released under the Freedom of Information Act.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf?
The PDF is a little hard to read in places, but you can get the relevant info if you stick with it.

OMG, I thought that was fake.   :o
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 06, 2005, 06:45 PM NHFT
I'll start adding evidence, as I see it.

Where's the plane?? I checked on an air disaster site:? http://www.airdisaster.com/ and plane crashed leave visible debris...lots of it.? Where's the plane from flight 93??

Article from the time it happened:
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912crashnat2p2.asp

They said bits and pieces of it were spread over a 5 mile radius.  That doesn't quite make sense to me.  However, they may have cleaned up the crater before this picture was taken.  So far, I cannot find any pictures of debris from flight 93, which is strange.

If it wasn't flight 93, then why did so many people call to report a large airliner flying low, then an explosion like dynamite, and a plume of smoke?  Maybe the terrorists weren't lying when they told passengers they had a bomb.  It could have been a remote detonator for a bomb in their luggage that was stored in the cargo area.  That could explain a lot of things.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 06, 2005, 09:27 PM NHFT
The people who came on the scene first said they didn't see huge airplane parts.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 06, 2005, 10:05 PM NHFT
7. The omission of the fact that, given the hypothesis that the collapses were caused by fire, the South Tower, which was struck later than the North Tower and also had smaller fires, should not have collapsed first (26).

B.S. alert.  The second airplane hit lower down the tower than the first one, thus leaving far more weight upon the structure of the tower.  This is why it appeared to split in half when it collapsed, as opposed to the other tower that pancaked floor upon floor as it collapsed.

The fire in that building didn't even cover the whole floor.  How did that building fall symetrically?  How does a fire that, according the the firefighters themselves, was almost out, cause a building to fall?  What about the numerous experts who say there's no way kerosene can melt steel?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 06, 2005, 10:09 PM NHFT
What about the numerous experts who say there's no way kerosene can melt steel?

There's about 1,500-2,000F difference (depending on composition) between "melt" and "soft as putty".
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 06, 2005, 11:07 PM NHFT
How many people would it take to pull off a conspiracy such as this?  How is it nobody has turned if that were the case?  If these people were frigging smart enough to do this and get away with it, how the hell are the screwing up Iraq so incompently?  Or is that part of their cover?

Send it to Myth Busters, I don't buy it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: tracysaboe on September 07, 2005, 03:31 AM NHFT
I tend to read The New American -- a John Birtch Society publication -- and they have lots of information that doesn't quite make sence too.

I wouldencourage people to read this PDF file from "Freedom-Force International"

On the War on Terror.

http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/pdf/futurecalling4.pdf

There are numerous things that don't make sence.

Tracy
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on September 07, 2005, 07:41 AM NHFT
? Looking at the history of government conspiracy, from the lies surrounding the impeachment trial of Andrew Johnson, to the sinking of the Maine, to the Lusitania, to Pearl Harbor, then on to the Bay of Pigs, the Tonkin Gulf incident, the Kennedy assasinations, the MLK assasinations, and most recently the Weapons of Mass destruction, can anyone doubt the ability of Government to attempt something on the scale of 9-11?

Although the events that followed the conspiracies you discribe, up to Tonkin, were horrible, the conspiracies themselves  to actually pull off, were not of the scale of 911.
The government probably had nothing to do with the assasinations of R. Kennedy or MLK. 
Even though Iraq's possesion of WMD's was none of our business and no excuse to invade, many experts in many countries assumed they had these weapons.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on September 07, 2005, 08:29 AM NHFT
Do you ever get the feeling that if this country or the world were ever under attack or facing some major disaster, that while the dems and republicans pointed fingers at each other, we would all die.

You know....they would never get those old retired astronots into a rocket to blow up the asteroid hurtling towards earth.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 07, 2005, 02:28 PM NHFT
I tend to read The New American -- a John Birtch Society publication -- and they have lots of information that doesn't quite make sence too.

The John Birch society is an organization of paranoid delusional conspiracy theorists of the Nixon/freemason/illuminati stripe.  No credibility, IMO.  And yes, I know Ron Paul is a part of it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: tracysaboe on September 07, 2005, 02:30 PM NHFT
I tend to read The New American -- a John Birtch Society publication -- and they have lots of information that doesn't quite make sence too.

The John Birch society is an organization of paranoid delusional conspiracy theorists of the Nixon/freemason/illuminati stripe.  No credibility, IMO.  And yes, I know Ron Paul is a part of it.

Well, they have reason to be paranoid, conspiracy, theorists.

BTW, Helen Chenowith is also part of it. Next to Ron Paul she was the best Representive in the country. And she was mine when I as in Idaho. Unfortunitly she actually honored her "promise to America" onlike most "other" conservatives, so she's no longer there.

Tracy

Tracy
Title: According to Michael Ruppert ...
Post by: Caleb on September 07, 2005, 08:02 PM NHFT
Quote
How many people would it take to pull off a conspiracy such as this

it would take only about 20 - 30 or so people who are "in" on the conspiracy to make it work.  The rest of the people that were involved in making it happen would only have had to know enough to do their part.  Full compartmentalization.  Ruppert compares it to the people making the atom bomb back in the 60's:  The person enriching the uranium has no idea of the plan.  The person flying the bomber doesn't have any idea of the plan.  Only the scientists developing it and a few of the people coordinating everything really need to know about the atom bomb.

I'm not saying the U.S. government planned 9-11, or that Bush knew anything about it prior to it happening.  I tend to think that Bush probably didn't.  (Plausible deniability.)  But in view of just how significant the "intelligence failures" really were ... it seems to me that some elements inside our government had to be in the know.  Hell, Mossad sent in agents to watch it happen after informing the CIA and being rebuffed.

The smoking bomb (Vreeland) is sitting in a cell in Canada.

The thought that "our government couldn't have been involved because its too hard for that many people to keep a secret" is fairly weak.   Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead ... OR if the information would destroy all three of them.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Pat McCotter on September 07, 2005, 09:05 PM NHFT
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean nobody is after you.  ::)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: joeyforpresident on September 07, 2005, 09:45 PM NHFT

What about WTC 7?

Larry Silverstein, who owned the WTC properties and purchased them several months before 9/11 even, was on PBS a year or two ago and sat right in that chair and admitted to the public that he had ordered FDNY to "pull" Building No. 7.

In other words, that building went down like a stack of um, well, floors used in a controlled demolition.



Use the photography, folks! Even the AP stuff, the CNN stuff, the Washington Post, Time Magazine stuff! You can't fit a commercial airliner into the hole that hit the Pentagon. There's  just no way. If a jetliner did in fact hit the Pentagon, where's the massive security camera footage of it all? We have yet to see one credible piece of footage that shows a jetliner hitting the Pentagon.

That Cleveland, Ohio TV station's report about Flight 93 isn't credible? Give me a break! It landed two hours after we were "told" it crashed!!

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

Not once has anyone said, "look at their organizations they're tied to." You don't think the Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderbergers, Skull & Bones and all those other "organizations" wouldn't put their agenda (i.e., Rockefellers, etc.) forward by putting a bunch of fruitcake figurehead politicians in power to carry it out? Come on!

This is all in plain view! I do believe a lot of folks in the libertarian community have very thick blinders on. Either you're just too trusting, or just won't pry open your brain a little to question everything you read or hear.

Must be the reporter in me.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 08, 2005, 08:26 AM NHFT
How many people would it take to pull off a conspiracy such as this?? How is it nobody has turned if that were the case?

Lots of people have .... those are the guys that Alex Jones and others interview. :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on September 08, 2005, 08:36 AM NHFT
Say.....have you heard about the chemtrails they've got up there...watching us?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 08, 2005, 09:42 AM NHFT
I don't get that one.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on September 08, 2005, 10:48 AM NHFT
just a play on a couple of other conspiracy theories.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Pat McCotter on September 08, 2005, 04:48 PM NHFT
Does everyone have their foil hats?

Is your computer Tempest shielded?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 08, 2005, 04:59 PM NHFT
What about WTC 7?

Larry Silverstein, who owned the WTC properties and purchased them several months before 9/11 even, was on PBS a year or two ago and sat right in that chair and admitted to the public that he had ordered FDNY to "pull" Building No. 7.

In other words, that building went down like a stack of um, well, floors used in a controlled demolition.

It collapsed just like a half-dozen other buildings that collapsed in that area AND were not hit by airplanes. ?"Pull" means to exit their positions at 7 WTC. ?Firefighters do not know how to install dynamite, wire it, or trigger it. ?The FDNY has NOTHING to do with demolition work.

The fact that you haven't even questioned this assumption damages your credibility as a reporter and an individual.



Use the photography, folks! Even the AP stuff, the CNN stuff, the Washington Post, Time Magazine stuff! You can't fit a commercial airliner into the hole that hit the Pentagon. There's? just no way. If a jetliner did in fact hit the Pentagon, where's the massive security camera footage of it all? We have yet to see one credible piece of footage that shows a jetliner hitting the Pentagon.

No credible footage? ?I have footage of it on my computer. ?Everyone has seen it on the news. ?How is it that you haven't seen it?


That Cleveland, Ohio TV station's report about Flight 93 isn't credible? Give me a break! It landed two hours after we were "told" it crashed!!

According to ONE news station 134 miles away from the crash site? ?You call that credible?

There were many witnesses of the plane going down, the plume of smoke, etc. ?Besides, it only takes about 15 minutes, NOT 2 hours, for a 757 to go the 134 miles from Pittsburgh to Cleveland.


Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

Not once has anyone said, "look at their organizations they're tied to." You don't think the Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderbergers...

Never heard of 'em.


...Skull & Bones and all those other "organizations" wouldn't put their agenda (i.e., Rockefellers, etc.) forward by putting a bunch of fruitcake figurehead politicians in power to carry it out? Come on!

Skull and Bones? ?Joey... seriously... you think a dorky old secretive Yale frat group is trying to take over the world? ? ::)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 08, 2005, 07:49 PM NHFT
LeRuineur, it doesn't bother you, even a little, that the people's representatives never bothered to look into the matter?  We have a Congressional inquiry into steroid use by baseball players, but not even a single congressional investigation into the who, what, when, where, why, and hows of the greatest terrorist attack on American soil?  That's what's frustrating to me.  The questioning is completely missing, and we are expected to believe what the government says, despite the fact that a) not only is the critical information all classified, but b) our elected representatives have never investigated the matter!  Granted, I want full disclosure, but I'd sure as hell feel a lot better if there were 535 people who all knew the truth and had seen all of the classified information.  Instead, all we have is the privileged "9-11 commission" with absolutely no accountability.  Why has the Congress been silent on this investigation?  Why has no one lost their job over the intelligence failures?  Heads should be rolling at Langley, but instead all we see is ass-covering.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 08, 2005, 07:50 PM NHFT
Not only that, they've majorly increased the budgets of all the security agencies....rewarding them for failure.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 10, 2005, 12:30 AM NHFT
LeRuineur, it doesn't bother you, even a little, that the people's representatives never bothered to look into the matter?? We have a Congressional inquiry into steroid use by baseball players, but not even a single congressional investigation into the who, what, when, where, why, and hows of the greatest terrorist attack on American soil?? That's what's frustrating to me.? The questioning is completely missing, and we are expected to believe what the government says, despite the fact that a) not only is the critical information all classified, but b) our elected representatives have never investigated the matter!? Granted, I want full disclosure, but I'd sure as hell feel a lot better if there were 535 people who all knew the truth and had seen all of the classified information.? Instead, all we have is the privileged "9-11 commission" with absolutely no accountability.? Why has the Congress been silent on this investigation?? Why has no one lost their job over the intelligence failures?? Heads should be rolling at Langley, but instead all we see is ass-covering.

Caleb

That's what politicians and bureaucrats do.  Everyone covers for each other.  Even enemies will work together to stay in power because power seems to shut off their conscience.  Nothing you say or do will ever make the government honestly investigate itself.

Of course this bothers me, but that does not make me susceptible to becoming a paranoid conspiracy theorist like Nixon or Hitler.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 10, 2005, 12:36 AM NHFT
Mike, I have been taking a look at the facts that are out there. Whose facts? As many as I can find. The Government facts don't add up for me, plain and simple.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 10, 2005, 10:13 AM NHFT
Quote
Of course this bothers me, but that does not make me susceptible to becoming a paranoid conspiracy theorist like Nixon or Hitler.

Don't forget McCarthy.  ;) :)

I understand your points, but this isn't conspiracy theory.  Look, I don't think any reasonable person is suggesting that a there is widespread complicity on the part of most people in government service.  That taxes the imagination of even the most creative. 

But during the Soviet cold war era, there were numerous spies, reaching into the highest levels of government, working for the Soviet cause and against the interests of the American people.  It doesn't require too much imagination to believe, using history as our guide, that there were those within the highest reaches of our government who would be willing sacrifice a few Americans if it advances their agenda.  The intelligence "failures" were just too many. 

Let's just take Coleen Rowley for instance.  Now she tried over and over again to get a warrant to check Zacharias Mussoui's computer, and was completely rebuffed time and time again.  What's interesting is that, as a last resort, she went to the CIA with pertinent information. (What that was, we'll not know for quite some time, it's been classified.)  But it does raise an interesting point:  Would you go to the CIA if you didn't have hard information?  How would that go?  "Hey, I captured a guy who was learning to fly airplanes.  But ... he's Arabic.  I'm with the FBI, but they won't issue a warrant.  Maybe you should check into it."  She would have been laughed out of town!  The only reason she would have gone to the CIA was if she had HARD, CREDIBLE information.

So lets put two and two together.  She needs a search warrant to make the evidence admissable.  That doesn't mean she hadn't read it.  If she had read it, that would explain her hard information that she relayed to the CIA, (still classified).

With it being classified, I can't prove that the FBI and the CIA knew a sufficient amount to stop the attacks.  But that is precisely the allegation that Ms. Rowley made.  And if they knew, why did they not issue the warrant, or at least act to take Zacharias' friends into custody for questioning.  Someone sat on that information.

You might call it an "intelligence failure" ... but shouldn't Congress at least investigate a failure of such a magnitude for possible intent?  They could have access to the classified information simply by issuing a Congressional subpeona.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 10, 2005, 10:27 AM NHFT
You might call it an "intelligence failure" ... but shouldn't Congress at least investigate a failure of such a magnitude for possible intent?? They could have access to the classified information simply by issuing a Congressional subpeona.

News reporter:  "Mr. Government, it appears that you failed to protect us from the terrorists.  The result of your enormous failure is a massive increase of your money and power.  But the people want answers!  Will you carry out an investigation of yourself so you can tell us why this was allowed to happen?"

Government:  "Yeah, I'll get right on that... *coughNOTcough*  Thanks for the money and power though."   8)

News reporter:  "But 3,000 people died and---"

Government:  "Now STFU and move along before I audit you!"
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 10, 2005, 10:44 AM NHFT
Mike, or anyone else,
 Do you believe in the existence of the Chautauqua movement? It meets the criteria of a conspiracy.
 J. Edgar Hoover was involved in many conspiracies.
 The Sons of Liberty was a conspiracy.
 Conspiracies exist.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 10, 2005, 11:04 AM NHFT
Mike, or anyone else,
 Do you believe in the existence of the Chautauqua movement? It meets the criteria of a conspiracy.
 J. Edgar Hoover was involved in many conspiracies.
 The Sons of Liberty was a conspiracy.
 Conspiracies exist.

IMO, 9/11 was a conspiracy of men who hate our government, for good reason.? I hate our government too, but I'm not going to kill anyone over it.

These men were previously trained and funded by our government, which completely destroyed their countries while playing with them like pawns during the Cold War.? Of course they had reason to hate our government.

Everything about 9/11 is obvious.? The cause is obvious:? foreign interventionism.? The method was obvious:? a few guys easily controlled hundreds of people in victim disarmament zones (airplanes).? It was probably pretty easy to pull off given the circumstances, especially with today's technology, like GPS transponders, to direct them to their targets.

This country was just waiting for something like 9/11 to happen.? I'm surprised we haven't been surprise-nuked yet by some suicidal foreign government that feels victimized by the US government.? It's probably only a matter of time.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 10, 2005, 01:01 PM NHFT
Much has been made about Bush's lack of reaction when he was told of the 9-11 attacks while in the kindergarten classroom. His reaction, to me, was entirely consistent with someone who knew it was going to happen, and what the ramifications would be. It is if he was pausing and thinking to himself, "So, it begins. Am I right?"
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 10, 2005, 01:10 PM NHFT
If all of what the conspiracy theorists holds is true, then why wouldn't these "people" make you disappear for attempting to expose them?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 10, 2005, 01:14 PM NHFT
If all of what the conspiracy theorists holds is true, then why wouldn't these "people" make you disappear for attempting to expose them?

They don't need to. At least until the point that lots of people start paying attention, at which point a massive campaign to discredit will begin. For now they just need folks to throw out the phrase, "Another conspiracy theory."
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 10, 2005, 01:21 PM NHFT
So shortly after being elected to office, George Bush murders 3000 + americans for what purpose again?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 10, 2005, 01:29 PM NHFT
So shortly after being elected to office, George Bush murders 3000 + americans for what purpose again?

For starters:
 1. To create public hysteria conducive to passage of the Real ID Act, the Patriot Act, The Homeland Security Department.
 2. To gather the support for his administration.
 3. To deflect attention away from his critics.
 4. To create support for his need to invade Iraq.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 10, 2005, 01:40 PM NHFT
I'm struck by those who simultaneously believe that Bush is an incompetent fool and a devious mastermind, and will express both thoughts in the same sentence.

Not speaking of anyone in particular here, just an observation in general.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 10, 2005, 01:45 PM NHFT
I, for one, have never thought him to be a fool. He didn't get where he is by being a fool. He is one of a powerful group who decided to make him their figurehead.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 10, 2005, 01:45 PM NHFT
Again I ask, if these people who are such geniuses at manipulation as to convince us that it was terrorists who took out the towers in order to gather support for invading Iraq among other things, why the hell is Iraq so screwed up?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on September 10, 2005, 01:53 PM NHFT
Much has been made about Bush's lack of reaction when he was told of the 9-11 attacks while in the kindergarten classroom. His reaction, to me, was entirely consistent with someone who knew it was going to happen, and what the ramifications would be. It is if he was pausing and thinking to himself, "So, it begins. Am I right?"

Well!....Shit!.....thats all the evidence I need!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 10, 2005, 01:58 PM NHFT
Again I ask, if these people who are such geniuses at manipulation as to convince us that it was terrorists who took out the towers in order to gather support for invading Iraq among other things, why the hell is Iraq so screwed up?

Why do you think that one implies the other? In the US they are dealing with a passive population willing to believe anything they are told by the Government. In Iraq, they don't have that situation. And it could be something as simple as the fact that they miscalculated.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 10, 2005, 02:34 PM NHFT
Hunter S. Thomson was working on an article on how 9-11 was an inside job when he "suicided".
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 10, 2005, 02:56 PM NHFT
Hunter S. Thomson was working on an article on how 9-11 was an inside job when he "suicided".

So now Dr. Gonzo was offed by the conspirators?

Damn, they're good... they got him while he was on the phone with his wife and his kids were in the house!

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: EagleClaw on September 11, 2005, 07:38 PM NHFT
Take a look at this:

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/hilton_interview.htm

Some say that several witnesses were coerced to recant their testimony.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 12, 2005, 12:00 AM NHFT
Perhaps you could go to the graves of the fire fighters and policemen who died going into the towers and piss on them directly.  You could also find say, an 8 year old who is the daughter of someone who was on one of the flights that slammed into the WTC and spit in her eye while you're at it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 12, 2005, 12:06 AM NHFT
JonM, why would I want to do that? They have suffered enough.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 12, 2005, 12:14 AM NHFT
Penn & Teller did a Bullshit episode on this exact conspiracy theory, and I have to agree with them.  100% bull fucking shit.  I have a much easier time believing our government was too incompetent to stop this than there is a cabal of people in America who decided murdering up to 50,000 Americans would be a good policy move.  If such a group exists, and were able to somehow, with nobody noticing, wire explosives into every floor, and pull off the most disturbing mass murder in American history without a single person defecting from their ranks in disgust and ratting them out, why in god's name would they let the Free State Project get moving?  That would be a direct threat against them.

This is the same government that couldn't keep an idiot break-in at a psychiatrist's office under wraps.  But I'm sure there's a good conspiracy theory on why they threw Nixon to the wolves as well.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 12, 2005, 12:16 AM NHFT
You are entitled to your opinion, as I am entitled to mine. I resent your post about the children, however. Try to be civil.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 12, 2005, 12:20 AM NHFT
I say your statements are no betters than walking up to the children of the people who died in those planes and pissing on them.  Your support of this conspiracy theory says their parents did not die in a horrible terrorist attack but were in on it and have abandoned them for the rest of their lives.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 12, 2005, 12:23 AM NHFT
I say your statements are no betters than walking up to the children of the people who died in those planes and pissing on them.? Your support of this conspiracy theory says their parents did not die in a horrible terrorist attack but were in on it and have abandoned them for the rest of their lives.

Excuse me, but I have never said the passengers or victims in the towers were involved in the conspiracy.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 12, 2005, 12:36 AM NHFT
One of the main "inside job" theories has it that it was not the passenger jets that collided with the towers, but drones, meaning all those people missing from those flights had to go somewhere.  If they can't go home, then either the government executed them (and why not fly them into the towers if that's the case) or they were in on it.  Tom Clancy wrote about a fuel filled jumbo jet flying into a joint session of congress what, 10 years or more ago?  It wasn't a unique concept for them to come up with, the towers were built to take a 737 running into them.  They used a bigger jet, the damn things were built of mostly glass and steel, not concrete.  Once the heat from the fire weakened the supports holding the floors above it, they had nowhere to go but down, and momentum just took the rest with it.  The jet fuel helped, but office equipment isn't exactly non-flammable.  A lithium-ion battery will burn at 700 degrees Celsius when damaged.  Keep that in mind if you ever drop your notebook.

The promotion of these conspiracy theories dishonors the memory of every single person who died that day.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 12, 2005, 12:42 AM NHFT
One of the main "inside job" theories has it that it was not the passenger jets that collided with the towers, but drones, meaning all those people missing from those flights had to go somewhere.? If they can't go home, then either the government executed them (and why not fly them into the towers if that's the case) or they were in on it.? Tom Clancy wrote about a fuel filled jumbo jet flying into a joint session of congress what, 10 years or more ago?? It wasn't a unique concept for them to come up with, the towers were built to take a 737 running into them.? They used a bigger jet, the damn things were built of mostly glass and steel, not concrete.? Once the heat from the fire weakened the supports holding the floors above it, they had nowhere to go but down, and momentum just took the rest with it.? The jet fuel helped, but office equipment isn't exactly non-flammable.? A lithium-ion battery will burn at 700 degrees Celsius when damaged.? Keep that in mind if you ever drop your notebook.

The promotion of these conspiracy theories dishonors the memory of every single person who died that day.



I puzzled over that for a long time, intil I read a theory that said the planes were controlled from the ground (the technology exists) and that the crew and passengers would have been gassed, possibly a nerve gas, just as the planes were taken control of from the ground. No, I do not think the passengers or crew were in on the conspiracy.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 12, 2005, 12:46 AM NHFT
What is so hard to accept about a bunch of terrorists getting on the plane, taking it over while the crew and passengers believe they're merely being hijacked in the "traditional" manner and flown into the two towers?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 12, 2005, 12:53 AM NHFT
There are far too many inconsistencies in the Governments case. Kat posted a number of them. The slips of the tongue by several different people, including Rumsfeld's using the term missle in regards to the Pentagon attack. It doesn't add up. Plus why didn't Osama immediately claim credit for the attack if it was him? Why did the Saudi Government claim one of the alleged attackers was still alive? It is my belief that the conspirators want us to believe the story they are presenting, but it doesn't add up.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 12, 2005, 12:56 AM NHFT
Your case adds up far less than that.  The fact that our government is run by morons doesn't take away from the fact that it was not Americans who flew those planes into the WTC and Pentagon.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 12, 2005, 01:01 AM NHFT
Your case adds up far less than that.? The fact that our government is run by morons doesn't take away from the fact that it was not Americans who flew those planes into the WTC and Pentagon.

There are a lot of very smart, very shrewd people in this administration, and to call them morons, I think is a mistake. Bush is merely the figurehead, the continuation of the dynasty, the One World group that controls him is very dangerous, and will stop at nothing to achieve their ends.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 12, 2005, 01:11 AM NHFT
They let Clinton run things for 8 years . . . why? Oh wait, that doesn't matter in that world, I keep forgetting.  I suppose the fact that twice Bush was barely able to eek out an electoral victory against some of the most unappealing Democrats ever to run for President was just part of the "show" as well?  Shrewd people can act like morons; they do it all the time.  They've shrewdly gotten Bush down to a 39% approval rating.  They've shrewdly fucked up Iraq tremendously.  The shrewd mishandling of the Katrina disaster is mostly the state government's fault, but they've shrewdly screwed up in making that clear.

Why do you still breathe if this conspiracy theory is true?  Shouldn't "they" have had you killed by now?  Of course, that would just lend credence to this nutjob conspiracy theory.  That I can't conceive of anyone in our government's power being so disgustingly callous to other Americans, and indeed be willing to risk the total economic collapse of our country in this attack is perhaps my failing.  Your inability to provide anything but supposition, guesses and statements that "things just don't add up" as opposition to the facts as presented is not my failing.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 12, 2005, 01:19 AM NHFT
They have no need to worry about me. I have no power.
I can see that you are the type of person who sees the good in people, not the bad. You still trust our leaders are trying to do the best for us. I used to feel that way, but no more.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 12, 2005, 01:28 AM NHFT
I trust them to be greedy self-serving egomaniacs twisting the system at every oppurtunity to benefit themselves and their cohorts.  I just don't see any upside for that sort of person to attempt 9/11.  The risk-reward ratio just doesn't make sense for them to try it.  If they get caught, they face worse than being strung up in the real and very physical sense.  They got a PATRIOT act that many people denounce, which is having issues being renewed.  They got a REAL ID act that the states are rebelling against implementing (sadly over cost rathern that the loss of liberty).  They got a war in Iraq (which they were going to go after regardless of 9/11) that is not turning out well in ANY sense of the word.

All this at the risk of what would happen if the conspiracy were revealed?  THAT does not add up.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 12, 2005, 03:01 AM NHFT
Take a look at this:

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/hilton_interview.htm

Some say that several witnesses were coerced to recant their testimony.

Stanley Hilton keeps saying how he's got mountains of direct evidence that Bush directly ordered 9/11, yet he hasn't offered up a single shred for public scrutiny. He (and Alex Jones) keep publicly worrying about his safety, because surely "they" will off him for exposing what "they" did. Apparently they're not concerned that these mountains of evidence could die with Hilton.

Were I in that situation, and truly had lots of hard evidence that could lead to my death, the last thing I'd do would be to sit on it. I'd be spreading copies like crazy, to every possible venue. When asked about the evidence in interviews, I'd be citing document dates and authors, and quoting them directly and providing a URL for people to download them.

But no... apparently Stanley Hilton's $7,000,000,000 lawsuit takes priority over spreading the "truth".

I wonder what the contingency fee is on $7 Billion...

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 12, 2005, 04:24 AM NHFT
Penn & Teller did a Bullshit episode on this exact conspiracy theory, and I have to agree with them.? 100% bull fucking shit.? I have a much easier time believing our government was too incompetent to stop this than there is a cabal of people in America who decided murdering up to 50,000 Americans would be a good policy move.? If such a group exists, and were able to somehow, with nobody noticing, wire explosives into every floor, and pull off the most disturbing mass murder in American history without a single person defecting from their ranks in disgust and ratting them out, why in god's name would they let the Free State Project get moving?? That would be a direct threat against them.

This is the same government that couldn't keep an idiot break-in at a psychiatrist's office under wraps.? But I'm sure there's a good conspiracy theory on why they threw Nixon to the wolves as well.

Exactly.

The government screws up everything they touch.? Even the Nazis couldn't get away with blaming the Reichstag fire on one communist boy, and most of Germany knew the Nazis burned it down.? Luckily for governments, people's attention spans are short and they are easily controlled by flag-waving, wars, and... more flag-waving.

No government short of a complete dictatorship could pull off an event like 9/11 against their own people.? The idea that a typical government could do this to its own people is absurd and illogical.? Governments succeed only at complete and utter failure with vast unintended consequences.

Of course Bush sat in a classroom listening to children for 5 minutes after being told that the US was at war - he's an idiot.? I've seen many videos of Bush speaking off-the-cuff, and I'm not talking about any practiced event like the New Orleans photo-op.? When cameras talk to him at his ranch, he proves that he's a blundering idiot.


For example, I've made exact transcripts of a few of these video clips:

"Well what... what I'm worried about... is... uhhh... job creation.? Uhhh... and I'm worried about those who... are unemployed.? I... uhhhh... I am concerned about those who... uhh... are looking for work and can't find work, so next week when I talk about an economic stimulus package, I will talk about... uhhhhh........ how to create jobs... how BEST to create jobs... as well as how best to take care of those who don't have a job.? I'm concerned about ALL people.? And I don't view the politics... and I understand the politics of... of economic stimulus.? If some would like to turn this into class warfare... uhhhh... I... uhh...... That's not how I think!? I think about the overall economy, how best to help those folks who are looking for work."


Example 2:

"Well, first of all... uhhh... I think it's important to remember that... Saddam Hussein was close to having a nucular weapon.? Uhh... We don't KNOW whether or not he has a nucular weapon.? Uhhh... We do expect him to disarm... his weapons of mass destruction; that's what we expect.? Uhh secondly... uhhhh... the uhh international community has been trying to resolve... the situation in Iraq with diplomacy for... uhh eleven years!? And for eleven years Saddam has defied... the international community.? And uhhhhh...... and now we brought the world together to send a clear signal we expect him to disarm... get rid of his weapons of mass destruction.? Uhh The first step in determining whether or not he can do that is... was discouraging!? His declaration was short!? And... uhhhhhh... uhhh... the... international community recognized that..... that he wasn't forthcoming.? Awww...? Again, I hope this Iraq situation can be resolved peacefully.? One of my New Year's resolutions was to work a... uh deal with these situations in a way that they're resolved peacefully.? But uhhhh...... thus far it appears that uhhh..... on-- at first look that Saddam hadn't heard the message!"


Example 3:

"Secretary Powell will make a... strong case about the danger of a armed Saddam Hussein.? We'll uh... make it clear that uh... Saddam Hussein is... fooling the world... trying to fool the world.? We will make it clear... that Saddam is... is a... uhhh... menace to peace in his own neighborhood.? We will also talk about... Al Qaeda links.? Links that... uhhh... really portend... uhhh... a danger for America and for Great Britain--anybody else that loves freedom.? As the Prime Minister said, the War on Terror is not confined to--just to a shadowy terrorist network.? The War on Terra includes those who are willing to train... and to equip... a... organizations such as Al Qaeda."


::)

Bush is an idiot.? Period.? Without significant coaching, help, and scripting, he cannot even speak like a normal human being.? He is BEYOND stupid.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 12, 2005, 09:04 AM NHFT
I am now questioning the original official explanation of 9/11 ..... I don't think that is disrespectful to anyone who died in the buildings or planes.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 12, 2005, 08:19 PM NHFT
I think its spitting in the face of the families of the victims NOT to demand the truth.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 12, 2005, 08:54 PM NHFT
The truth is terrorists from another country killed thousands of Americans on 9/11.  The only thing that was left to explore was why we didn't stop it ahead of time.  To suggest that someone inside the government could conceive of this and attempt to pull it off is ludicrous.  There may be someone in the intelligence community who suspected this would happen and was either unable or unwilling to raise the alarm, but how can you look at one of children of those victims and tell them to their face that it was really their government who did this with no =REAL= evidence of it?

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 12, 2005, 08:57 PM NHFT
Yes, letting the real criminals off scott free, ready to wreck more havoc upon us...now there some spit for ya.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 12, 2005, 09:42 PM NHFT
And who would these real criminals be, and how would they have commited this crime?  And WHY would they have commited this crime?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on September 12, 2005, 09:50 PM NHFT
Well....to throw the country into economic havoc so they would increace tax plunder.......wait a minute.....never mind......
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: EagleClaw on September 12, 2005, 10:03 PM NHFT
The truth is terrorists from another country killed thousands of Americans on 9/11.? The only thing that was left to explore was why we didn't stop it ahead of time.? To suggest that someone inside the government could conceive of this and attempt to pull it off is ludicrous.? There may be someone in the intelligence community who suspected this would happen and was either unable or unwilling to raise the alarm, but how can you look at one of children of those victims and tell them to their face that it was really their government who did this with no =REAL= evidence of it?



What is "Real Evidence"?  Believe me, any tangible evidence has been concealed and/or destroyed by the perpetrators. Most of the evidence which would be readily obtainable would be from various "loose canon" witnesses.

All I know is, that damn Patriot Act was whipped up way too fast to have been written AFTER the 911 attacks. It was clear that the authors didn't want the Congressmen to have time to read it (also true for other anti-liberty bills that were passed later).

Most of America has been Neo-Conned... This country is getting more dysfunctional all the time.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 12, 2005, 10:30 PM NHFT
That they had a wish list of police powers they would like to see enacted does not mean they perpetrated that attack.  It means they're opportunists.  That is not evidence, it is supposition.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 12, 2005, 11:53 PM NHFT
That they had a wish list of police powers they would like to see enacted does not mean they perpetrated that attack.? It means they're opportunists.? That is not evidence, it is supposition.

Agreed.? Every government wants these police powers.? The various departments have probably been asking for these powers for decades.? Somewhere, there's a massive laundry list of powers the government wants, and this list will be pulled out whenever something bad happens.

I'm sure the FBI has been looking for an excuse to raid our library records since its inception.  It's quite a big stretch to say the FBI killed 3,000 innocent Americans in order to get that ability.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 13, 2005, 12:43 AM NHFT
From Alex Jones's Prison Planet.com

Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Theory' is a Conspiracy Fact

By Randy Lavello

By now the misinformation and ignored findings surrounding the September 11, 2001 attacks have evaporated the official version into the land of fiction. Didn?t it seem strange that we learned everything of the government version by the next day? Much has been learned about the attacks, yet the official version has never changed; it seems as though our government thinks the point moot since it used this excuse to pass unconstitutional laws and wage wars resulting in oil profits. The time has come to admit the sorry truth as a nation, so that we can move on - as a nation.

The planes did not bring those towers down; bombs did. So why use planes? It seems they were a diversionary tactic- a grand spectacle. Who would want to divert our attention from the real cause of the collapse of those towers? It must be those who benefited most from these attacks. Let?s recount some facts of that dreadful day.

Any time an aircraft deviates from it?s course, the air traffic controller requests a military intercept according to military response code 7610-4J. This was the first time interceptors were not sent up in the history of this policy. The intercept pilots are trained to make a visual check of the cockpit? could this be the reason these interceptors were intercepted? Planes were sent to the New York area, after unprecedented delay, from Falmouth, Massachusetts rather than nearby Ft. Dix or Laguardia. Of course, they didn?t arrive in time - there was no visual scan of the cockpits.

Captain Kent Hill, retired from the Air Force, explained that the U.S. had flown unmanned aircraft, similar in size to a Boeing 737, on preprogrammed flight paths from Edwards Air Force Base, California to Australia on several occasions. He believes the airliners used in the attacks had their on board computers knocked out and were subsequently choreographed by an Airborne Warning and Control System. Along side Captain Hill, an Air Force officer with more than 100 sorties in Vietnam stated, ?Those birds either had a crack fighter pilot in the left seat, or they were being maneuvered by remote control.? We know that the technology exists to fly hijacked commercial airliners by remote control - it?s called ?Globalhawk.? We also know that the military has had an unmanned drone aircraft known as the ?Predator,? since 1994. A saboteur would merely have to reprogram the controls to switch from manual to remote; those airliners practically fly themselves already with the autopilot. This would require electronic security codes? acquisition of electronic codes would also explain the lapse of interceptor response due to sabotage. Furthermore, it?s a fact that Air Force One codes were known and punched in by a rogue source on 9/11, proving the presence of an inside, subversive element.

As usual, it?s not a good conspiracy, if it doesn?t involve a Bush! Introducing Marvin Bush - brother of George Jr. Marvin is a substantial shareholder and was on the Board of Directors until 2000 of a security company aptly named Securacom. This is not an ordinary security force with canvas badges and walkie-talkies; it?s an electronic security company, which was ?coincidentally? involved with Dulles Airport until 1998. Handling electronic security at Dulles seems like an excellent way to gain access to Air Traffic Control communication codes with NORAD, which is in charge of intercept missions. According to CEO Barry McDaniel, the company ?handled some of the security at the World Trade Center up to the day the buildings fell down.? How convenient, huh? Bombs were in those towers? Bush?s presidency was saved by these attacks - just something to think about.

Five of the twenty ?suicide hijackers? are alive and well according to the BBC and they want their names cleared. So who was flying those planes? We may never know exactly what happened with those jets; what we do know is that the official version crumbles under scrutiny. These planes were merely a diversion, as proven by the presence of bombs? that?s right, PROVEN!

Before beginning this article, I met Auxiliary Lieutenant Fireman and former Auxiliary Police Officer, Paul Isaac Jr. at the World Trade Center Memorial. Paul, along with many other firemen, is very upset about the obvious cover-up and he is on a crusade for answers and justice. He was stationed at Engine 10, across the street from the World Trade Center in 1998 and 99; Engine 10 was entirely wiped out in the destruction of the towers. He explained to me that, ?many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings, but they?re afraid for their jobs to admit it because the ?higher-ups? forbid discussion of this fact.? Paul further elaborated that former CIA director Robert Woolsey, as the Fire Department?s Anti-terrorism Consultant, is sending a gag order down the ranks. ?There were definitely bombs in those buildings,? he told me. He explained to me that, if the building had ?pancaked? as it?s been called, the falling floors would have met great resistance from the steel support columns, which would have sent debris flying outward into the surrounding blocks. I asked him about the trusses, and quoted the history channel?s ?don?t trust a truss? explanation for the collapses. He responded in disbelief, and told me, ?You could never build a truss building that high. A slight wind would knock it over! Those buildings were supported by reinforced steel. Building don?t just implode like that; this was a demolition.?

Just after the disaster, Firefighter Louie Cacchioli said, ?We think there were bombs set in the building.? Notice he said ?we?. At 9:04, just after flight 175 collided with the South Tower, a huge explosion shot 550 feet into the air from the U.S. Customs House known as WTC 6. A huge crater scars the ground where this building once stood. Something blew up WTC 6 - it wasn?t a plane; it must have been a bomb of some sort.

The seismic record from Columbia University?s observatory in Palisades, NY (21 miles away) provides indisputable proof that massive explosions brought down those towers. At the precise moment the South Tower began collapsing, a 2.1 earthquake registered on the seismograph. At the precise moment the North Tower began collapsing, a 2.3 earthquake registered; however, as the buildings started to crumble these waves disappeared. The two ?spikes?on the seismograph, which both occurred at the exact instants the collapses began, are twenty times the amplitude, or more than 100 times the force of the other waves. If the buildings had simply collapsed, the largest jolts would have occurred when the massive debris struck the earth, not at the beginnings of the collapses. Seismologist Arthur Lerner-Lam of Columbia University stated, ?Only a small fraction of the energy from the collapsing towers was converted into ground motion. The ground shaking that resulted from the collapse of the towers was extremely small.? In other words, the collapsing did not cause 2.1 and 2.3 magnitude earthquakes. Furthermore, a ?sharp spike of short duration? is how underground nuclear explosions register on seismographs. Underground explosions, where the steel columns meet Manhattans granite would account for both the demolition-style implosions and these ?spikes? on the seismograph. Another seismologist at the Palisades observatory, Won Young Kim said the 1993 truck bomb did not even register on their seismographs because the explosion was ?not coupled? to the ground. Imagine the magnitude of explosions it would take to register the two earthquakes, when the truck bomb didn?t even show up.

The American Free Press reported that in the basements of the collapsed towers, where 47 central support columns (per building) connected with the bedrock, hot spots of ?literally molten steel? were discovered more than a month after the attack. There is only one explanation for this: An explosion of unprecedented magnitude destroyed the bases of the columns, then the massive structures buried the impact points, trapping the intense heat below for all that time.

The tower which was struck second suffered less damage from the plane because it was a less direct hit and most of the jet fuel was seen ignited outside the structure? yet this tower collapsed first. Just before this collapse, the firefighters were up on the burning levels and were heard saying, ?Battalion seven? Ladder fifteen, we?ve got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines.? How could two isolated pockets of fire destroy the bases of the support columns causing the buildings to implode? Paul Isaac told me, ?Based on video footage of the collapse of the South Tower, the structural collapse is not consistent with the angle the building was struck.?

Why was no investigation permitted of the debris? Dr W. Gene Corley headed the FEMA sponsored engineering assessment of the World Trade Center collapse, which performed no tests on the steel for traces of explosives. When asked about this process known as ?twinning,? he responded, ?I am not a metallurgist.? Dr. Corley also ?investigated? the debris at Waco and Oklahoma City? and we all know how thoroughly those ?investigations? were performed.

No government agency performed forensic examinations of the rubble; no effort was made to validate their official story. The rubble was quickly loaded onto ships and delivered to China for smelting. These are the actions of criminals disposing of evidence! By these actions, FEMA proves itself to be a subversive element in our government!

Former Deputy Director of the FBI, John P. O?Neil stated, ?The main obstacles to investigate Islamic terrorism were U.S. oil corporate interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it.? Can you think of anyone (Bush) linked to both wealthy Saudi Arabians and U.S. corporate oil? John O?Neil resigned from the FBI after 31 years of service after Barbara Bodine, currently part of the Iraqi transition team, barred him from following up his investigation of the attack on the U.S.S Cole. He took a job heading security at the World Trade Center? his first day of work - September 11, 2001. John O?Neil received the job from Jerome Howard, Former Director of the New York Office of Emergency Management, who happened to have the day off on 9/11. We may only speculate on the case of Mr. O?Neil, but he does seem to be a person which U.S. oil corporate interests would want out of the way? especially during these wars for oil and power in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The top FBI officials in Minneapolis called off investigations of Zacarais Moussaoui, causing bitter resentment among field agents. The man who made the decision not to investigate was promoted! Israeli intelligence agents lived next to the alleged hijackers in Hollywood, Florida. The ?hijackers? were trained at U.S. government flight schools. Insider training on United Airlines leads to the conclusion that there was foreknowledge of these attacks; it also establishes that those with this foreknowledge are, at least, relatively wealthy. Another suspicious finding is that the World Trade Center was sold to Vornado Realty Trust in February, seven months prior to the attacks for 3.25 billion dollars? this doesn?t prove anything, it?s merely suspicious.

Who gained the most from the attacks of September 11th? Who had the motive? An Israeli expert on terrorism at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Ehud Sprinzak said, ?From the perspective of Jews, it is the most important public relations act ever committed in our favor.? David Stern, an expert on Israeli intelligence operations stated, ?This attack required a high level of military precision and the resources of an advanced intelligence agency. In addition, the attackers would have needed to be extremely familiar with both Air Force One flight operations, civil airline flight paths, and aerial assault tactics on sensitive U.S. cities like Washington.? He elaborated that the attacks ?serve no Arab group or nation?s interest, but their timing came in the midst of international condemnation of Israel?? He goes on to claim ?A U.S. military intelligence report revealed details of an international intelligence memo linking Mossad to the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks. The memo was in circulation three weeks before the attacks.?

Furthering the suspicion of Mossad involvement, five Israelis were seen atop a van smiling and celebrating, while taking videos of the disaster from across the Hudson River. These five were arrested by the FBI and detained for two months before being deported back to Israel. Two of these men were positively identified as Israeli intelligence agents. Eighty-one nations are represented among the World Trade Center?s dead - Israel is not one of these nations even though approximately 1200 of its citizens worked there. As if that wasn?t enough, an instant messaging firm in Israel, named Odigo, received warnings about the towers two hours before the attacks. Everyone who points out the wrongdoings of Israel is immediately labeled ?anti-Semitic?? well, the truth knows no race or religion - it?s just the truth. These aren?t Jews carrying out these plans; it?s merely sick animals who hide behind the Jews!

WorldTradeCenter.com describes David Rockefeller as the ?Visionary behind the World Trade Center.? He pushed the construction of these towers through major opposition with the aid of his brother, then governor, Nelson Rockefeller. David has been quoted as saying, ?We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.? Was this the ?right major crisis? to advance the aims of a global government?

There is overwhelming evidence to support the findings that these alleged Arab terrorists were merely scapegoats used to advance the World Government agend. During the attacks, ?President? George Jr. was reading a book with school children about goats! (Scapegoats?) Arab terrorists did not carry out these attacks which were detrimental to the Muslim world.

All evidence points to elements inside, high atop the governments of Israel and the United States. Those wishing to implement their world government through their control over finance, media and militaries are guilty of these most heinous crimes. This atrocity is proving to advance the domestic police state agendas and consolidate the Middle East?s oil reserves. The people who most benefited from these attacks are the wealthiest, most privileged and powerful men on earth who feel they will finally be able to hold dominion over the nations of the world through their New World Order. For some of these globalists, these attacks were merely a means to an end - a huge step toward ruling a world socialist system. But for others, likely the planners of such a vile crime, this was a mass sacrifice to themselves. This mass ritual sacrifice of the vulnerable and the heroes who tried to save them was perpetrated by power crazed freaks who are simply - satanic.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 13, 2005, 01:53 AM NHFT
That article is so full of non-sequiturs, unsupportable conclusions, leaps of logic (leaps of faith?), deliberate ignorance of science, and just plain stupidity, that I don't know where to begin. It can't even be dismissed paragraph-by-paragraph... each sentence contains things to be disputed on several levels!

I think the first line of the last paragraph sums up the author's true feelings: the Jews were behind it all, and the secret agencies of the U.S. government were their minions.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: joeyforpresident on September 13, 2005, 01:58 AM NHFT

I sent Kat the two DVD documentaries, Loose Change & 9/11 In Plane Site-The Director's Cut last week.

I hope all of you live near Kat, or at least can watch those two films soon.

Your skepticism will be deluded after watching both of them...
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 13, 2005, 03:08 AM NHFT
Your skepticism will be deluded after watching both of them...

"Deluded"... Interesting choice of words, Joey.  ;)

Again, I ask this of anyone watching these videos: when first watching them, mute the audio (no fair reading closed captions). Look at what you're seeing, and etch it into your mind. Do this several times if you have the chance.

Only after you're familiar with the video, should you turn on the audio and let someone else tell you what you're seeing. What you know you saw, and what the voice now tells you, might be very very different.

I'm not commenting on Joey's videos, because I haven't seen them. But, I apply the same standard to any "The Real Truth!"  videos about OKC, Waco, Ruby Ridge, Abu Graib, Columbine, etc.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 13, 2005, 10:02 AM NHFT
MMM.... New World Order!  Now it all makes sense!

When I was in the Air Force we changed the encrpytion codes on our communications equipment every single day.  The codes came on a one time use piece of paper tape that looked like the crappy correction tape spools for typewriters of a bygone error.  Every day we would take the new code and run it through the equipment designed to read it, and pray the damn paper didn't tear.  Now you expect me to believe NORAD left the same ones on for 3 years?

Once again, go piss on the 8 year old girl whose parent was in one of those planes if you wish to promote this fantasy.  EVEN IF there were bombs in the place that doesn't mean it was our government that did it.  Or was the 1993 bombing of the WTC just advanced cover-up planning?  I've seen buildings implode on TV.  I've never seen one implode like the WTC collapsed.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 13, 2005, 10:39 AM NHFT
http://911review.com/errors/wtc/seismic.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 13, 2005, 11:35 AM NHFT
http://911review.com/errors/wtc/seismic.html

Hmmmm... looks like "Snopes for 9/11". Heavy on facts and data, looks at all angles, and only draws conclusions based on evidence.

More reading is in order... :)

Thanks!

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 13, 2005, 12:33 PM NHFT
Okay, after I read some of that site's debunking, I backed out to the root, to see their overall take on 9/11. And what do we find? That they're debunking other conspiracy sites, because those other sites' errors are part of an even larger disinformation conspiracy designed to make the public skeptical of the skeptics, through easily-refuted nonsense!

AAAAAAaaaaarghhh!

 ::)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 13, 2005, 12:50 PM NHFT
Gotta love it.  Is there more to the story than the office report?  Perhaps.  Did anyone in the government stand to benefit enough from this attack to make it worth the risk?  I can't see that, and until someone can show me an equation where that makes sense, I will have a hard time believing that anyone within the government would attempt to pull this off.  They could have flown planes into the statue of liberty and the washington monument and gotten the same reaction from the populace in support of war and anti-terror police state laws without risking sending the economy into the crapper for years.

We've all seen what the government is capable of doing against its citizens in Ruby Ridge and Waco.  That's a far cry from what happened at the WTC.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 13, 2005, 06:19 PM NHFT

I sent Kat the two DVD documentaries, Loose Change & 9/11 In Plane Site-The Director's Cut last week.

I hope all of you live near Kat, or at least can watch those two films soon.

Your skepticism will be deluded after watching both of them...

Do not trust one single video clip from these DVDs.  Verify them against others available throughout the internet and you will find that the "9/11 in Plane Site" DVD has been modified to add a bright flash of light before the planes enter the buildings.  These flashes are not present in any other video I've ever seen.  The DVD is pure garbage.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 13, 2005, 06:27 PM NHFT
From Alex Jones's Prison Planet.com

Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Theory' is a Conspiracy Fact

By Randy Lavello

Prison Planet = Info Wars = zero credibility.

Look at the garbage on their website.  Claims that New Orleans was flooded on purpose, 9/11 conspiracy theories, etc.  They may have some factual stories, but I wouldn't trust ANYTHING on these websites.

3,000 people were murdered, but firefighters who supposedly witnessed explosive charges are too afraid to talk about it?  That is completely absurd.

Everything in this article makes me laugh.  The assumptions, "facts", and quotes are beyond ridiculous.  They are obvious fabrications.  The entire article is a complete fabrication.  Prison Planet is a joke.

No offense intended.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 13, 2005, 08:03 PM NHFT
Kevin and Mike,

I'm truly trying to understand where you're coming from here.  I'm one whose mind is not made up on this issue yet.  It seems difficult for me to believe that there was any sort of mass conspiracy. 

But I have also been very troubled by the way that everything has been handled by the government.  I simply ask myself, "What would I have done if I had been President ... " and what I would have done and what the government actually did are so far apart they can't even see each other.

Mike, are you happy with the government's response?
Kevin, are you?

Look at the huge volumes of information that is still classified.  Why?  Can you understand why people are suspicious?  A good rule to follow is that if it looks like a skunk, and smells like a skunk, its probably a skunk.  If the government is trying desperately to keep information from people, it only stands to reason that they are hiding something.  And until that information is out in the open, can you understand why people will be trying to figure out what the government is hiding?  If the government wants these conspiracy theories to go away, all it has to do is declassify all the information and allow everyone access to investigate it as they wish.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: tracysaboe on September 13, 2005, 08:06 PM NHFT
I'll post this again.

http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/pdf/futurecalling4.pdf

There are lots of questions about 9/11 that have yet to be answered, and many conflicting answers.

Tracy
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 13, 2005, 08:53 PM NHFT
Kevin and Mike,

I'm truly trying to understand where you're coming from here.  I'm one whose mind is not made up on this issue yet.  It seems difficult for me to believe that there was any sort of mass conspiracy.

The existence of the professional conspiracy theory industry casts doubt onto much that they say or do, simply because they always assume there is a conspiracy behind every government action, and they actively look for data that can be presented to support their claim.

The technique at work here is not unlike Michael Moore's work. On further thought, it's exactly like Michael Moore's work. The uncritical audience is led and manipulated and told what they're seeing, and its significance, and its meaning -- all of which is unsupported by the actual data. The conclusion requires huge leaps of logic and fact.


Quote
But I have also been very troubled by the way that everything has been handled by the government.  I simply ask myself, "What would I have done if I had been President ... " and what I would have done and what the government actually did are so far apart they can't even see each other.

Mike, are you happy with the government's response?
Kevin, are you?

I'm not sure of which response you're speaking. I assure you that each of us here has a laundry list of "If I were the President..." alternatives.

Do you mean the decision to go to war? Which war? Do you mean the Patriot Act? Do you mean the 9/11 Comission?

And just who do you mean when you say "the government"?


Quote
Look at the huge volumes of information that is still classified.  Why?

Having held a TSBI-PRP, I can tell you that the intelligence side of the house suffers from massive information overload, even more now in the computer age than 20 years ago when I was on active duty.

The bulk of the data remains classified not for the secrets it might reveal, but because they don't know what's in there that might be highly significant, but unrecognized. They don't know which sources might be endangered by release of the information.

And frankly, the biggest reason it's classified, is because no one has taken the time to fully analyze and declassify it. Our biggest complaint about government is its behemoth slothfulness and ineptitude. How often has government paperwork been screwed up because someone checked the wrong box, or mis-filed a folder, or accidentally shredded an original document? Similar things have probably happened a dozen times this week, right here in my little workplace, but it wasn't a conspiracy.


Quote
If the government wants these conspiracy theories to go away, all it has to do is declassify all the information and allow everyone access to investigate it as they wish.

People --good people, on our side-- die when certain things get declassified. Sources disappear, making the quest for truth rather impossible.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Pat McCotter on September 14, 2005, 04:00 AM NHFT
...or accidentally shredded an original document...

Late one night John, the office manager, is walking by the copy room and sees the CEO in front of the shredder looking confused with some papers in hand.

"Can I help you, sir?" he says.

"I'm trying to figure this out."

"Oh," John says, taking the papers, "you put these in here, like this." The machine whirrs and the papers are safely shredded into confetti.

Looking very relieved, the boss says, "Thanks, John! I need ten copies of those for the meeting I'm having right now!"
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dreepa on September 14, 2005, 08:47 AM NHFT
And then the meeting was more productive!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 14, 2005, 04:12 PM NHFT
"People --good people, on our side-- die when certain things get declassified. Sources disappear, making the quest for truth rather impossible."


I don't think anyone on the inside is on my side .... I am on the outside
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 15, 2005, 09:25 PM NHFT
Weldon: Atta Papers Destroyed on Orders
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050916/ap_on_go_co/sept11_hijackers
By DONNA DE LA CRUZ, Associated Press Writer 15 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A
Pentagon employee was ordered to destroy documents that identified Mohamed Atta as a terrorist two years before the 2001 attacks, a congressman said Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT

The employee is prepared to testify next week before the Senate Judiciary Committee and was expected to name the person who ordered him to destroy the large volume of documents, said Rep. Curt Weldon (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa.

Weldon declined to name the employee, citing confidentiality matters. Weldon described the documents as "2.5 terabytes" ? as much as one-fourth of all the printed materials in the
Library of Congress, he added.

A Senate Judiciary Committee aide said the witnesses for Wednesday's hearing had not been finalized and could not confirm Weldon's comments.

A message left Thursday with a Pentagon spokesman, Army Maj. Paul Swiergosz, was not immediately returned.

Weldon has said that Atta, the mastermind of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and three other hijackers were identified in 1999 by a classified military intelligence unit known as "Able Danger," which determined they could be members of an al-Qaida cell.

On Wednesday, former members of the Sept. 11 commission dismissed the "Able Danger" assertions. One commissioner, ex-Sen. Slade Gorton, R-Wash., said, "Bluntly, it just didn't happen and that's the conclusion of all 10 of us."

Weldon responded angrily to Gorton's assertions.

"It's absolutely unbelievable that a commission would say this program just didn't exist," Weldon said Thursday.

Pentagon officials said this month they had found three more people who recall an intelligence chart identifying Atta as a terrorist prior to the Sept. 11 attacks.

Two military officers, Army Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott, have come forward to support Weldon's claims.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 17, 2005, 10:11 AM NHFT
I read a great article the other day by Cynthia McKinney questioning the government's role in 9-11.  Hopefully I'll post it in the next few days.  But what struck me was how desperate the government is to squash any talk about the subject.  This, to me, is suspicious behavior.  I mean, if someone suggested that I personally was responsible for 9-11, I would laugh at it because its obviously foolish.

It seems to me that only the guilty have to squash criticisms that they did something.

Cynthia McKinney's congressional seat was targeted by the same Republicans who targeted Bob Barr's seat.  Both lost in the primary.  Barr, a staunch conservative, was an outspoken critic of the Patriot Act.  He currently spends his time doing the talk radio rounds and working for the ACLU fighting the Patriot Act in the courts.

Why did the administration target these two?  What are they afraid of?

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 17, 2005, 01:55 PM NHFT
I mean, if someone suggested that I personally was responsible for 9-11, I would laugh at it because its obviously foolish.

And yet, if you were a government official and laughed it off, that denial would be "proof" for the conspiracy theorists.

Kevin
Title: New Orleans was an inside job by Osama
Post by: mulp on September 17, 2005, 08:42 PM NHFT
"People --good people, on our side-- die when certain things get declassified. Sources disappear, making the quest for truth rather impossible."


I don't think anyone on the inside is on my side .... I am on the outside
That statement stood out like a red flag to me, too.

I go a step further and note the contradiction of justifying the government keeping secrets, while also believing it isn't on my side and is engaged in conspiracies against me.

Nothing undermines trust in government more than governments keeping any secrets for any reasons because the secrets creates the conspiracy theories that cause one to distrust government.

I recall a scifi story about a republican society that didn't have secrets and that was completely open being attacked by an enemy who had joined the society to collect information for the attack.? The story focused on the nature of society, and then in the epilogue the spy is captured and held by the one he befriended.? The spy asks how they could win when he knew all their plans, and the response was, "well, we all knew that you had left and we all knew what we told you, so we all knew what you knew about our weaknesses so we all knew how you would attack us, so we defended against your obvious attack."

That reminds me of the war game before Iraq where the adversary defeated Rumsfeld's wetdream electronic battlefield in two days by not using any radios, passing all commands by hand, and by not using the technology he had, but relying on guerilla techniques.? He was ruled to have violated the rules of engagement and the game was reset, and he was told that he had to lose the battle according to rules of the game.? Afterward, they proclaimed the war game to have proved the effectiveness of the electronic battlefield or whatever.

If I were magically president, I would eliminate all classified information and announce every weakness in every aspect of America, and then wait for the conspiracy theories to fly on both sides.? "He has just told us of the failed attempt to overthrow our government, which we suspected, but he must now have a double secret plan to overthrow us, or trick us into abdicating power...."? Meanwhile the local conspiracy theorist would be claiming that there is double secret secret conspiracy to classify information of an operation to take power and the revealing of all the secret information is to hide the conspiracy in the mountain of revealed secrets.

What I'm surprised at is the lack of conspiracy theories around the destruction of New Orleans.? It should be clear that this was directed by Osama.? At the top of FEMA's list of greatest risks, issued in Jan 2001, was NYC terrorist attack, flooding of New Orleans, and finally the big quake in LA.? Knowing the nature of the environment around New Orleans and the increasing vulnerability, I told all that would listen that the next best target for Osama was to have a team in New Orleans during hurricane season that would blow up the levees in some critical spots and that would be the end of a symbolic icon.? As we haven't heard a claim of responsibility, I can only conclude that they decided to blow it up on Sep 11th for symbolic reasons and they weren't able to plant the bombs in time to create the necessary new reel footage, and the surrounding storm damage inhibited their ability to blow up things outside of New Orleans.? Who set all those fires in New Orleans?? Just consider all the water around-it would take man made firestarting materials to get water logged building to burn.? Definitely the work of terrorists.? Why did Bush take so long to act.? Clearly so that the terrorists had the full opportunity to be caught in some clear act of violence so that Bush would be able to gain the support to invade Iran.

;-)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 18, 2005, 01:13 PM NHFT

I sent Kat the two DVD documentaries, Loose Change & 9/11 In Plane Site-The Director's Cut last week.

I hope all of you live near Kat, or at least can watch those two films soon.

Your skepticism will be deluded after watching both of them...

I'm not at all impressed with the 9-11, In plane site video, and I believe the government did it!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 19, 2005, 03:34 PM NHFT

I sent Kat the two DVD documentaries, Loose Change & 9/11 In Plane Site-The Director's Cut last week.

I hope all of you live near Kat, or at least can watch those two films soon.

Your skepticism will be deluded after watching both of them...

I'm not at all impressed with the 9-11, In plane site video, and I believe the government did it!

LOL
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 19, 2005, 08:19 PM NHFT
Quote
And yet, if you were a government official and laughed it off, that denial would be "proof" for the conspiracy theorists.

But Kevin, you're proving my point.? Because they don't laugh it off.? Let me give you an example.

A paranoid wacko named David Ickes accused Senator McCain of being a Reptilian space alien.? When McCain was informed, he did the only thing you can do when faced with such nonsense:? He laughed at it.? He didn't target Mr. Ickes for some government probe or try to destroy his career.? Mr Ickes still flies worldwide promoting these theories, and as far as I can tell, Mr. McCain hasn't done anything at all to try to stop it because he's not threatened by it in the least.?

But the administration doesn't laugh when accused.? Early after 9-11, Mr. Bush informed us somberly that we shouldn't even consider any sort of conspiracy theories regarding 9-11.? Why even mention it?

Then there's Senator Charles Shumer, who wants to criminalize such speculations.? He introduced a bill (HR 2580) in response to conspiracy theories regarding the Oklahoma City bombing.? His bill would seek to punish someone with five years in prison for engaging in "unseemly speculation" or publishing "baseless conspiracy theories regarding the Federal government of the United States".

Does it seem to you that these gentlemen are laughing it off like McCain did the reptilian space alient comments?

So in conclusion, let me throw a wild conspiracy theory at you ...

In 1933, the German Reichstag parliament building was burned.? Officially, no one really knows who burnt it, as I was informed at this website:? http://www.aviewoncities.com/berlin/reichstag.htm? A brief quote from the website:

It is to date still unclear who started the fire, but the Communists were blamed. It gave a boost to Hitler's Party, the NSDAP, who would soon come to power.

Now, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say ... If it looks like a skunk and smells like a skunk, it's probably a skunk.? So ... if Hitler's party benefitted from it, I'm going to say Hitler probably arranged for the Reichstag to be burned.? I know, I know.? Ridiculous.

If it looks like a skunk, and smells like a skunk ...

Has the fruit of 9-11 singed your nosehairs yet?? Patriot Act.? War on Terrorism (which Cheney says will last "our lifetime").? American citizens are arrested on American soil and held without without being charged as "enemy combatants", and denied the writ of Habeus Corpus, as guaranteed by the Constitution.? We have a war in Iraq.? A War in Afganistan.? Promis software patrols emails.? All in the name of security.?

If it looks like a skunk, and smells like a skunk ...

Caleb

PS:  I have a little running signature, but I think it bears repeating here:  "Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate and systematical plan of reducing us to slavery."
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 20, 2005, 05:47 PM NHFT
I won't mind if the war on terror lasts for Cheney's lifetime, I think he's not one for the over portion of the over/under bet on the actuarial tables.  So you're saying the attack against America was a bi-partisan affair?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 20, 2005, 06:03 PM NHFT
absolutely
waco - Clinton
oklahoma city - clinton
9/11 - Bush

seems to be the organizations not necessarily the white house :(
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on September 20, 2005, 06:06 PM NHFT
So Timmy was really a government agent and not an anti-government nutjob?

As for the faults of Janet Reno, don't forget Ruby Ridge and Elian Gonzalez.  I'm not sure how to pin those on on another group, but I'm sure someone else can.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 20, 2005, 09:30 PM NHFT
I think that the atf blew it up .... I am not sure what Tim M part was. :-\
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: joeyforpresident on September 20, 2005, 11:33 PM NHFT

So Kat, I'm guessing you received the two DVDs?

Will you still try to make public showings of them?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on October 01, 2005, 04:44 AM NHFT
What about the numerous experts who say there's no way kerosene can melt steel?
There's about 1,500-2,000F difference (depending on composition) between "melt" and "soft as putty".

I watched a blacksmith working the other day and asked him some questions (horray for homeschool field trips)...a couple observations:

1.  Only the part of the metal which was directly in the hottest part of the stoked coal fire softened enough for him to be able to shape the metal. 
2.  He was working on a 1/4" piece of steel stock.  He said he could possibly work much larger pieces of metal, but he would need to heat it for so long, it just wasn't practical. 

How long would it take to heat an extra large steel girder in an "almost out" fire (according to the fire department) to even melt it to the soft pliable stage?  How come no other steel buildings with fires that have burned much longer have never collapsed?

Even if those enourmous steel support columns did somehow melt in one hour, how would that break them in the rest of the building?  Why weren't columns left standing way up in the air?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on October 01, 2005, 04:51 AM NHFT

I sent Kat the two DVD documentaries, Loose Change & 9/11 In Plane Site-The Director's Cut last week.

I hope all of you live near Kat, or at least can watch those two films soon.

Your skepticism will be deluded after watching both of them...

I'm not at all impressed with the 9-11, In plane site video, and I believe the government did it!

We watched Joey's CD the other day, and it wasn't the movie I was thinking of.  It's a good one.  I was doubtful about the flashes before the planes hit the towers.  I got the 9-11, America Remembers cd .... the CNN recap of the whole thing.  I watched it, slowing it down frame by frame in places....those flashes are clearly visible on the original CNN footage.  Not that that in itself means there was a conspiracy, but people have claimed that they used doctored footage, which as far as I can tell, they didn't.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on October 01, 2005, 11:40 AM NHFT
Maybe the conspiracy is the WTC towers were shoddy construction and nobody wants to face that monumental lawsuit.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on October 01, 2005, 04:01 PM NHFT
We watched Joey's CD the other day, and it wasn't the movie I was thinking of.? It's a good one.? I was doubtful about the flashes before the planes hit the towers.? I got the 9-11, America Remembers cd .... the CNN recap of the whole thing.? I watched it, slowing it down frame by frame in places....those flashes are clearly visible on the original CNN footage.? Not that that in itself means there was a conspiracy, but people have claimed that they used doctored footage, which as far as I can tell, they didn't.

Oh, the original digital footage I found must not have been a high enough quality to see the flashes.  Regardless, if I were one of those planes, I would have made a big flash if I ran into those buildings.   ;)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on October 01, 2005, 04:44 PM NHFT
A hypothetical situation:

A plane runs into floors 51 and 52 of a building.? Several floors immediately topple onto each other, tripling to weight being held up by the 50th floor.? If the metal heats up, that floor collapses, and the floor below it has no hope of holding quadruple its normal capacity, and the floor below that one can handle the above weight even less, so the entire building immediately collapses.

Now how much does the metal really have to heat up before that happens?? Probably not much and maybe not at all.? Maybe it just took time for the building's structure to give in and the floors' supports to bend under the pressure.? It's amazing the buildings did not collapse immediately upon impact.

It doesn't take an expert to see that the buildings began to collapse exactly where they were hit by the airplanes and there were no obvious explosive charges visible from the footage of the collapses.

When thousands of people die like this, the truth will find a way out into the open.? It already has.? OBL has repeatedly admitted doing it and he is praised in the middle east because America is hated throughout the region.

The world full of evidence against a 9/11 conspiracy by the government cannot be overcome.? Perhaps some government files on the 9/11 hijackers are disappearing to hide the government's complete and miserable failure to connect the dots and protect us.? In my mind, that's much more easy to imagine than to believe the government carried it out.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on October 01, 2005, 05:03 PM NHFT
Even if those enourmous steel support columns did somehow melt in one hour, how would that break them in the rest of the building?

They were originally created in small sections a few feet long.? These pieces were scattered all over the place, I assume because of he enormous weight of the building collapsing on them:

http://www.ctgreatbay.com/files/wtc066-sm.jpg


Why weren't columns left standing way up in the air?

I assume the collapse scattered them.? This is all that was left of the buildings:

http://www.ctgreatbay.com/files/wtc067-sm.jpg
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on October 01, 2005, 09:18 PM NHFT
They weren't welded together?   :o
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on October 01, 2005, 09:22 PM NHFT
They weren't welded together?? ?:o

Maybe they used elmer's glue.

These buildings were very poorly constructed, IMO. ?I think they depended on the outside of the building to hold up the inside.

Or something.

 ???
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on October 01, 2005, 09:24 PM NHFT
I think they depended on the outside of the building to hold up the inside.

Yep, that I can confirm from inside knowledge.

Brilliant!  :P
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 02, 2005, 04:42 PM NHFT
"When thousands of people die like this, the truth will find a way out into the open."

It has ..... it finally made its way to me in the last few months ..... now it has reached you. :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on October 02, 2005, 04:47 PM NHFT
I think they depended on the outside of the building to hold up the inside.

Yep, that I can confirm from inside knowledge.

Brilliant!  :P

I love your rigorous source-checking.  :P
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on October 02, 2005, 05:12 PM NHFT
This is interesting video from the construction of the WTC:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/newyork/sfeature/sf_building.html

"Massive steel beams formed the core columns"  I don't believe those things either busted or melted in one hour.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on October 02, 2005, 05:23 PM NHFT
The beginning of that film made me wonder if eminent domain was used to build the twin towers.  I found this..

Quote
With the help of his brother, Nelson Rockefeller, the governor of New York state at the time, David Rockefeller got The Port of New York Authority involved. The Port of New York Authority, now known as the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, is a government institution that heads up public projects in the New York and New Jersey port area. While the Port Authority is a public organization, it functions like a private corporation -- it charges its "customers" directly and profits from investments, rather than taking tax money.

Since its creation in 1921, the Port Authority had been concerned mainly with bridges, tunnels, airports and bus transportation. It had never undertaken anything near the scale of the World Trade Center before, but nonetheless, the organization was the most logical choice to head up the project. It had the rare combination of government connections, diverse resources and the power of eminent domain.

Rockefeller commissioned early designs for the WTC in 1958, the Port Authority got involved in 1960, and the initial plans were made public in 1961. Then things slowed down considerably. For years, the Port Authority slogged through fiscal problems, public relations debacles and legal wrangling, not to mention the unpopular task of evicting the hundreds of businesses and homes occupying the building site.
http://people.howstuffworks.com/wtc1.htm
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: tracysaboe on October 02, 2005, 06:30 PM NHFT
Yeah, both the World Trade center and the Twin Towers are not representitive of "Freedom"

Both were founded on government theft.

Tracy
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on October 03, 2005, 07:32 PM NHFT
I'm still undecided on this one, but I'm leaning very heavily on at least partial government complicity ...

Here's the challenge I would pose to anyone out there who believes the government's official story.  Read "Crossing the Rubicon" by Michael Ruppert.  It opened my eyes.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on October 04, 2005, 03:23 PM NHFT
If anyone would like to take up Caleb's challenge, here's the book:

http://www.soulawakenings.com/underground/Crossing_The_Rubicon.pdf
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on October 07, 2005, 10:06 AM NHFT
http://www.911busters.com/911_new_video_productions/MOV/Painful_Deceptions.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on October 07, 2005, 11:20 AM NHFT
http://www.911busters.com/911_new_video_productions/MOV/Painful_Deceptions.html

Wow... the most agonizingly long non-sequitur I've ever seen.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 07, 2005, 03:46 PM NHFT
It looks to me like a 757 never hit the pentagon and that building 7 was demolished.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on November 11, 2005, 01:47 PM NHFT
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/1,1249,635160132,00.html

Y. professor thinks bombs, not planes, toppled WTC
By Elaine Jarvik
Deseret Morning News
      The physics of 9/11 ? including how fast and symmetrically one of the World Trade Center buildings fell ? prove that official explanations of the collapses are wrong, says a Brigham Young University physics professor.
      In fact, it's likely that there were "pre-positioned explosives" in all three buildings at ground zero, says Steven E. Jones.
      In a paper posted online Tuesday and accepted for peer-reviewed publication next year, Jones adds his voice to those of previous skeptics, including the authors of the Web site www.wtc7.net, whose research Jones quotes. Jones' article can be found at www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html.
Image
Stuart Johnson, Deseret Morning News
"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three (WTC) buildings," BYU physics professor Steven E. Jones says.
      Jones, who conducts research in fusion and solar energy at BYU, is calling for an independent, international scientific investigation "guided not by politicized notions and constraints but rather by observations and calculations.
      "It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes ? which were actually a diversion tactic," he writes. "Muslims are (probably) not to blame for bringing down the WTC buildings after all," Jones writes.
      As for speculation about who might have planted the explosives, Jones said, "I don't usually go there. There's no point in doing that until we do the scientific investigation."
      Previous investigations, including those of FEMA, the 9/11 Commission and NIST (the National Institutes of Standards and Technology), ignore the physics and chemistry of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, to the Twin Towers and the 47-story building known as WTC 7, he says. The official explanation ? that fires caused structural damage that caused the buildings to collapse ? can't be backed up by either testing or history, he says.
      Jones acknowledges that there have been "junk science" conspiracy theories about what happened on 9/11, but "the explosive demolition hypothesis better satisfies tests of repeatability and parsimony and therefore is not 'junk science.' "
      In a 9,000-word article that Jones says will be published in the book "The Hidden History of 9/11," by Elsevier, Jones offers these arguments:

      ? The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with "controlled demolition" ? and even then it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?" Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here, along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job."

      ? No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.

      ? WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors ? and intact steel support columns ? the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . . How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?" The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.

      ? With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing ? and demanding scrutiny since the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon."

      ? Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.

      ? Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel ? and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.

      ? Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.

      ? Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.

      Jones says he became interested in the physics of the WTC collapse after attending a talk last spring given by a woman who had had a near-death experience. The woman mentioned in passing that "if you think the World Trade Center buildings came down just due to fire, you have a lot of surprises ahead of you," Jones remembers, at which point "everyone around me started applauding."
      Following several months of study, he presented his findings at a talk at BYU in September.
      Jones says he would like the government to release 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of video footage for "independent scrutiny." He would also like to analyze a small sample of the molten metal found at Ground Zero.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: free55 on November 11, 2005, 09:03 PM NHFT
This  hread title is ridiculous and insulting to Americans.  :o

There's a lot of good stuff on this site, but this is manure, plain and simple. >:(
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on November 11, 2005, 09:08 PM NHFT
I have to agree that these claims have zero credibility.  A few simple questions cannot overturn the mountains and mountains of evidence to the contrary.

I'm still watching closely to see if conspiracy theorists come up with anything concrete.

Nothing so far.  *shrug*
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Pat McCotter on November 11, 2005, 09:16 PM NHFT
I say if the government is this far gone Atlas has shrugged and the FSP is worth nothing.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 11, 2005, 09:39 PM NHFT
Aren't we atlas and we are shrugging by what we are doing in NH?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 11, 2005, 09:41 PM NHFT
This hread title is ridiculous and insulting to Americans. :o

There are many Americans that are insulted that the government ignores their stories about what they saw and heard on 9/11 like basement explosions.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 11, 2005, 09:44 PM NHFT
I'm still watching closely to see if conspiracy theorists come up with anything concrete.
The concrete was blown up and the evidence carted away. All we have is tapes, photos and people's memories.
Would you like to read a good book?
'The New Pearl Harbor"
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 11, 2005, 09:46 PM NHFT
How does a plane hit the pentagon without being shot down by its missle defenses? It is made to defend against a missle attack. How could it not stop a plane?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 11, 2005, 09:47 PM NHFT
Why do people get mad and disgusted by the mere questioning of the official federal government version of 9/11?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on November 12, 2005, 12:20 AM NHFT
I don't get mad and disgusted by people questioning the official version and seeking the truth.

I just laugh at the people who always assume that everything is a conspiracy by some secret cabal, and that every official explanation is a cover-up. I do get irritated when they start claiming "proof" when they have nothing but supposition, and they then build layer upon layer on nothing more than shifting sands.

I'm especially distrustful of those claiming to have proof, but who don't offer it into evidence, and with those whose biggest "proof" is denial of their claims.

edited to add:
I'm sorry if that sounds disparaging to Russell, Kat, or anyone else here on the Underground who happens to believe that the WTC was brought down by something other than (or in addition to) airplanes.

My comments have been about those who engage in the professional conspiracy industry, peddling snake oil to the choir, who always promise a little more "inside scoop" in exchange for another book sale. Traveling revival preachers have nothing on the conspiracy industry when it comes to shearing the flock.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on November 12, 2005, 12:24 AM NHFT
The people who attacked the WTC in the 90s used car bombs in the basement.

It could be there is something to the idea that explosives were used to bring down the WTC.? That doesn't mean the government did it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on November 12, 2005, 03:13 AM NHFT
There are many Americans that are insulted that the government ignores their stories about what they saw and heard on 9/11 like basement explosions.

 ???

Basement explosions?  Is that why the underground malls were all actually intact weeks after 9/11?  I've seen the video footage of them intact after 9/11.  Someone could have lived down there for weeks with all the food and drinks, it was in such good condition.

And of course building 7 collapsed - MANY buildings collapsed from the damage.  Others further away had pieces of WTC beams stuck in them.  The source of these theories have no credibility and cannot override the mountain of evidence that I've seen with my own eyes.

Is it really that hard to imagine that the government was just too stupid to stop 9/11, JUST like they were too stupid to protect New Orleans.  Yet people claim New Orleans was flooded intentionally as well on these whackjob conspiracy theorist websites.

No offense intended, but Prison Planet is not my idea of a credible organization.  It's a professional conspiracy-theory organization that probably makes a lot of money from the tabloid garbage they feed to their readers.  :o
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 12, 2005, 07:00 AM NHFT
In the previous year the military was able to intercept every single possible hijack situation ..... but then failed 3 out of 4 times on 9/11
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 12, 2005, 07:01 AM NHFT
No offense intended, but Prison Planet is not my idea of a credible organization. It's a professional conspiracy-theory organization that probably makes a lot of money from the tabloid garbage they feed to their readers. :o
I haven't found anything on prison planet that isn't true.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 12, 2005, 07:02 AM NHFT
Are we only allowed to stray so far from political correctness? I used to think that alternate theories of 9/11 were not possible .... but after I looked at piles of evidence, I have changed my mind.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 12, 2005, 07:07 AM NHFT
Basement explosions? Is that why the underground malls were all actually intact weeks after 9/11? I've seen the video footage of them intact after 9/11. Someone could have lived down there for weeks with all the food and drinks, it was in such good condition.
I haven't seen this footage or pictures. Can you point me to them?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on November 13, 2005, 10:43 AM NHFT
How does a plane hit the pentagon without being shot down by its missle defenses? It is made to defend against a missle attack. How could it not stop a plane?
The question you need to ask yourself is how a piss poor pilot like Hani Hanjoor who couldn't even manuever a Cessna, managed to perform a 270 degree roll in a 747 while dropping 5,000 feet to hit a target less than five stories high, a move that professional pilots say requires a "legendary level of skill".
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on November 13, 2005, 10:53 AM NHFT
Basement explosions?  Is that why the underground malls were all actually intact weeks after 9/11?  I've seen the video footage of them intact after 9/11.  Someone could have lived down there for weeks with all the food and drinks, it was in such good condition.
Where did you see this footage?

Quote
And of course building 7 collapsed - MANY buildings collapsed from the damage.  Others further away had pieces of WTC beams stuck in them.  The source of these theories have no credibility and cannot override the mountain of evidence that I've seen with my own eyes.
Actually the damage to WTC 7 was far from enough to make it collapse - especially not the manner that it collapsed.  But this is all moot, Larry Silverstein, controller of the WTC complex, admitted in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY jointly decided that the Solomon Bros building, commonly referred to as WTC 7, should be pulled - industry slang for demolished.  The manner in which it "collapsed" was the best evidence of this.

Quote
No offense intended, but Prison Planet is not my idea of a credible organization.  It's a professional conspiracy-theory organization that probably makes a lot of money from the tabloid garbage they feed to their readers.  :o
I agree - but Prison Planet isn't the only group questioning the official story.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 13, 2005, 08:58 PM NHFT
The question you need to ask yourself is how a piss poor pilot like Hani Hanjoor who couldn't even manuever a Cessna, managed to perform a 270 degree roll in a 747 while dropping 5,000 feet to hit a target less than five stories high, a move that professional pilots say requires a "legendary level of skill".
Maybe it can be programmed into the navigation system and then just push "autopilot".
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on November 13, 2005, 10:37 PM NHFT
Maybe it can be programmed into the navigation system and then just push "autopilot".
That would have to explain it, as the plane performed that manuever for no real purpose.  It was approaching at the ideal speed and descent to hit the side of the pentagon where Rumsfeld and all the policymakers work.  The manuever, took it around to the back, which had been obviously under construction for some time.  Odd.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on November 13, 2005, 10:39 PM NHFT
Maybe it can be programmed into the navigation system and then just push "autopilot".
That would have to explain it, as the plane performed that manuever for no real purpose.? It was approaching at the ideal speed and descent to hit the side of the pentagon where Rumsfeld and all the policymakers work.? The manuever, took it around to the back, which had been obviously under construction for some time.? Odd.

Yes, definitely odd. Why would terrorists attack the area of the Pentagon where there was no one, because of the construction?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on November 13, 2005, 10:46 PM NHFT
The question you need to ask yourself is how a piss poor pilot like Hani Hanjoor who couldn't even manuever a Cessna, managed to perform a 270 degree roll in a 747 while dropping 5,000 feet to hit a target less than five stories high, a move that professional pilots say requires a "legendary level of skill".

Only a piss-poor pilot would be in the position of having to maneuver like that to hit his target.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on November 13, 2005, 10:48 PM NHFT
The question you need to ask yourself is how a piss poor pilot like Hani Hanjoor who couldn't even manuever a Cessna, managed to perform a 270 degree roll in a 747 while dropping 5,000 feet to hit a target less than five stories high, a move that professional pilots say requires a "legendary level of skill".
Maybe it can be programmed into the navigation system and then just push "autopilot".

The autopilot won't make such maneuvers.

It would be nice if someone who actually has a clue about this stuff, like Varrin, would join the conversation.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on November 13, 2005, 10:52 PM NHFT
The question you need to ask yourself is how a piss poor pilot like Hani Hanjoor who couldn't even manuever a Cessna, managed to perform a 270 degree roll in a 747 while dropping 5,000 feet to hit a target less than five stories high, a move that professional pilots say requires a "legendary level of skill".
Maybe it can be programmed into the navigation system and then just push "autopilot".

The autopilot won't make such maneuvers.

It would be nice if someone who actually has a clue about this stuff, like Varrin, would join the conversation.

Kevin

Varrin sais, either on this forum, or the FSP forum, that cell phones don't work on planes. How do you explain the Gov's insistence about the phone conversations the guy who said, "Let's roll" was supposed to have had with his wife?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on November 13, 2005, 11:47 PM NHFT
Those little rectangles in the seatback in front of you . . . phones.

I once spent like $25 on one of those to cancel a hotel room for the guy who missed the flight.  If a plane were flying low enough, a cell might work as well, 35,000 feet, natch.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on November 13, 2005, 11:55 PM NHFT
Those little rectangles in the seatback in front of you . . . phones.

I once spent like $25 on one of those to cancel a hotel room for the guy who missed the flight.? If a plane were flying low enough, a cell might work as well, 35,000 feet, natch.

Not the same as your average cell phone. The antenna is on the exterior of the plane.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on November 14, 2005, 01:27 AM NHFT
I've never heard if the calls were supposedly made from personal cell phones, or from the built-in AirPhones (or whatever they call them).

There are many anectdotal cases of cell phones working from planes; there are many variables involved.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 14, 2005, 10:06 AM NHFT
The autopilot won't make such maneuvers.

It would be nice if someone who actually has a clue about this stuff, like Varrin, would join the conversation.

Kevin
That was a joke .... we were just talking about auto-pilot with Varrin at our meeting yesterday.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 14, 2005, 10:10 AM NHFT
Only a piss-poor pilot would be in the position of having to maneuver like that to hit his target.

Since he was flying from the West, why wasn't his target just the side facing him? Why would he circle, unless he missed the first time or something? It doesn't make any sense to me.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on November 14, 2005, 12:04 PM NHFT
Only a piss-poor pilot would be in the position of having to maneuver like that to hit his target.

Since he was flying from the West, why wasn't his target just the side facing him? Why would he circle, unless he missed the first time or something? It doesn't make any sense to me.

He was looking for the building.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on November 14, 2005, 12:06 PM NHFT
No offense intended, but Prison Planet is not my idea of a credible organization. It's a professional conspiracy-theory organization that probably makes a lot of money from the tabloid garbage they feed to their readers. :o
I haven't found anything on prison planet that isn't true.

Are we only allowed to stray so far from political correctness? I used to think that alternate theories of 9/11 were not possible .... but after I looked at piles of evidence, I have changed my mind.

Just because you can't prove all of Prison Planet's propaganda is false, that doesn't mean it's true by default.

Everything is false by default from a source with no credibility that prints any and every minor conspiracy theory story that ever surfaces.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on November 14, 2005, 12:11 PM NHFT
Quote
No offense intended, but Prison Planet is not my idea of a credible organization.? It's a professional conspiracy-theory organization that probably makes a lot of money from the tabloid garbage they feed to their readers.? :o
I agree - but Prison Planet isn't the only group questioning the official story.

Of course the official story is false.  But a conspiracy theory requires a near-religious leap of faith that I'm not willing to make without a mountain of evidence.

I believed the CIA's report of documents from Niger were forged within days after they were announced to the public because many credible news sources started quoting many anonymous officials and intelligence individuals stating the documents were not only a complete forgery, but a bad forgery at that.  I had relatively credible sources for this information which turned out to be true.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on November 14, 2005, 12:14 PM NHFT
Quote
No offense intended, but Prison Planet is not my idea of a credible organization.? It's a professional conspiracy-theory organization that probably makes a lot of money from the tabloid garbage they feed to their readers.? :o
I agree - but Prison Planet isn't the only group questioning the official story.

Of course the official story is false.? But a conspiracy theory requires a near-religious leap of faith that I'm not willing to make without a mountain of evidence.

I believed the CIA's report of documents from Niger were forged within days after they were announced to the public because many credible news sources started quoting many anonymous officials and intelligence individuals stating the documents were not only a complete forgery, but a bad forgery at that.? I had relatively credible sources for this information which turned out to be true.

So, what do you believe happened on 9-11, if you believe the official version was false.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on November 14, 2005, 12:17 PM NHFT
Quote
And of course building 7 collapsed - MANY buildings collapsed from the damage.? Others further away had pieces of WTC beams stuck in them.? The source of these theories have no credibility and cannot override the mountain of evidence that I've seen with my own eyes.

Actually the damage to WTC 7 was far from enough to make it collapse - especially not the manner that it collapsed.? But this is all moot, Larry Silverstein, controller of the WTC complex, admitted in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY jointly decided that the Solomon Bros building, commonly referred to as WTC 7, should be pulled - industry slang for demolished.? The manner in which it "collapsed" was the best evidence of this.

Yeah, the fire department is trained in demolition work. ? ::)

They most likely decided to "pull" OUT of the area rather than trying to save the building.

Even if they did demolish the building, which they most likely did not considering the miniscule evidence in support of that theory and the mountain of evidence to the contrary, it was probably very seriously damaged and unsafe anyways, like all buildings in that area were, so I wouldn't even care.

I hear this "pulled" quote constantly, as though it is the bible of the conspiracy theorists.

But it proves nothing.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on November 14, 2005, 12:27 PM NHFT
Quote
No offense intended, but Prison Planet is not my idea of a credible organization.? It's a professional conspiracy-theory organization that probably makes a lot of money from the tabloid garbage they feed to their readers.? :o
I agree - but Prison Planet isn't the only group questioning the official story.

Of course the official story is false.? But a conspiracy theory requires a near-religious leap of faith that I'm not willing to make without a mountain of evidence.

I believed the CIA's report of documents from Niger were forged within days after they were announced to the public because many credible news sources started quoting many anonymous officials and intelligence individuals stating the documents were not only a complete forgery, but a bad forgery at that.? I had relatively credible sources for this information which turned out to be true.

So, what do you believe happened on 9-11, if you believe the official version was false.

The official story is that we were caught off-guard by animals who hate freedom.

In reality, the government funded and trained Al Qaeda in Afghanistan in order to use them as pawns against the USSR during their invasion of that country.  Their country was thus devastated and 9/11 was one of their acts of retaliation.  OBL, Al Qaeda, and therefore 9/11 were all funded, directly or indirectly, with US taxpayer dollars.

9/11 isn't just one example of the government being caught off guard, it's more proof that government cannot and will not protect us, and we should be completely free to defend ourselves, even on an airplane.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 14, 2005, 12:31 PM NHFT
I don't quite get how you filter out new information Mike. If you meet a new person, you don't believe anything they say unless it matches something "credible". How do you decide what is credible?
They never give up on skyscapers. They put out fires and fix the building. Steel buildings don't just collapse from fires. The mountain of evidence is on the skeptics (of the government) side.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on November 14, 2005, 10:49 PM NHFT
Maybe it can be programmed into the navigation system and then just push "autopilot".
That would have to explain it, as the plane performed that manuever for no real purpose.  It was approaching at the ideal speed and descent to hit the side of the pentagon where Rumsfeld and all the policymakers work.  The manuever, took it around to the back, which had been obviously under construction for some time.  Odd.

Yes, definitely odd. Why would terrorists attack the area of the Pentagon where there was no one, because of the construction?
I won't attempt to draw conclusions.  I'll just present the facts.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on November 14, 2005, 10:52 PM NHFT
Only a piss-poor pilot would be in the position of having to maneuver like that to hit his target.

Since he was flying from the West, why wasn't his target just the side facing him? Why would he circle, unless he missed the first time or something? It doesn't make any sense to me.

He was looking for the building.
And you know this because....
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on November 14, 2005, 10:56 PM NHFT
Of course the official story is false.  But a conspiracy theory requires a near-religious leap of faith that I'm not willing to make without a mountain of evidence.
No theory requires much of a leap of faith.  A hypothesis, perhaps, but not a theory.  A theory is supported by data, testing, and evidence.  Of course the official story is false, and no, you shouldn't believe all the hyped up conspiracy stuff.  But look at the data.  Look at the evidence.  Something fishy was definitely afoot, and the 9/11 commission existed just to whitewash the issue, as they failed to address any of the relevant questions (such as the logic/skill/performance of Mr. Hanjoor).

Quote
I believed the CIA's report of documents from Niger were forged within days after they were announced to the public because many credible news sources started quoting many anonymous officials and intelligence individuals stating the documents were not only a complete forgery, but a bad forgery at that.  I had relatively credible sources for this information which turned out to be true.
Yeah, it's a damn shame the amount of BS that this administration churns out.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on November 14, 2005, 10:59 PM NHFT
Yeah, the fire department is trained in demolition work.   ::)
They made a decision, as they are authorized to do.  They didn't do the demolition work.

Quote
They most likely decided to "pull" OUT of the area rather than trying to save the building.
No, they pulled the building.  The conversation was not about human presence in the area, it was about the building itself, continued use, liability, and best options for future use.  Silverstein was the property owner, as such it was his call - human presence in the area would not have been his call.

Quote
Even if they did demolish the building, which they most likely did not considering the miniscule evidence in support of that theory and the mountain of evidence to the contrary, it was probably very seriously damaged and unsafe anyways, like all buildings in that area were, so I wouldn't even care.
Where's this mountain of evidence to the contrary?  The building was not damaged enough to warrant a fall, especially a picture-perfect four point fall.

Quote
I hear this "pulled" quote constantly, as though it is the bible of the conspiracy theorists.
Or the truth.

Quote
But it proves nothing.
Except that the property owner authorized with permission of NYC the demolition of a structure on his property.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: free55 on November 22, 2005, 03:18 PM NHFT
So you believe the NY firemen decided to kill themselves and demolish a building they were still in?

Don't you realize how stupid that sounds?

In you desire to find a conspiracy, you step over the facts while denying them.

 ::)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on November 22, 2005, 10:11 PM NHFT
So you believe the NY firemen decided to kill themselves and demolish a building they were still in?
Please name one fireman who died on 9/11 in WTC 7.

Quote
Don't you realize how stupid that sounds?
It does sound stupid, because I never claimed that the firemen demolished the building, and no firemen died in WTC 7 anyway.

Quote
In you desire to find a conspiracy, you step over the facts while denying them.
Please list evidence that I have a desire to find a conspiracy.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: freedombabe on November 23, 2005, 10:28 AM NHFT
This whole thread about the attack on 9-11 being an inside job is just idiotic. 

The next thing will be that OBL was just misunderstood, having had a troubled childhood.  Jeesh!

(Sorry if I offend some.)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: freedombabe on November 23, 2005, 10:33 AM NHFT
These people are religious fanatics (see other thread on religion) that kill innocent people, torture their own, and abuse women as a sport...all in the name of god.  Amen.

Do we hate our own government so much so as to make claims like this?  Overtaxing is one thing, but we're talking treason by our own officials.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on November 23, 2005, 10:37 AM NHFT
These people are religious fanatics (see other thread on religion) that kill innocent people, torture their own, and abuse women as a sport...all in the name of god.? Amen.

Do we hate our own government so much so as to make claims like this?? Overtaxing is one thing, but we're talking treason by our own officials.



If you think the only problem with our government is over taxing, then you could not even conceive of the ability of those in power wishing to attempt to acquire absolute power. I believe there are those in power whose goal is absolute power. Of course they believe in their hearts they are doing it for the good of their fellow man, but all the evil despots of the world believed they were doing right.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 23, 2005, 01:09 PM NHFT
These people are religious fanatics (see other thread on religion) that kill innocent people, torture their own, and abuse women as a sport...all in the name of god. Amen.
That is quite an accusation against most of our US Presidents.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on November 23, 2005, 01:11 PM NHFT
Do we hate our own government so much so as to make claims like this?

Yes.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 23, 2005, 01:11 PM NHFT
The next thing will be that OBL was just misunderstood, having had a troubled childhood. Jeesh!
I think that OBL was part of the killing. He probably did have a troubled childhood .... no excuse.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: freedombabe on November 23, 2005, 05:36 PM NHFT
Do we hate our own government so much so as to make claims like this?

Yes.

Your response is a little startling.  But, I respect your expression as honest and even courageous.

I haven't gotten to that "place" yet.  Maybe I'm just hoping that if enough of our neighbors become elected to important positions, they'll do the "right" thing.  I'm hoping that the gov't can be reshaped into a more acceptable image and a more responsive body.

Have you given up on our govt completely and want to can it and start over?

Is there a better model out there that you can point to, or are you considering that it hasn't been developed or tried yet?

Or, is govt overthro the solution with anarchy the best and most free result?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on November 23, 2005, 08:02 PM NHFT
freedombabe ...

You do understand that a substantial number of people on this board are anarchists, right?

As for me, I'll just stick by this statement, as my own personal official statement on the federal government:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. ?Such has been the patient sufferance of these States; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on November 23, 2005, 11:18 PM NHFT
Do we hate our own government so much so as to make claims like this?

Yes.

Your response is a little startling.? But, I respect your expression as honest and even courageous.

I haven't gotten to that "place" yet.? Maybe I'm just hoping that if enough of our neighbors become elected to important positions, they'll do the "right" thing.? I'm hoping that the gov't can be reshaped into a more acceptable image and a more responsive body.

Have you given up on our govt completely and want to can it and start over?

Is there a better model out there that you can point to, or are you considering that it hasn't been developed or tried yet?

Or, is govt overthro the solution with anarchy the best and most free result?

The model I and several others so far are looking at is the Tuath. Medieval Ireland had no government for a thousand years. Read more about in on the thread discussing Medieval Iceland: http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=1949.0
Also the Freedom Friends Tuath we are starting: http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=2305.0

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on November 25, 2005, 09:51 PM NHFT
Do we hate our own government so much so as to make claims like this?  Overtaxing is one thing, but we're talking treason by our own officials.
I think you're offending the 100 million people killed by their own governments during the 20th century.  Why is America so immune to hidden agendas and shady leadership?  I'm not saying anybody is guilty of treason, but its naive to think that we're somehow insulated from the possibility. 
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on November 26, 2005, 07:52 AM NHFT
(http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/november2005/231105perspective.jpg)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: polyanarch on November 26, 2005, 08:34 AM NHFT
Big Cheney is watching you!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on November 26, 2005, 08:09 PM NHFT
BYU Physic professor Steven Jones paper on WTC collapse:
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

and radio interview:
http://www.soulawakenings.com/underground/231105jones.mp3
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on November 27, 2005, 02:10 AM NHFT
Isn't it remarkable that more and more people are doubting the "official" version of the events of 9-11. The mask of secrecy and lies is slowly being peeled off.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on November 27, 2005, 06:33 AM NHFT
Did you hear how he first started wondering about it?  He was at a lecture on something completely unrelated and the woman speaking said something like "if you believe the official story on 9/11, you're in for a big surprise" and he said the whole audience broke into applause.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on December 05, 2005, 08:37 PM NHFT
Police find explosives in world trade center:

http://www.soulawakenings.com/underground/explosives.wmv
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on December 05, 2005, 09:00 PM NHFT
Police find explosives in world trade center:

Police find explosives Reporter says police found "suspicious device" in world trade center:

Do you know how many "suspicious devices" get blown up every year, which turn out to be completely benign? (Me either, but a helluva lot more than actual bombs!)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on December 07, 2005, 08:47 PM NHFT
The 9-11 commission .... the real slap in the face to victims.


"Kristen Breitweiser, whose husband, Ronald, was killed at the World Trade Center, said the interviews underscore a conflict-of-interest problem at the commission and cast serious doubts on the panel's credibility.

"We've had it," said Breitweiser, who met with several commission leaders last week. "It is such a slap in the face of the families of victims. They are dishonoring the dead with their irresponsible behavior." "

http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/01-20-04/discussion.cgi.67.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on December 07, 2005, 10:45 PM NHFT
Did anyone notice the C-130 that crashed into an apartment highrise in Iran? It didn't collapse, though it burned extensively. Hmmm....
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on December 07, 2005, 10:55 PM NHFT
The WTC buildings had slightly more weight bearing down upon the lower levels that caused it to collapse.

I would SO love to be proven wrong if a massive cover-up is blown wide open and it results in the end of the US government.  But I very highly doubt I will be proven wrong.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on December 08, 2005, 06:05 AM NHFT
Police find explosives Reporter says police found "suspicious device" in world trade center:

Do you know how many "suspicious devices" get blown up every year, which turn out to be completely benign? (Me either, but a helluva lot more than actual bombs!)

And how many of those were found in buildings that blew up in the next hour?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on December 08, 2005, 12:13 PM NHFT
Police find explosives Reporter says police found "suspicious device" in world trade center:

Do you know how many "suspicious devices" get blown up every year, which turn out to be completely benign? (Me either, but a helluva lot more than actual bombs!)

And how many of those were found in buildings that blew up in the next hour?

In your case, they were found after the attack. Everything was suspcious at that point.

Look at the Miami airplane incident yesterday: the crazy guy was already dead, no bombs were found... but three pieces of luggage were still blown up as "suspicious".

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on December 08, 2005, 12:55 PM NHFT
Look at the Miami airplane incident yesterday: the crazy guy was already dead, no bombs were found... but three pieces of luggage were still blown up as "suspicious".

I bet they found traces of explosives in the bags... after they blew them up with explosives.  ;D
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on December 08, 2005, 11:01 PM NHFT
I would SO love to be proven wrong if a massive cover-up is blown wide open and it results in the end of the US government.  But I very highly doubt I will be proven wrong.
To this day, there's still no proof that Hitler burned down the Reichstag, even though many analysts agree that he was behind it.  That's likely how we'll see this crisis in 60 years.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on January 18, 2006, 09:54 PM NHFT
This lady's websites are interesting.


"The American public have not heard who is the real culprit behind 9/11"
Most Gagged Whistleblower in US history Sibel Edmonds joins Alex Jones on air, says there are strong criminal elements within all three branches of Government.

Prisonplanet | January 19 2006

Last Tuesday nationally syndicated radio host Alex Jones was joined on air by FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds for an in depth interview

Edmonds was hired shortly after Sept. 11 to translate intelligence gathered over the previous year related to the 9/11 attacks. She says the FBI had information that an attack using airplanes was being planned before Sept. 11 and calls Condoleezza Rice's claim the White House had no specific information on a domestic threat or one involving planes "an outrageous lie."

Although Edmonds is officially barred from revealing the specifics of what she found out, she has revealed that she was hired to find and cover up the prior knowledge intercepts. She refused to go along with the cover up. Of course only small criminal elements of the government were involved on 9/11, the majority of those working for the FBI, the CIA and the NSA are good people who would have picked up on the pre-intelligence.

Edmonds has also previously gone on record with revelations of government run drug shipping and other organized crime operations.

Firstly Edmonds was keen to stress that information relating to pre 9/11 terrorist activity was intentionally blocked by elements of the intelligence agencies.

"I started reporting these cases together with documents and other witnesses in the department, within two months after I started working for the bureau, around November/December 2001. I went to my superiors, to their superiors and even all the way to the top of the chin, to Director Mueller himself within the FBI headquarters. Initially they were asking me not to push through this and in return they offered to give me a raise... When I did not continue reporting these issues, in about February 2002, they accused me of reporting these issues to the Congress via email."

At this time Sibel was not attempting to do this, she was attempting to raise the issues internally. The FBI then sent several agents to her house and confiscated her home computer and took it apart to check exactly who Edmonds had ben contacting.

They then forced her to take a polygraph test to determine whether she had been speaking to anybody outside the agency. This was the last straw for edmonds who decide it was time to blow the case wide open and go to Congress with her vital information.

"So I went to these people within the Senate Judiciary Committee, I briefed their staff who had clearance, I went inside the secured facility and gave them documents, and about two weeks after that I was terminated without any reason being cited, in fact the letter I received from the Department of Justice said that 'your contract is being terminated as of this date purely for the convenience of the Government."

Ms Edmonds went on to talk about the specifics of what elements of the Government are now doing and covering up.

Starting with the revelation that forces inside the Congress and the FBI confirmed that House Speaker Dennis Hastert was illegally receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash bribes from foreign lobbying organizations in exchange for political favors.

Other Senators and Congressmen have also been exposed in the activity of taking illegal cash.

She then went on to talk about former Attorney General John Ashcroft who in an unprecedented move officially gagged the Congress over her case in order to "protect certain diplomatic relations of the United States and to protect sensitive US-foreign business relations."

Ashcroft did not elaborate at all and many have come forward to suggest that the gagging order was wholly illegal.

Edmonds then made an analogy, as she often does when she cannot reveal specific facts. She suggested that there could be a so called "war on drugs" but it is an unwritten rule that you only go after the lower end drug dealers and leave alone the middle men and those at the top because the government can directly profit from their activity. This is how things were handled with terrorism in the lead up to 9/11.

"Intentionally, I and I want to underline this, intentionally they are not going after the middlemen and the people at the top. So to this day the American public have not heard who is the real culprit behind 9/11. There is money laundering, and certain narcotic and weapons procurements involved."

Ms Edmonds went on to reveal that the criminal elements are active within all three branches of Government. Plus there are those who are working outside government towards the same agenda. She suggests that we should look towards lobbying groups who are registering as agents of foreign governments, such as International Advisors Inc, the lobbying company set up by arch Neo-Con Richard Perle, which is registered with the State Department as "agents of Turkey."

These groups, with weighty influences upon the foreign policy of the US Government, some, including Perle, Pentagon architects of the Iraq war, are operating with elements of the Government in a nexus like fashion, moving around vast amounts of money and arms and profiteering from directing world events.

Edmonds suggested that this information would become more widespread should more people demand that the media cover these issues. There are simply too many people who are not concerned by such revelations or who simply take no notice.

"Our founders repeatedly stressed eternal vigilance because we can't say we have separation of powers, we have our Constitution and our Bill of Rights, they're going to take care of themselves and they are going to last, no, it does take eternal vigilance." Edmonds commented.

Prisonplanet.tv subscribers watch this space for the full exclusive audio interview.

Visit Sibel Edmonds' websites at http://www.nswbc.org and http://www.justacitizen.com/
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on January 18, 2006, 10:17 PM NHFT
This would be one of the non-existant whistleblowers.

Why can't she reveal certain things? Wasn't she fired?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on January 18, 2006, 11:27 PM NHFT
I believe that whistleblowers get squashed (I work for DoJ, remember?)

But I don't believe that this lady was hired from the street to find and hide pre-9/11 intelligence, especially since she seems to have no bent towards hiding stuff. Jones comments on how it's only a small, secretive, compartmentalized group that had access. But less than two months after being hired, she's gained access to very high-level SCI and taken it to the Director? Hogwash!

It's very possible that she saw a document that she thought was significant, and ran it up the chain of command, and then went to Congress with it. That doesn't mean it actually was significant, especially since she "can't reveal" what it was.

As for being fired, she was a probationary employee, meaning she was employed at will. With two months in the FBI, she wasn't even trusted with the key to the break room, much less conspiracy-busting classified data. Having already shown that she would disclose classified information, I'm not at all surprised that she was fired. That doesn't mean she had uncovered The Truth.

This is one of the things I don't like about Alex Jones: he gives full credence to incredible sources, and holds them up to be something much more than they really are. This leaves people even less likely to believe him if a valid story comes along.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on January 19, 2006, 07:59 AM NHFT
Yes, she was fired.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Bill Henderson on January 20, 2006, 10:29 PM NHFT
The plot thickens!

When researching this topic, I came across this site: http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/buffett.html (http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/buffett.html)

So where was Warren Buffett the morning of 9/11 and what was he doing?

Mr. Buffett was reportedly at his home in Omaha, Nebraska watching TV when he heard about the terrorist attacks.  He was getting ready to host his "last annual golf charity event" which just happened to be at the U.S. Strategic Command headquarters located at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha.  Offutt AFB is, coincidentally, where President G. W. Bush flew to on Air Force One later in the day for "safety".   This early golf charity event hosted by Mr. Buffett  was to include celebrities, professional athletes, and a small group of business leaders in which one of these business leaders became a very lucky person.

This very lucky person was Ann Tatlock, the CEO of Fiduciary Trust Co. International.  Now what made Mrs. Tatlock such a lucky person for being invited to this charity event that morning?  Mrs. Tatlock not only works in the World Trade Center, but her offices were right where Flight 175 crashed into the WTC 2. 
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on January 21, 2006, 10:50 AM NHFT
Why would Warren Buffett want to lose $3,000,000,000 in one day? He had to pay out 10% of the damages at the WTC.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on January 28, 2006, 06:41 AM NHFT
"We believe that senior government officials have covered up crucial facts about what really happened on 9/11," the group says in a statement released Friday announcing its formation. "We believe these events may have been orchestrated by the administration in order to manipulate the American people into supporting policies at home and abroad."
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635179751,00.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on February 24, 2006, 11:01 AM NHFT
911 as a controlled demolition has finally hit the mainstream media:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/columnists/robert_steinback/13760721.htm

With the same flawed questions and premises that belong on Alex Jones instead of in the Miami Herald.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: CNHT on February 24, 2006, 12:46 PM NHFT
There is always manipulation of the public after something like this so it makes you wonder...

I truly believe that Oklahoma City was an inside job..yet with a perfect scapegoat all set up so that no one would suspect.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 24, 2006, 01:23 PM NHFT
My 9/11 questions have been answered ...... the federal government did it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on February 24, 2006, 01:49 PM NHFT
The same federal government that has royally screwed up everything it has touched?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 24, 2006, 02:08 PM NHFT
Yea .... I think Billy was telling me some of his theories ..... one was that 9/11 was actually a botched attempt to do something else.

That was one of my reasons not to believe that they were behind it before. I now think they did it ..... poorly.

Do you have any unanswered questions about 9/11?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on February 24, 2006, 02:27 PM NHFT
Perhaps, but none of them lead me anywhere near the conclusion that the government did it.  There's not enough upside reward for the downside risk in my opinion.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Ron Helwig on February 24, 2006, 03:07 PM NHFT
I don't care who burned down the Reichstag toppled the towers anywhere near as much as I care about the actions taken in response.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dreepa on February 24, 2006, 05:54 PM NHFT
Yea .... I think Billy was telling me some of his theories ..... one was that 9/11 was actually a botched attempt to do something else.
Now there is something to think about... :o
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on February 24, 2006, 07:30 PM NHFT
To Kevin,

Since you're such a believer in the government, please answer this simple question for me:  Where was Donald Rumsfeld when flight 77 hit the Pentagon and shortly thereafter? 

I ask this because he has given THREE completely different, completely contradictory answers to that question.  And Clark supplies a FOURTH answer, that is nothing like any of Rumsfelds answers.

Follow that ONE lead, and see where it takes you.  How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go?

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 24, 2006, 08:03 PM NHFT
I don't care who burned down the Reichstag toppled the towers anywhere near as much as I care about the actions taken in response.
That is exactly how I used to feel. We know for sure that they have turned that event into a reason for a police state.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 24, 2006, 08:05 PM NHFT
Perhaps, but none of them lead me anywhere near the conclusion that the government did it.  There's not enough upside reward for the downside risk in my opinion.
What downside risk are you talking about?
Punishment by the government or ridicule by the non-believers or something else......
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on February 24, 2006, 08:14 PM NHFT
Who is "the government" here?  People did this.  If it was discovered the people who did this worked for our government, with actual evidence, and not supposition based on stuff that doesn't add up, you don't think bad things would happen to those people?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on February 24, 2006, 08:52 PM NHFT
To Kevin,

Since you're such a believer in the government, please answer this simple question for me:  Where was Donald Rumsfeld when flight 77 hit the Pentagon and shortly thereafter?

No, first you have to present something: why does it matter?

The Alex Jones school of conspiracy theory loves to throw out questions, as if the lack of definitive answers is proof of something. In reality, the proper response is usually, "So what?", "What difference does it make?", or "Who cares?"

And what makes you think I'm "such a believer in the government"?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on February 24, 2006, 09:26 PM NHFT
You guys and the internet should have been around after the Kennedy Assasination.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dave Ridley on February 24, 2006, 09:35 PM NHFT
Thanks, law!  Welcome to the Underground.  Don't underestimate the importance of hanging out on this forum; as forums go this place is probably closer than any other to being a "last best hope" for liberty.  I hope you will stick around!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on February 24, 2006, 10:34 PM NHFT
I don't care who burned down the Reichstag toppled the towers anywhere near as much as I care about the actions taken in response.

Ron, who toppled the towers is far more important than the response.

IF we accept the premise that the towers were toppled by foreign terrorists, then the response could merely be a misguided attempt to do the right thing and to protect innocent American lives.  Thus, some hope might remain that we can negotiate with them and help them to understand that there is a better response.

However, IF we accept the premise that the government (or elements within the government) conspired to bring down the towers, there can be NO reasoning with them.  There can be NO hope for change.  It only remains for us to "alter or abolish" our current form of government.  This is so because the "response" is in actuality not a misguided attempt to protect us at all; instead, it is an engineered attempt to deprive us of our liberties.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 25, 2006, 02:05 AM NHFT
Who is "the government" here?  People did this.  If it was discovered the people who did this worked for our government, with actual evidence, and not supposition based on stuff that doesn't add up, you don't think bad things would happen to those people?
The evil people who control our government did this to us. They will not punish themselves, we have to break away from them or not cooperate in their deeds.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 25, 2006, 02:07 AM NHFT

The Alex Jones school of conspiracy theory loves to throw out questions, as if the lack of definitive answers is proof of something. In reality, the proper response is usually, "So what?", "What difference does it make?", or "Who cares?"
Isn't the government supposed to answer the people's questions? Some of their expanations either contradict or cannot be true. Do you not care if these people lie or tell the truth to us?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 25, 2006, 02:09 AM NHFT
You guys and the internet should have been around after the Kennedy Assasination.
We are around after his assassination. ;)
Maybe we should start doing something about it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on February 25, 2006, 10:51 AM NHFT
Who is "the government" here?  People did this.  If it was discovered the people who did this worked for our government, with actual evidence, and not supposition based on stuff that doesn't add up, you don't think bad things would happen to those people?
The evil people who control our government did this to us. They will not punish themselves, we have to break away from them or not cooperate in their deeds.
You have no proof of this, merely speculation.  You don't think the Democrats hate Bush enough to go after him if there were proof he were involved?  Or do you suggest that this treachery is a bipartisan treason?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on February 25, 2006, 12:17 PM NHFT
Quote
Or do you suggest that this treachery is a bipartisan treason?

BINGO!  We have a winner!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on February 25, 2006, 12:18 PM NHFT
Quote
You have no proof of this, merely speculation.

www.st911.org

Its amazing how much "proof" there is.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on February 25, 2006, 01:37 PM NHFT
Who is "the government" here?  People did this.  If it was discovered the people who did this worked for our government, with actual evidence, and not supposition based on stuff that doesn't add up, you don't think bad things would happen to those people?
The evil people who control our government did this to us. They will not punish themselves, we have to break away from them or not cooperate in their deeds.
You have no proof of this, merely speculation.  You don't think the Democrats hate Bush enough to go after him if there were proof he were involved?  Or do you suggest that this treachery is a bipartisan treason?
[/quote
Read the book "Tragedy and Hope."  Wrote in 1964 by Georgetown law professor Carroll Quigley, it gives an insider's view of the internationalist's plan make both political parties virtually the same, so when one party gets voted out, there will be no policy change when the new party came in.  Take the beginning of 2000 when Bush was elected. No one would've believed that He could possibly out-spend Clinton like he did.  Point being, the liberal was taken out of office and a neocon was installed and business continues as usual. Or worse.

PS: Checkout reopen9/11.org
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on February 25, 2006, 02:22 PM NHFT
Quote
You have no proof of this, merely speculation.

www.st911.org

Its amazing how much "proof" there is.


The only thing that's amazing is that highly intelligent people, such as yourself and Russell, believe that speculation constitutes proof.

This article, for instance, is titled "The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True" (emphasis mine):

http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html

It starts out with a misdirection: that fire cannot cause the collapse of a steel-framed highrise building. Who has ever said that fire alone caused the collapse of the towers? Yes, the buildings were designed to withstand the impact of a jetliner. I'll note that such design specifications are very difficult to quantify, and impossible to test. This was the only time the towers were tested for impact of a full-size airliner, massive explosion, and raging fire. They failed the test.

Steel-framed buildings collapse all the time due solely to fire damage. High-rise buildings are obviously designed to a tougher standard, and they include fire suppression systems. No fire system is sufficient to put out a fire fueled not just by tens of thousands of pounds of flammable liquid, but also by the massive draft.

This paper also tears down the oft-used strawman that the fire wasn't hot enough to melt the steel beams. This is so utterly transparent that I don't know why it's survived, except that it keeps being repeated by those who willingly suspend disbelief. The steel beams do not have to melt in order to lose their load-bearing capacity.

For starters, the article doesn't discuss the composition of the steel. This is important, because different alloys have different degrees of plasticity at different temperatures. Mild steel becomes significantly plastic around 1,200F, and is workable down to around 700F, where S2 (a shock-resistant tool steel) remains extremely difficult to work right up to the point where it begins to burn.

The next strawman is the temperature at which jet fuel burns. Jet fuel (kerosene, diesel) is not a hot-burning fuel, when burned at standard conditions. That is, in open air. Acetylene gas burns even cooler, barely burning at all, with a flickering yellow flame giving off massive amounts of soot. But combine it with oxygen, as in an oxyactylene torch, and it will blast through thick pieces of steel at almost 6,000F.

Propane gas burns hot enough to heat water and cook food, but not hot enough to raise steel to working temperature. But combine it with a blast of air, either from a blower or an induced draft, and you can burn steel into a useless molten mess.

These two examples, coming from no expertise other than my limited experience as an erstwhile amateur blacksmith, counter the "proof" that jet fuel couldn't have burned hot enough to weaken the steel support structure. Given 110+ stories of draft acting as a venturi, I would not be surprised if internal temperatures in the fire exceeded 4,000F.

I've given my background, so that you can judge whether or not I have any knowledge that gives me a valid basis for my thinking. What about the author of this piece?

The author is listed as "David Ray Griffin, PhD". Due to the discussion of materials, engineering, and physics, the reader would naturally assume that Dr. Griffin is schooled in the hard sciences. Curious, I checked the "Who we are" section of st911, and found that Dr. Griffin is "Emeritus Professor of Philosophy of Religion & Theology, Claremont School of Theology & Claremont Graduate University".

I trust that Dr. Griffin is an expert in his field, but his field is not engineering, architecture, or physics. His field is the exact opposite, existing solely in the spiritual plane, not the physical.

I have read this piece, but I will admit that I have not chased down all the citations. Here's why: when an author practices such flagrant deception in his opening paragraphs, I assume that he will continue to deceive through selective omission and partial quotation. His opening premise chimes 13 times; the remainder simply cannot be trusted.

Lest I be accused (again) of being a government apologist, I'm one of their biggest detractors. I have no doubt that the government told untruths, both through incompetence and dishonesty. I know that certain things will never be revealed, because they would compromise intelligence operations.

But, I also know that professional conspiracy theorists like Dr. Griffin are even less trustworthy, and, frankly, not all that good at their lies.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Barterer on February 25, 2006, 03:06 PM NHFT
KBCraig,
As a civil engineer I can vouch for your point, that the intense heat from the fire(s) was enough to weaken the steel columns and initiate collapse.  The collapse of both buildings was exactly consistent with a structural failure at or near the location of the fires.  Of coarse that does not mean there weren't coverups --probably for security reasons or just officials trying not to look like incompetent fools-- but the controlled-demolition part of the conspiracy theory (at least for bldg. 1 & 2 ) is bogus.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on February 25, 2006, 03:38 PM NHFT
Kevin,

I am not sufficiently trained in the sciences to make a judgment call.  I was going to be a physics major, but I'm a flunky, so I hardly would qualify as an expert.  Take these opinions, therefore, with the grain of salt they are intended.

I consider the collapse of the buildings to be a relatively minor point; in other words, it wasn't that particular line of thinking that convinced me that the government is complicit.  (What started me down the rabbit hole is evidence that many of the "hijackers" are still alive.  I previously believed the government story.  More on that in a second.)  That having been said, I will note several things about the collapse of the buildings that are incompatible with the current theory, from a scientific standpoint.

First, on the assumption that the fires were raging so hot that they could have weakened the steel sufficiently:  I understand that there is a difference between the heat required to melt steel, and the heat required to weaken its load bearing.  I won't pretend to know what that point is, but I feel confident in assuming that that point must be higher than the point at which humans would be uncomfortable.  There are, to be sure, photographs of people jumping from the first tower to their deaths, but the other tower has pictures of people walking around in the entry site, taking a look around.  Who knows, maybe those people were Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego.  :)  But that is suspicious to me.  It's also suspicious that people reported hearing bomb blasts, but that information wasn't included in the report.  Even more suspicious is the report from Mike Pecoraro (a maintenance worker in WTC) that a bomb had gone off in the basement LONG BEFORE the tower collapsed. 
http://valis.gnn.tv/blogs/11129/Maintenance_workers_saw_evidence_of_apparent_bombings_in_the_WTC_basement_prior_to_the_collapse

So once again, I'm not an expert, but there is some pretty damning circumstantial evidence.  And what most people don't know is that there is no general agreement on how the buildings collapsed.  You seem to be advocating the "pancake theory", but largely based on pictures that showed evidence that the heat wasn't that great on the exterior, an engineering firm ("Wesserstein" or some similar name) concluded that the failure had been in the building's central concrete core, which had absorbed most of the heat.  The problem with that theory (once again, I'm only going off of my limited physics background) is that the buildings fell at nearly the standard gravitational rate (10 meters per second per second), whereas it would seem that even collapsing concrete would provide some degree of resistence. 

At any rate, there is no plausible theory to explain the collapse of wtc 7.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on February 25, 2006, 04:54 PM NHFT
Kevin,

I?m sorry for accusing you of being a government apologist.  I meant specifically with respect to 9-11, not the government as a whole, but it wasn?t a kind charge, and I apologize.

I hadn?t read Dr. Griffin?s paper, but I went ahead and did so because its difficult to comment on things that you haven?t even read.

First of all, Dr. Griffin DOES acknowledge precisely what you say he doesn?t:  That the official story is, not that fires alone caused the collapse, but fires combined with the explosions and jet crash:

?With this definition in mind, let us look at the official theory about the Twin Towers, which says that they collapsed because of the combined effect of the impact of the airplanes and the resulting fires. The report put out by FEMA said: ?The structural damage sustained by each tower from the impact, combined with the ensuing fires, resulted in the total collapse of each building? (FEMA, 2002).?

And again ?

?Defenders of the official theory, of course, say that the collapses were caused not simply by the fire but the fire combined with the damage caused by the airliners.?

It is true that Dr. Griffin focuses mainly on the fires, rather than the structural collapse, but he noted his reasons for doing so, citing this official statement of the cause of the collapse:

The NIST Report (2005, pp. xliii and 171) says: ?the towers withstood the impacts and would have remained standing were it not for the dislodged insulation (fireproofing) and the subsequent multifloor fires.?

Dr. Griffin is trying to make the point that, although the official story speak of both ?fires? and ?structural damage?, the structural damage was irrelevant because the building was designed to redistribute load through multiple redundancies.  Thus, whatever you may think of the logic of his argument, I don?t think its fair to accuse him of dishonesty because he never omits or distorts anything.  He presents it, and then rejects one of the assertions as being irrelevant.  You may disagree with his conclusion, but he hasn?t been dishonest.

Going on,  you state this about Dr. Griffin?s article:  ?This paper also tears down the oft-used strawman that the fire wasn't hot enough to melt the steel beams. This is so utterly transparent that I don't know why it's survived, except that it keeps being repeated by those who willingly suspend disbelief. The steel beams do not have to melt in order to lose their load-bearing capacity.?

But Dr. Griffin never asserted that was the position of the official story.  In fact, he states quite the opposite.  After noting that a few people at the outset made the astounding claim that the steel had been melted, Dr. Griffin makes this statement:
?Most defenders of the official theory, in fact, do not make this absurd claim. They say merely that the fire heated the steel up to the point where it lost so much of its strength that it buckled.? 

He thus addresses the very points that you imply he does not address.  Once again, you may not agree with his conclusions, but I think it is unfair to charge him with dishonesty.
In fact Dr. Griffin addresses many speculations that you have not even mentioned.  He appears to be trying to come at it from ?every angle.?

And ? I?m trying to be fair to you here, Kevin, but I feel its important to bring this point up:  You singled Dr. Griffin out, noting that he is not an expert in the field.  However, there is another paper on the same website, placed immediately above Dr. Griffin?s article by Professor Steven Jones, who is an expert in that particular field.  In fairness to Dr. Griffin, wouldn?t the argument that he?s not an expert in the field at least mitigate the charge that he is being intentionally dishonest?  You seem to be treating Dr. Griffin in two contradictory ways.  First, you dismiss his positions because he is not an expert in the field.  And yet, you then turn around and hold him to the standards of an expert in the field and accuse him of dishonesty.  But you correctly note that he is a Professor of Theology.  Wouldn?t being an expert in that particular field cause you to at least give him the benefit of the doubt that he is not being intentionally dishonest?

My position is this:  I agree with GK Chesterton.  I don?t think a person needs to be an expert to hold an informed viewpoint on a subject.  However ? to the extent that there are experts on the website who are better trained than Dr. Griffin, I will hold them as more authoritative. 

You should have read Dr. Jones? article, not Dr. Griffin?s, if you are interested in reading from an expert in the field.  Dr. Griffin does not claim to be an expert.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on February 25, 2006, 07:00 PM NHFT
I chose the Griffin article rather randomly, because the author was listed as a PhD. It's listed on st911.org as a paper proving the towers didn't collapse from the impact and fire. Given what the group aims have others believe, I assume it's representative.

You're correct that Griffin makes note of those who doubt his view. Perhaps we came away with a different overall feel for the article, but here's my paraphrase of it: "Those who buy the official line point out x and y. But that's just silly, and they're wrong." He notes the argument, then dismisses it out of hand. That's not the same as coming at it from all angles.

Should there ever be actual proof of government complicity in 9/11, I'll be surprised. Not surprised that there are people in government who are so evil as to do such a thing, but very surprised that anyone could be competent to pull off such a large and complex operation, requiring hundreds of participants, and yet maintain total secrecy.

Apology noted and accepted on the "believer in government" remark. Thanks, and I look forward to a long friendship, and future robust debates.  ;D

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 25, 2006, 08:57 PM NHFT
Dr. Griffin is not a conspiracy theory author. He just had questions about 9/11 and gathered up all the problems into a book and then a second one later. We heard him in Brattleboro a little while ago and enjoyed him. His books are good. He has gone from a questioner of the governments story to a firm believer in their deceptiveness. I agree with him.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on February 25, 2006, 11:32 PM NHFT
Thanks Kevin, I do consider you a friend and am glad you forgive me.  Now, if we can only convince you ... you'll be a powerful ally.

Part of the problem with the st911.org website is that, like almost all the 9-11 truth sites, the information is of varying quality.  Personally, I think Dr. Griffin is one of the best advocates.  No one can be an expert in everything.  But rational and intelligent people tend to come up with rational and intelligent conclusions. 

Russell is quite right:  Griffin is not, primarily, a conspiracy theorist.  He has written only two books that could be called "conspiracy theories", both of them on the topic of 9-11.  Compare that to Fetzer, (also on the st911.org website), who has written on JFK, the moon landing (he thinks it was faked), 9-11, etc.  Griffin has written many, many books, and with the exception of the two 9-11 books, they have all been scholarly religious tomes.  He is widely respected; Claremont is one of the most prestigious seminaries in the nation.  I have several of his non-911 books, and have been very impressed with his presentation of his subjects. 

It makes a difference, Kevin, because if you identify someone as a "conspiracy theorist" that indicates that the person is already inclined to believe somewhat extraordinary claims.  If I went around speaking about "Chemtrails" and "alien abductions", I would think that a person would be fair in not listening when I speak about something that seems incredible, such as 9-11.  But when persons who you know have a reputation for sane and reasoned thinking come to a conclusion that seems extraordinary, we tend to listen more because we figure that they have arrived at the extraordinary conclusions in the same manner that they arrive at their more mundane conclusions.  I think you would find that to be true of members of the 9-11 truth community such as Jones, Griffin, Ruppert, and Judge.  It is, by its very nature, filled with people who make extraordinary claims, and I don't say that you should accept what everyone says.  But when the above four make a statement, I listen because I have no reason to suspect that they tend to deviate from their otherwise sane and reasoned conclusions.  Of course, I'm not recommending that you suspend your own judgment, regardless of who says something, but I do suggest that certain people are more worthy of respect than others, and that applies regardless of the subject under consideration.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 25, 2006, 11:46 PM NHFT
but then Caleb believes it .....so we can throw credibility right out.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on February 26, 2006, 06:13 PM NHFT
Russell, perhaps if you had been abducted by aliens, you would see things the way I do too!  ;)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 26, 2006, 08:08 PM NHFT
I watched the snippets from the "Confronting the Evidence" video. It was pretty good. It was a tape of a conference where the had a bunch of the guys who have made movies or books about 9/11 and "experts", so it had a good combination of subjects. It has clips from all the 9/11 movies I have seen.

So .....
'Confronting the Evidence' was good
'Painful Deceptions' is good
'In Plane Site' was ok and
'Loose Change' is ok

The also had video from "The Great Conspiracy" which was decent, but I haven't seen the whole thing. It is from a Canadian reporter guy.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on February 26, 2006, 08:12 PM NHFT
Russell, perhaps if you had been abducted by aliens, you would see things the way I do too!  ;)

Well....this explains everything.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on February 26, 2006, 10:02 PM NHFT






[/quote]


http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html




Steel-framed buildings collapse all the time due solely to fire damage.



I have read this piece, but I will admit that I have not chased down all the citations. Here's why: when an author practices such flagrant deception in his opening paragraphs, I assume that he will continue to deceive through selective omission and partial quotation.
Kevin
[/quote]
 
 
 
Kevin, can you cite an example of a skyscraper brought down by fire?
 
I know that the WTC twin towers were constructed with dissimilar metals (aluminum and steel) that could have resulted in corrosion in the surrounding salt air. This was a faux pas as far as material's science is concerned.
 
Why do you think the government has locked up all the prints of the project?
 
The 9-11 report contends that a fireball decended the elevator shafts to the sub-basement. Elevator shafts don't typically go that far without a transition floor. If there was an exception to this rule (like a freight elevator) why won't the government show the plans?
 
I read where the buildings were built without a sprinkler system. That one was added later but that the redacted words of the on scene firefighters were "Where's the f*^king sprinkers?"
 
Kind of brings the following story into a new light eh?
   AP    Katherine Smith, top left, was charged in a scheme to sell fraudulent driver's licenses with five Middle Eastern men.    Tuesday, February 12, 2002   MEMPHIS, Tenn. - A driver's license examiner charged in a scheme with some Middle Eastern men to sell fraudulent licenses died the day before her first court appearance in a fiery car wreck prosecutors called "most unusual and suspicious."  Forensics tests were being performed on Katherine Smith's car to determine what caused the fire, FBI spokesman George Bolds said Tuesday.  "We're looking at everything ... whether it was an accident, whether it was a suicide or whether it was something else," said Bolds, who would not specifically discuss the possibility of explosives.  The FBI also said it is investigating whether Smith's five co-defendants have connections to the Sept. 11 attacks or other terrorist ties.  Smith, 49, was killed early Sunday. The 1992 Acura Legend she was driving ran off the road and struck a utility pole just north of the Mississippi state line, Highway Patrol Lt. Col. Mark Fagan said.  Smith's car "was immediately engulfed in flames," but authorities do not know whether the fire started before or after the crash, Fagan said. The body was so badly burned it took authorities until Tuesday to confirm Smith's identity.  The cause of death remains under investigation.  FBI agent J. Suzanne Nash said the gas tank did not explode and the car was only slightly dented from the crash.  Prosecutor Tim DiScenza called the crash "most unusual and suspicious."  Smith was one of six people charged last week by federal officials with conspiracy to get Tennessee driver's licenses under false pretenses. She had been scheduled for arraignment on Monday.  Also charged were Khaled Odtllah, 31, Sakhera Hammad, 24, Mohammed Fares, Mostafa Said Abou-Shahin and Abdelmuhsen Mahmid Hammad. Authorities did not give ages for the last three and said they admitted being in the country illegally.  The case broke last week when authorities staked out the driver's license office where Smith worked on a tip from the FBI in New York that several illegal immigrants from the Middle East were traveling to Memphis to illegally obtain state IDs, Nash said.  Smith, an examiner for nine years, told authorities that Odtllah was a friend who had asked her to help him obtain driver's licenses six or seven times, Nash said.  Nash said that when Sakhera Hammad was arrested, investigators found a visitor's pass for the World Trade Center, dated Sept. 5, 2001, in his wallet. He told authorities he was a plumber who worked on the center's sprinkler system. He said Abdelmuhsen Mahmid Hammad was a cousin who worked with him, Nash said.  Federal authorities learned that Odtllah drove to Memphis from New York City on Sept. 11, Nash said.  Anthony Helm, attorney for Odtllah, asked Nash in court: "You certainly don't have any indication any of these fellows is a terrorist, do you?"  "Not at this time, no sir," Nash said.  A hearing for Abou-Shahin, Abdelmuhsen Mahmid Hammad and Fares is scheduled for Wednesday. Odtllah and Sakhera Hammad remain held without bond until their trial. 

 
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on February 26, 2006, 10:12 PM NHFT
As I understand it all the "middle easterners" in the above story were deported back to thier home country of...
Israel. :D
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on February 26, 2006, 11:05 PM NHFT
In fairness, Israel DID warn us prior to 9-11 that there was a significant threat.  I don't think Israel is to blame here.  Was Israel spying on us?  Yes.  Did Israel know what was going to happen?  Yes.  Did Israel cause it?  No.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: tracysaboe on February 26, 2006, 11:12 PM NHFT
Another excellent conservative video about 9/11 is

Hijacking Catastrophy.

It doesn't get into conspiracy theory, but the position that government definitely used it as an excuse.

Tracy
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 27, 2006, 12:35 AM NHFT
There is using it and causing it ...... to me there is a big difference.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on February 27, 2006, 01:37 AM NHFT
There is using it and causing it ...... to me there is a big difference.

And to me too. There's no doubt the government used 9/11, even though I do doubt they caused it.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 27, 2006, 01:53 AM NHFT
Since there is a difference ..... you should watch some of the videos mentioned here. I want people to be exposed to the truth about the federal government.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on February 27, 2006, 08:12 AM NHFT
I don't think the government caused it. I think they had evidence it was being planned, and allowed it to happen, a la the Reichstag fire. They wanted something to scare the Bejeezus out of the sheeple, and they got it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on March 03, 2006, 08:55 PM NHFT
conspiracy theory
I love the use of this term, as it applies best to the official story of 9/11.  The official story involves a plot by more than one individual that is supported by evidence but has yet to be proven, ergo, a conspiracy theory.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on March 03, 2006, 09:15 PM NHFT
We live in the grey area between fact and fiction.

We live, in the Twilight zone.
 
Do de do due do de do due.... ;D
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on March 03, 2006, 09:53 PM NHFT
I love the use of this term

The history of how the idiom "conspiracy theory" became a part of our language is most interesting.

Due tell!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on March 08, 2006, 05:08 PM NHFT
Group of scholars asking for release of information about 9/11:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/929981172?ltl=1141667399
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on March 21, 2006, 01:43 PM NHFT
Audio for the interview http://prisonplanet.tv/audio/200306sheen.htm which I haven't listened to yet.



Actor Charlie Sheen Questions Official 9/11 Story
Calls for truly independent investigation, joins growing ranks of prominent credible whistleblowers

Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | March 20 2006

Actor Charlie Sheen has joined a growing army of other highly credible public figures in questioning the official story of 9/11 and calling for a new independent investigation of the attack and the circumstances surrounding it.

Over the past two years, scores of highly regarded individuals have gone public to express their serious doubts about 9/11. These include former presidential advisor and CIA analyst Ray McGovern, the father of Reaganomics and former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury Paul Craig Roberts, BYU physics Professor Steven Jones, former German defense minister Andreas von Buelow, former MI5 officer David Shayler, former Blair cabinet member Michael Meacher, former Chief Economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term Morgan Reynolds and many more.

Speaking to The Alex Jones Show on the GCN Radio Network, the star of current hit comedy show Two and a Half Men and dozens of movies including Platoon and Young Guns, Sheen elaborated on why he had problems believing the government's version of events.

Sheen agreed that the biggest conspiracy theory was put out by the government itself and prefaced his argument by quoting Theodore Roosevelt in stating, "That we are to stand by the President right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

"We're not the conspiracy theorists on this particular issue," said Sheen.

"It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75% of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory. It raises a lot of questions."

Sheen described the climate of acceptance for serious discussion about 9/11 as being far more fertile than it was a couple of years ago.

"It feels like from the people I talk to in and around my circles, it seems like the worm is turning."

Suspicious collapse of buildings

Sheen described his immediate skepticism regarding the official reason for the collapse of the twin towers and building 7 on the day of 9/11.

"I was up early and we were gonna do a pre-shoot on Spin City, the show I used to do, I was watching the news and the north tower was burning. I saw the south tower hit live, that famous wide shot where it disappears behind the building and then we see the tremendous fireball."

"There was a feeling, it just didn't look any commercial jetliner I've flown on any time in my life and then when the buildings came down later on that day I said to my brother 'call me insane, but did it sorta look like those buildings came down in a controlled demolition'?"

Sheen said that most people's gut instinct, that the buildings had been deliberately imploded, was washed away by the incessant flood of the official version of events from day one.

Sheen questioned the plausibility of a fireballs traveling 110 feet down an elevator shaft and causing damage to the lobbies of the towers as seen in video footage, especially when contrasted with eyewitness accounts of bombs and explosions in the basement levels of the buildings.

Regarding building 7, which wasn't hit by a plane, Sheen highlighted the use of the term "pull," a demolition industry term for pulling the outer walls of the building towards the center in an implosion, as was used by Larry Silverstein in a September 2002 PBS documentary when he said that the decision to "pull" building 7 was made before its collapse. This technique ensures the building collapses in its own footprint and can clearly be seen during the collapse of building 7 with the classic 'crimp' being visible.

The highly suspicious collapse of building 7 and the twin towers has previously been put under the spotlight by physics Professor Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan of Underwriters Laboratories, the company that certified the steel components used in the construction of the World Trade Center towers.

"The term 'pull' is as common to the demolition world as 'action and 'cut' are to the movie world," said Sheen.

Sheen referenced firefighters in the buildings who were eyewitnesses to demolition style implosions and bombs.

"This is not you or I watching the videos and speculating on what we saw, these are gentlemen inside the buildings at the very point of collapse."

"If there's a problem with building 7 then there's a problem with the whole thing," said Sheen.

Bush's behavior on 9/11

Sheen then questioned President Bush's actions on 9/11 and his location at the Booker Elementary School in Florida. Once Andy Card had whispered to Bush that America was under attack why didn't the secret service immediately whisk Bush away to a secret location?

By remaining at a location where it was publicly known the President would be before 9/11, he was not only putting his own life in danger, but the lives of hundreds of schoolchildren. That is unless the government knew for sure what the targets were beforehand and that President Bush wasn't one of them.

"It seems to me that upon the revelation of that news that the secret service would grab the President as if he was on fire and remove him from that room," said Sheen.

The question of how Bush saw the first plane hit the north tower, when no live footage of that incident was carried, an assertion that Bush repeated twice, was also put under the spotlight.

"I guess one of the perks of being President is that you get access to TV channels that don't exist in the known universe," said Sheen.

"It might lead you to believe that he'd seen similar images in some type of rehearsal as it were, I don't know."

The Pentagon incident

Sheen outlined his disbelief that the official story of what happened at the Pentagon matched the physical evidence.

"Show us this incredible maneuvering, just show it to us. Just show us how this particular plane pulled off these maneuvers. 270 degree turn at 500 miles and hour descending 7,000 feet in two and a half minutes, skimming across treetops the last 500 meters."

We have not been able to confirm that a large commercial airliner hit the Pentagon because the government has seized and refused to release any footage that would show the impact.

"I understand in the interest of national security that maybe not release the Pentagon cameras but what about the Sheraton, what about the gas station, what about the Department of Transportation freeway cam? What about all these shots that had this thing perfectly documented? Instead they put out five frames that they claim not to have authorized, it's really suspicious," said Sheen.

Sheen also questioned how the plane basically disappeared into the Pentagon with next to no wreckage and no indication of what happened to the wing sections.

Concerning how the Bush administration had finalized Afghanistan war plans two days before 9/11 with the massing of 44,000 US troops and 18,000 British troops in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, and in addition the call for "some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor," as outlined in the PNAC documents, Sheen stated, "you don't really put those strategies together overnight do you for a major invasion? Those are really well calculated and really well planned."

"Coincidence? We think not," said Sheen and he called the PNAC quotes "emblematic of the arrogance of this administration."

A real investigation

Sheen joined others in calling for a revised and truly independent investigation of 9/11.

Sheen said that "September 11 wasn't the Zapruder film, it was the Zapruder film festival," and that the inquiry had to be, "headed, if this is possible, by some neutral investigative committee. What if we used retired political foreign nationals? What if we used experts that don't have any ties whatsoever to this administration?"

"It is up to us to reveal the truth. It is up to us because we owe it to the families, we owe it to the victims. We owe it to everybody's life who was drastically altered, horrifically that day and forever. We owe it to them to uncover what happened."

Charlie Sheen joins the rest of his great family and notably his father Martin Sheen, who has lambasted for opposing the Iraq war before it had begun yet has now been proven right in triplicate, in using his prominent public platform to stand for truth and justice and we applaud and salute his brave efforts, remembering Mark Twain's quote.

"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: BillyC on March 21, 2006, 10:17 PM NHFT
check this story out :-)

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/200306charliesheen.htm
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dreepa on March 22, 2006, 01:37 PM NHFT
Sheen stated, "you don't really put those strategies together overnight do you for a major invasion? Those are really well calculated and really well planned."


The Pentagon has plans to invade just about every country so that should not be suprising.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: BillyC on March 22, 2006, 06:39 PM NHFT
Fox News - 911 The Israeli Connection
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAoe26MaTew&search=fox%20news

I just finished watching this. it was interesting to say the least.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on March 22, 2006, 08:51 PM NHFT
The Pentagon has plans to invade just about every country so that should not be suprising.
Your tax dollars at work.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on March 24, 2006, 11:10 AM NHFT
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/240306supportsheen.htm
 
As of Friday morning you can still vote in the poll and I encourage you to do so by clicking here. A.J. Hammer and CNN Showbiz Tonight need to be given their due as the only mainstream television news show to give balanced coverage of serious 9/11 questions.

This is a watershed moment in the struggle to create a powerful, educated and active contingent of individuals with no hierarchical structure but with a unified cause.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on March 24, 2006, 02:00 PM NHFT
According to the CNN poll, 86% agree with Sheen and have doubts about the official story...almost 15000 people agreeing.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on March 24, 2006, 02:22 PM NHFT
Must be something wrong with the software. These results just don't seem "fair and balanced". Better shut down the internet till we can find the "problem". :o
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: stitcherman on March 24, 2006, 03:11 PM NHFT
  tonight {friday} on cnn showbiz tonight at 7 pm charlie sheen will be on again for the third night about 911. i participated in a poll cnn is running and 83% believe the us government covered up what really happened.

 7 pm check it out.

on alex jones show:
he made a public challenge to silverstien {the owner of trade towers and bldg #7} to explain what he said on pbs interview that "they made a decision to pull the building so we pulled it"

  if every american was doing what mr. sheen is now. we would get our govt. back from these evildoers.

america's being destroyed by design
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on March 24, 2006, 03:19 PM NHFT
Must be something wrong with the software. These results just don't seem "fair and balanced". Better shut down the internet till we can find the "problem". :o

 
Ah Ha! Here's the problem.
 
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/240306_b_Bandwidth.htm
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: 1984IsNow on March 24, 2006, 08:16 PM NHFT
Wasn't microsoft trying to buy out google or something at one time?  Did that ever go through?  >.> seems irrelivant, sorry, haha, but could it be something like that going on?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dreepa on March 25, 2006, 08:38 PM NHFT
I have never heard that MS was going to buy Google.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on March 25, 2006, 08:51 PM NHFT
Wasn't microsoft trying to buy out google or something at one time?  Did that ever go through?  >.> seems irrelivant, sorry, haha, but could it be something like that going on?

Three words. China, communist China. Billy bob Gates gave the source code to windows to the PLA. The very same code used by our US Navy to steer and command our most advanced warships. The reds know where every single boat in the blue water US Navy is 24/7. But don't despair our most generous president Billy bob Clinton gave the red Chinese a pass into the bowels of the pentagon for a yardsale exclusive that included the prints to our most advanced rocket gyroscope technology. So now when the Chinese minister tells us that "we will not trade Los Angeles for Tiawian" we kinda haveta take him seriously. Google is guilty of the lesser crime of pointing out to the murderers in charge of the Chinese internet police where all the nodes of natural rights emenated from. This alleviates the need to lock all the internet cafe goers inside the building while it gets torched.
 
Hope this clears up any misconceptions you might be holding for Microsoft or Google.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dreepa on March 25, 2006, 08:57 PM NHFT
  Just because the ships may have 'windows' on board does not mean that that controls the ships.

How would that data be transfered from the ship to the PLA?


Via the fringed flag? ::)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on March 25, 2006, 09:27 PM NHFT
Good one Dreepa!
 
Having never been in the Military Tunga can only make this kind of shit up. The windows based NT opperating system was detailed in an article posted in Scientific American about an American warship that spent several "hours" dead in the water when it's Windows OS crapped out.
 
NEST stands for something like Nuclear Emergency SEARCH Team. They supposedly have the codes to every military nuke worldwide. Tunga speculates that this implies all Nuclear equiped parties have access to all other parties codes and the real time locations of those devices.
 
No?
 
http://www.milnet.com/nest.htm
Title: She did everything right.
Post by: Tunga on March 26, 2006, 10:18 PM NHFT
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/260306Scholars.htm
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on March 30, 2006, 09:52 PM NHFT
If you have seen photos of the exit hole in the wall of the pentagon and wondered why there was no logical explanation offered for its existance. This story will just make it worse for you.
 
http://rense.com/general70/bhole.htm
 
Tunga has worked with engineers and he can confirm the damage shown in the photos is NOT consistant with the definition of the the terms "Cracking and Spalling". If the damage to the column in question was caused by a Jet engine, where did said engine go after it broke through the wall? Poof! You don't need to know. >:(
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on April 02, 2006, 03:54 AM NHFT
Liberty lovers Penn & Teller study 9/11:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7501020220921158523

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on April 06, 2006, 10:04 AM NHFT
Hmm..more insiders going public.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on April 06, 2006, 10:27 AM NHFT
How many insiders have to speak before folks begin to listen?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on April 06, 2006, 10:31 AM NHFT
The interview is good:

http://prisonplanet.tv/audio/030406bowman.htm

Here's the guy's bio:
Dr. Robert M. Bowman is President of the Institute for Space and Security Studies, Executive Vice President of Millennium III Corporation, and Presiding Archbishop of the United Catholic Church. The recipient of the Eisenhower Medal, the George F. Kennan Peace Prize, the President's Medal of Veterans for Peace, the Republic Aviation Airpower Award, The Society of American Military Engineers' Gold Medal (twice), the Air Medal with five oak leaf clusters, and numerous other awards, he is one of the country's foremost authorities on national security.

Until July, 1982, he was a Vice President of Space Communications Company. Before that, Dr. Bowman was Manager, Advanced Space Programs at General Dynamics, responsible for the communications spacecraft product line. Culminating a 22-year Air Force career in 1978, Col. Bowman was Director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the Air Force Space Division. In that capacity, he controlled about half a billion dollars worth of space programs, including the "Star Wars" programs, the existence of which was (at that time) secret. Dr. Bowman taught at five colleges and universities, serving as Associate Professor, Department Head, and Assistant Dean. From 1971 to 1974, Dr. Bowman was responsible for Air Force and NASA contracts in Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and Southern Asia. In 1969 and 1970, Col. Bowman flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam. He is active in national and international professional societies and chaired eight major conferences. His PhD is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech. Dr. Bowman has lectured at the National War College, the United Nations, Congressional Caucuses, the Academies of Science of six nations, and the House of Lords. He has appeared on McNeil-Lehrer, ABC News, the Larry King Show, Donohue, and Firing Line. He has hosted radio talk shows in New York, Rhode Island, and Florida.

Archbishop Bowman has preached at the National Cathedral and at churches of many faiths, including Roman Catholic, Protestant, Anglican, and Orthodox Christian Churches, Jewish synagogues, and a Muslim mosque. He has been keynote speaker for religious and clergy conferences nationwide and has spoken at theological seminaries and at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. He has appeared on many Christian radio and TV talk shows, including the 700 Club.

Bob Bowman was the first presidential candidate officially recognized by the Reform Party for the 2000 election, and for several weeks was the only one. He beat Pat Buchanan in Iowa, Illinois, and California before dropping out of the race for lack of money and media coverage. Central to his campaign were (1) electoral reform (severing the connection between big money and political power), (2) international trade reform (gaining democratic control of the WTO), (3) health care reform ( a doctor-run single-payer national health system), (4) structural reform (ending the domination of society by transnational corporations and banks), (5) economic reform (allowing workers to keep more of the wealth they create), and (6) foreign relations reform (freeing the American people from the threat of nuclear terrorism by a return to a Constitutional foreign and military policy which refuses to go to war for the financial interests of the wealthy few).
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on April 07, 2006, 11:58 AM NHFT
Bush's poll numbers are at an all time low. I expect there will be either another terrorist attack inside the US, or an invasion of someone else by US, possibly Iran, before the 2006 Federal elections.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on April 07, 2006, 06:48 PM NHFT
Not to mention that the President promised to shitcan the guy that outed the CIA agent working on Newculer weapons proliferation. Turns out it was the President himself. Bu Bye now.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on April 28, 2006, 07:12 AM NHFT
After the viewing of Loose Change, Second Edition the other night, people were discussing what we should do about it.  We're forming a group to discuss this issue and take action:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NH911Action/
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Republidog on April 28, 2006, 02:21 PM NHFT
I'm not sure if we'll ever know for sure what happened to 93, but I have heard that story as well.

What I do know (and I live in PA and have seen the area, as well as photos immediately after) is that the official crash site was over 8 miles long with an extremely small almost nonexistent main impact site.

This correlates with the plane being shot down in the air and the debris spreading out and then hitting the ground. There are also locals who say they saw fighter jets in the area before the crash. There was even a caller into Howard Stern that lived in the area and said it was shot down on the day of the attacks.

8 mile debris field does not indicate a crash. Of course, the "let's roll" fable makes for nice propaganda and movie sales.

Chances are the passengers on that plane were either unaware or it was a drone and there was no one on that plane.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on April 28, 2006, 02:25 PM NHFT
How many insiders have to speak before folks begin to listen?
As long as the corporate bankers run the media, no credence will be given to the 9-11 truth movement. The underground will have to make it happen.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 06, 2006, 07:42 PM NHFT
WWIII Started And We Weren?t Told?
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=5265

We haven't had much talk on this forum about the Flight 93 movie.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: ravelkinbow on May 06, 2006, 07:48 PM NHFT
In my opinion there is more to the story and the way it is portrayed is to generate patriotic support.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 06, 2006, 08:55 PM NHFT
Flight 93 confuses me. I don't know how you make a movie of it.... we don't know what happened. Is this another "perfect storm"?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on May 06, 2006, 10:37 PM NHFT
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://usaattacked.com/shank-092201b.jpg&imgrefurl=http://usaattacked.com/flight_93.htm&h=450&w=600&sz=104&tbnid=bhOKlhLOSKm94M:&tbnh=99&tbnw=133&hl=en&start=4&prev=/images%3Fq%3DFlight%2B93%2Bcrash%2Bsite%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on May 06, 2006, 10:48 PM NHFT
Flight 93 confuses me. I don't know how you make a movie of it.... we don't know what happened.

I certainly had no desire to see it, and for exactly that reason.

Fictionalized accounts of highly emotional and tragic major events is the root of most progaganda. I don't see how this movie could be anything but propaganda, no matter how much the producer's politics differ from Bush's.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on May 07, 2006, 11:56 AM NHFT
I found this to interesting and thought provoking.

From:
9/11 SYNTHETIC TERRORISM
MADE IN USA
By Webster Griffin Tarpley
? 2004 by Webster Griffin Tarpley

XII: CONSPIRACY THEORY: THE GREAT
AMERICAN TRADITION
The neocons, who are themselves a conspiracy, do not like conspiracy theories. But if we
look at actual American history, we find conspiracy theories everywhere, even in the
most exalted places. The neocon hysteria about conspiracy theories is therefore radically
anti-historical, like so much else about this ideological and fanatical faction.
As the Harvard historian Bernard Bailyn convincingly argues in his prize-winning study,
The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (1967), the American Revolution
was based on a conspiracy theory which saw the individual actions of George III as all
being governed by a singly unifying design, which was to impose tyranny on the UK?s
North American colonies. This theory had been learned by some among the founding
fathers from such British political figures as Edmund Burke, who made similar
allegations themselves in a slightly different context. As Bailyn points out, the notion of a
conspiracy centered on George III and his court was shared by the broadest spectrum of
the founding fathers, from firebrand revolutionaries to cautious right-wingers like
Dickinson.
Before the United States ever existed, there was a conspiracy theory. According to
Bailyn, the Americans of the eighteenth century
?saw about them, with increasingly clarity, not merely mistaken, or even
evil, policies violating the principles upon which freedom rested, but what
appeared to be evidence of nothing less than a deliberate assault launched
surreptitiously by plotters against liberty both in England and in America.
The danger in America, it was believed, was in fact only the small,
immediately visible part of the greater whole whose ultimate
manifestation would be the destruction of the English constitution, with all
the rights and privileges embedded in it. This belief transformed the
meaning of the colonists? struggle, and it added an inner accelerator to the
movement of opposition. For, once assumed, it could not easily be
dispelled: denial only confirmed it, since what conspirators profess is not
what they believe; the ostensible is not the real; and the real is deliberately
malign. It was this ? the overwhelming evidence, as they saw it, that they
were faced with conspirators against liberty determined at all costs to gain
ends which their words dissembled ? that was signaled to the colonists
after 1763; and it was this above all else that in the end propelled them
into Revolution. (Bailyn 95)
This conception was endorsed by George Washington in the Fairfax Resolution of 1774,
written in collaboration with George Mason. Here Washington asserted the existence of a
?regular, systematic plan? of oppression. In conformity with this plan, the British

government was ?endeavoring by every piece of art and despotism to fix the shackles of
slavery upon us.? Washington wrote in a letter of this time that ?beyond the smallest
doubt?these measures are the result of deliberation?I am as fully convinced as I am of
my own existence that there has been a regular, systematic plan formed to enforce them.?
(Bailyn 120)
Thomas Jefferson agreed; he wrote in a pamphlet of 1774 that although ?single acts of
tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day? a series of oppressions,
begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of
ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate and systematical plan of reducing us to slavery.?
(Bailyn 120) This language prefigures the final text of the Declaration of Independence.
John Adams estimated in 1774 that ?the conspiracy was first regularly formed and begun
to be executed in 1763 or 4.? At other times Adams traced the conspiracy back to the
1750s and the 1740s, mentioning in this context Governor Shirley of Massachusetts.
According to Adams, the proponents of the conspiracy were exchanging letters that were
?profoundly secret, dark, and deep;? this was a part of what Adams called a ?junto
conspiracy.? (Bailyn 122) According to the Boston Committee of Correspondence, one of
the most important pre-revolutionary institutions, awareness of the conspiracy was a gift
of divine providence, practically a revelation. They thanked God who had ?wonderfully
interposed to bring to light the plot that has been laid for us by our malicious and
invidious enemies.? (Bailyn 122) For these colonists, God was a conspiracy theorist.
Even the Tories, the pro-British faction among the colonists, believed in a conspiracy
theory of their own. In 1760 the royalist Governor Bernard of Massachusetts alleged that
a ?faction? had organized a conspiracy against the customs administration; he saw this
group as a secret, power-hungry cabal. (Bailyn 151)
As Bailyn sums up his exhaustive reading of the pamphlet literature and political writings
of the time, ?the conviction on the part of the Revolutionary leaders that they were faced
with a deliberate conspiracy to destroy the balance of the constitution and eliminate their
freedom had deep and widespread roots ? roots deeply embedded in Anglo-American
political culture?. The configuration of attitudes and ideas that would constitute the
Revolutionary ideology was present a half-century before there was an actual
Revolution? and among the dominant elements in this pattern were the fear of
corruption ? of its anti-constitutional destructiveness ? and of the menace of a ministerial
conspiracy. At the very first signs of conflict between the colonies and the administration
in the early 1760s the question of motivation was openly broached and the imputation of
secret purposes discussed? The conviction that the colonies, and England itself, were
faced with a deliberate, anti-libertarian design grew most quickly where the polarization
of politics was most extreme?. But in some degree it was present everywhere; it was
almost universally shared by sympathizers of the American cause?. The explosion of
long-smoldering fears of ministerial conspiracy was by no means an exclusively
American phenomenon. It was experienced in England too?.? (Bailyn 144-145)
THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE: CONSPIRACY THEORY

The US Declaration of Independence signed in Congress in Philadelphia on July 4, 1776,
is one of the most celebrated conspiracy theories of all time. Here we read towards the
beginning a description of the present situation of the states which notes that
?when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the
same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it
is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government and to provide
new guards for their future security?.
This is followed by a long catalogue of misdeeds and abuses committed by the British
monarch, introduced by the refrain: ?He has?.? At the end of the catalogue, there is a
summary paragraph which makes clear that what has been presented should not be
thought of as a laundry list of complaints about disparate events, but rather as the
implacable and systematic operations of a concerted plot ? of a conspiracy. In the words
of Thomas Jefferson, as edited by Benjamin Franklin and others:
The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated
injuries and usurpations, all having, in direct object, the establishment of
an absolute tyranny over these States.
The ministers changed, the policies shifted, but the controlling goal of tyranny remained.
It is a conspiracy theory of the type which would make many a modern academic or
neocon talk show host squirm. It is also one of the greatest political documents of world
history. Were Jefferson and Franklin paranoids, mere conspiracy buffs?
It is perfectly correct to say that the United States as a country was founded on
conspiracy theory, one which served as a powerful unifying ideology for the entire
revolutionary generation. The approach of their analysis, it should be noted, was
empirical as well as analytical: they recognized the need to back up their conspiracy
theory with an abundant supply of factual material. This point of documentation and
intelligibility is a key point, which the analysts and researchers of today need to
remember.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on May 07, 2006, 02:09 PM NHFT
I think this movie is your typical ploy to rally the American people around the government's official story while at the sametime glorifying the passengers and winning the hearts and minds of the American people. We'll never know what happened because the FBI/NSA classifies any and everything in the name of national security and then releases their 'official' verdict. While I feel bad for everyone involved, I don't think their memory is honored by disinformation.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on May 14, 2006, 12:09 PM NHFT
Check this out! Scroll down to 'Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime'

http://freedomtofascism.blogspot.com/

Could someone snag this? I have dial-up and it would take me a week to watch this. I watched about two minutes of stop and go, but can't stand to do it for the full 1:11 minutes.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on May 14, 2006, 07:59 PM NHFT
It's good.  A lot of stuff I hadn't heard about.  I got halfway before my computer crashed.  Don't see a way to download it, though  :-\
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on May 14, 2006, 09:07 PM NHFT
http://www.911blogger.com/2006/05/video-everybodys-gotta-learn-sometime.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 16, 2006, 12:32 AM NHFT
That would make sense.
Could a plane fly into that building easily?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on May 16, 2006, 02:07 AM NHFT
That would make sense.
Could a plane fly into that building easily?

Only in a vertical dive.

Interesting theory, but pretty implausible.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on May 16, 2006, 11:58 AM NHFT
That would make sense.
Could a plane fly into that building easily?

Only in a vertical dive.

Interesting theory, but pretty implausible.



Unless the twin towers were not standing in the way.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 16, 2006, 12:25 PM NHFT
If the reason wtc7 was demo'ed was because it contained a command center, then I would think that would go against the idea of 93 headed there, unless it came much later and they had time to leave.
Title: Pentagon impact video to be released in 9 min's.
Post by: Tunga on May 16, 2006, 12:51 PM NHFT
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50234
 
William Kammer, chief of the Department of Defense, Office of Freedom of Information wrote to Judicial Watch: "Now that the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui is over, we are able to complete your request and provide the video. ?"
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on May 16, 2006, 01:55 PM NHFT
Pentagon to Release 9/11 Security Video

55 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The
Pentagon said Tuesday it planned to release video images of American Airlines Flight 77 crashing into the military headquarters building and killing 184 people in the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

The images, recorded by a Pentagon security camera, were to be released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by Judicial Watch, a public interest group. The video had previously been leaked and publicly circulated, but this is the first time the government will have officially released the imagery.

The hijacked American Airlines plane slammed into the southwest side of the Pentagon at 9:38 a.m. EDT, shortly after two other hijacked airlines were flown into the twin towers at the World Trade Center in New York. The attack set off fires in a portion of the Pentagon and killed 125 people inside, in addition to those on board the plane.

"We fought hard to obtain this video because we felt that it was very important to complete the public record with respect to the terrorist attacks of September 11," said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on May 16, 2006, 02:02 PM NHFT
Wow, they're really going to need some creative videography for this. But of course, they've been working on their imposter video for almost five years.
Title: Inconclusive at best?
Post by: Tunga on May 16, 2006, 06:39 PM NHFT
Looks pretty small for a Jumbo jet.
 
Still no Citgo video. Just the security cam at the gate.
 
We're getting slimed here folks.
 
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/16/pentagon.video/index.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on May 16, 2006, 08:32 PM NHFT
All I saw was a missle hitting the pentagon.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 16, 2006, 09:50 PM NHFT
I don't believe the pentagons conspiracy theory that an arab stole a 757 and plowed it into their building.
I am not paying for damages .... it was probably arson.
Title: surveillance footage
Post by: NC2NH on May 16, 2006, 10:02 PM NHFT
All I saw was a missle hitting the pentagon.

I certainly couldn't see a plane in the grainy frames on CNN today. By comparison, it makes the Zapruder film seem like a feature-length IMAX movie.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on May 17, 2006, 02:30 AM NHFT
All I saw was a missle hitting the pentagon.

Missiles don't carry jet fuel. High explosives don't produce big orange fireballs, but low-order flammables like JET-A do. A missile strike would produce a shock wave and a cloud of dust, with no visible flame or smoke. A plane crash would produce a big orange fireball and black smoke, exactly like is seen on the video.

Before everyone gets too worked up about the apparent size of the flying object that hits the Pentagon, please remember that both camera views are extreme wide angle, so that the farther away objects are, the smaller they appear.

Note: I'm not repeating the government line, and I don't expect anyone else to do so, either. I want the truth, but "Truth" must be based on facts. When you argue against the government line, please do so with actual, verifiable facts. "I don't believe it, so they must be lying" doesn't constitute proof.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 17, 2006, 03:37 AM NHFT
Does that look like a 757 to you?
Would you even think that unless someone told you to?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on May 17, 2006, 04:45 AM NHFT
Does that look like a 757 to you?

It doesn't look like it's not a 757. It definitely doesn't look like a cruise missile, which would look more like a cigarette at that range. Insufficient data for a conclusion.

Quote
Would you even think that unless someone told you to?

I wouldn't think it was, or wasn't, whether anyone told me to, or not.

It's a one-frame blurr in a bad video. Insufficient data to say yea or nay. Anyone who claims proof either way is relying on a previous conclusion, not evidence as presented.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 17, 2006, 05:03 AM NHFT
Until the government proves their side .... I am going to be a skeptic.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on May 17, 2006, 06:42 PM NHFT
Does that look like a 757 to you?

It doesn't look like it's not a 757. It definitely doesn't look like a cruise missile, which would look more like a cigarette at that range. Insufficient data for a conclusion.

Quote
Would you even think that unless someone told you to?
I wouldn't think it was, or wasn't, whether anyone told me to, or not.

It's a one-frame blurr in a bad video. Insufficient data to say yea or nay. Anyone who claims proof either way is relying on a previous conclusion, not evidence as presented.

Kevin

A Skyhawk has a high wing vs. a 757 which has a low wing. The absence of any ripped up lawn lends credence to the high wing. The blur appears to be hugging the lawn. Tunga is aware of "ground effect" and that the length might be subject to the approach angle relative to the camera.
 
We don't know the shutter speed but the length seems short for the 155 feet of 757. Using the vertical height of 80 feet of the Pentagon as a scale.
 
Tunga has read about discrepencies in the approach angle which if true don't help the governments case. Why don't they release the other 84 videos too? Not blurry enough?
 
Bunker busters also contain two charges. There might not be any photographic evidence of the secondary explosion from one of those. Assuming it was detonating deep inside the building.
 

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: BillyC on May 17, 2006, 07:29 PM NHFT
That would make sense.
Could a plane fly into that building easily?

Only in a vertical dive.

Interesting theory, but pretty implausible.


How Flight 77 Hitting The Pentagon Would Really Look?

http://infowars.com/articles/sept11/pentagon_video_how_flight_77_really_look.htm
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on May 18, 2006, 05:52 AM NHFT
Alex Jones played clips of this one reporter on September 11th and now.  September 11th he was at the Pentagon and says all day long that he sees no pieces of plane, no fuselage, no evidence a plane hit the building.  Then clips from the same person reporting on it now...where the guy is saying that he was there that day and saw plane pieces all over.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Republidog on May 18, 2006, 06:11 AM NHFT
I think we need to be careful we don't get too sucked in to the no plane/missle theory. I personally don't believe it was a passenger plane that hit it that day but we'll never really know.

The reason we need to use caution telling people new to the 9/11 truth movement about the no plane thing is that it has been 5 years. That's long enough to create whatever they want. Imagine a perfectly rendered 3d plane just like in the movies added to the footage. Then they blur it badly and make it look like security footage and all of the sudden *poof* they'll claim they squashed the "crazies" that believe 9/11 was an inside job.

I believe 9/11 was an inside job- without a doubt. But we need to focus on things like insider trading, controlled demo of 7, and all the now public officials, etc.

Whether it was a plane or a missle that hit the pentagon- bin laden didn't do it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 18, 2006, 11:33 AM NHFT
Bin Laden 'probably back home in US'
http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/06/05/13/10039526.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: tracysaboe on May 18, 2006, 03:39 PM NHFT
All I saw was a missle hitting the pentagon.

Missiles don't carry jet fuel. High explosives don't produce big orange fireballs, but low-order flammables like JET-A do. A missile strike would produce a shock wave and a cloud of dust, with no visible flame or smoke. A plane crash would produce a big orange fireball and black smoke, exactly like is seen on the video.

Before everyone gets too worked up about the apparent size of the flying object that hits the Pentagon, please remember that both camera views are extreme wide angle, so that the farther away objects are, the smaller they appear.

Note: I'm not repeating the government line, and I don't expect anyone else to do so, either. I want the truth, but "Truth" must be based on facts. When you argue against the government line, please do so with actual, verifiable facts. "I don't believe it, so they must be lying" doesn't constitute proof.

Kevin

I don't believe it. But I don't believe these controled demolition conspiracy theories either.

I think the government did know about it and purposely didn't do anything to stop it. It's a much more plausible "conspiracy" theory, and it's also grounded in history. A simular thing happened around pearl harbor. And if IS a theory that fits into all the questions cerounding the incident that the government isn't answering. The government's too stupid to come up with anything as ellaborate as controlled demolition.

Tracy
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Republidog on May 18, 2006, 06:18 PM NHFT
Quote
The government's too stupid to come up with anything as ellaborate as controlled demolition.

I only wish such was the case.

Or perhaps WTC 7 just got tired and fell down?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 19, 2006, 04:03 AM NHFT
....did someone say pearl harbor?

I wonder if all the buildings in NY are that fragile.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Tunga on May 20, 2006, 09:36 AM NHFT
http://www.physics911.net/georgenelson.htm
Title: Jetwash blows away cars.
Post by: Tunga on May 23, 2006, 06:00 PM NHFT
Fun video.
 
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2006/230506_b_Crosswinds.htm
Title: Zogby Poll: Over 70 Million American Adults Support New 9/11 Investigation
Post by: BillyC on May 23, 2006, 08:41 PM NHFT
Zogby Poll: Over 70 Million American Adults Support New 9/11 Investigation

http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20060522/bs_prweb/prweb388743_4

RWEB) - Utica, NY (PRWEB) May 22, 2006 -- Although the Bush administration continues to exploit September 11 to justify domestic spying, unprecedented spending and a permanent state of war, a new Zogby poll reveals that less than half of the American public trusts the official 9/11 story or believes the attacks were adequately investigated.
ADVERTISEMENT

911Truth.org Urges 2006 Reform Candidates to Recognize a Powerful New Constituency
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: ravelkinbow on May 29, 2006, 11:13 AM NHFT
But all these people are just tinfoil hat freaks, there is no such thing as conspiracy...right
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on May 29, 2006, 12:39 PM NHFT
Putting it past the government to use controlled demolitions to bring down the towers is bordering on naivete. They have more money than you can imagine at their disposal. Plus, they can spend money on classified projects and stear clear of the public eye.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: ravelkinbow on May 29, 2006, 01:17 PM NHFT
Putting it past the government to use controlled demolitions to bring down the towers is bordering on naivete. They have more money than you can imagine at their disposal. Plus, they can spend money on classified projects and stear clear of the public eye.

I so agree with you!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dreepa on May 31, 2006, 10:47 PM NHFT
So first I watched the gypsy lady video.
That led me to this:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2023320890224991194

Wow.... I have some research to do. :'(
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on June 01, 2006, 03:51 PM NHFT
The latest "loose change" video was what we saw at the Keene library.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: BillyC on June 01, 2006, 04:07 PM NHFT
So first I watched the gypsy lady video.
That led me to this:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2023320890224991194

Wow.... I have some research to do. :'(

People are blowing the whistle about this all over the place.
Maybe that is why this is so important.

U.S. Supreme Court eases whistleblower protections
http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20060531-110926-1846r
Title: 200+ 9/11 'Smoking Guns' Found in the Mainstream Media
Post by: BillyC on June 03, 2006, 03:27 PM NHFT
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/911smokingguns.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: BillyC on June 13, 2006, 08:12 PM NHFT
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_firefighters.html

9/11 Firefighters: Bombs and
Explosions in the WTC
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dreepa on July 10, 2006, 02:13 PM NHFT
Digg reference:

http://digg.com/politics/September_11th_42_percent_of_US_citizens_doubtful_about_official_version
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on July 10, 2006, 02:50 PM NHFT
saw another one of those non-existent whistleblowers
General Stubblebine

he said a plane did not make the whole in the Pentagon.

He didn't say he was selling a book or otherwise making money off of his statements. ;)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on July 10, 2006, 03:03 PM NHFT
saw another one of those non-existent whistleblowers
General Stubblebine

he said a plane did not make the whole in the Pentagon.

He didn't say he was selling a book or otherwise making money off of his statements. ;)

He is, however, insane.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/hambone/lecture.html


Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on July 10, 2006, 03:24 PM NHFT
I've been involved in a discussion over at FTL BBS and the majority of the responders just do not believe anything regarding the 9-11 truth movement. I just don't even bother anymore.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 01, 2006, 08:23 AM NHFT
What do you say when a witness keeps changing his story?  Would you think he was lying?

http://www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/griffin/griffin-faulkner-8-30-2006.mp3  NPR interview with David Ray Griffin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 01, 2006, 08:31 AM NHFT
The feds killed 1000's of people in NY .... what are you going to do about it?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 01, 2006, 09:29 AM NHFT
personally, i'm going to DC on 9/11/06 to what is becoming a considerably large demonstration. would love to see you there!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 02, 2006, 07:14 AM NHFT
I hope they don't do something to you guys down there to scare people and grab more power.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 05, 2006, 02:14 PM NHFT
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20060905/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_terrorism_12
WASHINGTON -
President Bush used terrorists' own words Tuesday to battle complacency among Americans about the threat of future attack, defending his national security record as the fall campaign season kicks into high gear.
ADVERTISEMENT

Bush said that despite the absence of a successor on U.S. soil to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the terrorist danger remains potent.

"Bin laden and his terrorist's allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them," the president said before the Military Officers Association of America and diplomatic representatives other countries that have suffered terrorist attacks. "The question is `Will we listen? Will we pay attention to what these evil men say?'"

Quoting extensively from letters, Web site statements, audio recording and videotapes purportedly from terrorists, as well as documents found in various raids, Bush said that al Qaida, homegrown terrorists and other groups have adapted to changing U.S. defenses.

For example, Bush cited what he called "a grisly al Qaida manual" found in 2000 by British police during an anti-terrorist raid in London, which included a chapter called "Guidelines for Beating and Killing Hostages." He also cited what he said was a captured al Qaida document found during a recent raid in
Iraq. He said the document described plans to take over Iraq's western Anbar province and set up a governing structure including an education department, a social services department, a justice department, and an execution unit.

"The terrorists who attacked us on September the 11th, 2001, are men without conscience, but they're not madmen," he said. "They kill in the name of a clear and focused ideology, a set of beliefs that are evil but not insane."



It is almost like he likes it this way.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 05, 2006, 02:21 PM NHFT
ha. imagine if the public got ahold of the official US guidebook for CIA and military interrogations of hostages i mean prisoners.

are you NH'ers planning any events on 9/11?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: BillyC on September 05, 2006, 11:08 PM NHFT
check this video out

http://infowars.com/video/clips/daily/090306_911_truth_traitors_patriots.htm

sorry :-)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 06, 2006, 05:00 AM NHFT
What video?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: BillyC on September 06, 2006, 10:29 PM NHFT
i was sleepy  , but i fixed it lol
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on September 07, 2006, 04:03 AM NHFT
Yall should see what type of response you get from the FTL bbs with this topic. Not nearly as friendly as here though. I promise.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on September 07, 2006, 04:35 PM NHFT
Most of the conspiracy theories have been debunked.  Unfortuntitly those sites only give you the information that shows them to be right.

If you want to see some of the debunking you can find it here: http://www.debunking911.com/
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 07, 2006, 08:08 PM NHFT
most of the debunking has been debunked ... but that won't stop the Kbcraig and the Lildog's of the world from clutching the debunking sites like a security blanket.  A little too scary for some of us.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 07, 2006, 08:25 PM NHFT
if only this administration had given us some reason over the past 5 years (it's only been five years?  - eek - seems like a million lifetimes) to believe them...

about anything.

...there might not be so many people who dont buy their version of the 9/11 events.

i took a poll of my backyard and 95% of americans believe that the administration is, for selfish reasons (not those of national security), withholding some relevent information about 9/11. thats a pretty big number. and it includes rabbits.

maybe if they told us the truth about 9/11, or the truth about anything, we might be less likely to suspect, as each day passes increasingly so, that what they know is, in some way, criminal.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 08, 2006, 03:17 AM NHFT
most of the debunking has been debunked ... but that won't stop the Kbcraig and the Lildog's of the world from clutching the debunking sites like a security blanket.

Caleb, perhaps in some moment of weakness, I personally insulted you while debating this matter. Perhaps I sunk so low as to call you a blanket-clutcher for stating your personal beliefs, although I don't recall saying such a thing. If I did, then I sincerely apologize, but I'd appreciate it if you could point out the specifics so that my apology would be more heartfelt and sincere than is currently the case.

And while you're at it, could you please elaborate on your apparent position that one must be either: A) A Bush blanket-clutcher who unquestioningly believes the "official" version of 9/11; or, B) Someone who "knows" that the Bush administration wasn't just sloppy, but actively orchestrated the entire 9/11 attacks.

Seems like a false dichotomy to me, especially since I fit into neither catgegory.

Thanks for your clarification,

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on September 08, 2006, 04:37 PM NHFT
most of the debunking has been debunked ... but that won't stop the Kbcraig and the Lildog's of the world from clutching the debunking sites like a security blanket.  A little too scary for some of us.

For most of the conspiracies to hold true litterally THOUSANDS had to be in on the planning and carrying out of what they think happened.

Do I think the US is telling us everything they know?  No of course not, plus I think there is a lot they themselves don't know so they are guessing big time to make it sound like they know everything.

But to suggest Bush (the bumbling idiot who can't do much right) somehow pulled together this master plan and was able to do so with the thousands needed to be involved to carry it out without a single whistle blower is just insane.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 08, 2006, 08:50 PM NHFT
Wow, lildog, so many errors in just a tiny little post.  Where to begin?

Quote
For most of the conspiracies to hold true litterally THOUSANDS had to be in on the planning and carrying out of what they think happened.

Michael Ruppert suggested about 20 people for his plan. David Ray Griffin suggests a "small A team" that is actually "in" on the plot.  Most of the work would come from people who did not know what they were doing. An example might be running an exercise (Vigilant Guardian, for example), without understanding that the A team was using it to confuse the radar screens. We'll call these people the B-team. You can't expect the A-team guys to come forward:  they have too much to lose.  You can only expect that B-team people would come forward with something that, while not quite a smoking gun, is highly suggestive. And that is exactly what HAS happened.

Quote
But to suggest Bush (the bumbling idiot who can't do much right) somehow pulled together this master plan

I don't know ANYONE who has credited George Bush with this. In fact, I tend to think he would be kept in the dark as much as possible:  why involve the one guy who has the most to lose and might decide to pull the plug on the whole operation?  Just my suspicion, but I tend to think Bush was told just enough to incriminate him, and not much more.

Quote
the thousands needed to be involved to carry it out without a single whistle blower is just insane.

Once again, DOZEN OR SO, not THOUSANDS. The rest would be "B-team" guys, many of whom HAVE come forward as "whistleblowers".  The problem with "B-team" guys is that since they aren't actually in on it in the sense of knowing it was happening and being in on the plot, you don't count them as a whistleblower. But they are, because they are coming forward with the only information they have.  For instance, the State Department official who told about the intentional plot by the Saudi Arabian embassy to intentionally allow highly questionable figures to enter the country on Visas.... There are tons of people with stories like this, but ... like I say no smoking gun because they aren't the A-team.  The A-team obviously has no reason to incriminate itself, although I suspect that if we could get Mahmoud Ahmad here facing a jury he might start talking to save his skin.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 08, 2006, 09:20 PM NHFT
Caleb, your "dozen or so operatives" theory is very easily disproven by the absolute, indisputable fact that wiring buildings the size of the WTC towers would take many dozens of experts in controlled demolition, months to accomplish. All the while, they'd be tearing through sheetrock and walls in big, obvious ways. So the circle of silence would have to include the hundreds who worked in the towers and escaped the attacks.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 08, 2006, 09:42 PM NHFT
Well, here's one expert's scenario that would involve only five people in the know, KB ... http://www.serendipity.li/wot/finn/1/soldier1.htm

I'm not saying that is how it happened.  Truth is, I don't know. Those who buy the guvment's story like to ask people like me to explain every last little detail, while letting the guvment get away with glaring inaccuracies and half truths.  What would it be like, KB, if you held the government to the same standards as you hold those who challenge it on the issue of 9/11?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on September 09, 2006, 12:01 AM NHFT
... while letting the guvment get away with glaring inaccuracies and half truths.

So, I take it you've never looked at a school district budget?

Your mistake is assuming that the "guvment" even has its stuff together well enough to even have the slightest clue of what's accurate or true.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 09, 2006, 09:20 AM NHFT
You've convinced me, Mike.  The fact that local school boards are somehow inept in conclusive proof that Covert Intelligence Operations are theoretically impossible.  ::)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 09, 2006, 10:27 AM NHFT
I'm not saying that is how it happened.  Truth is, I don't know.

Exactly. You don't know. The only thing you know is that you don't trust or believe the government, therefore they must have been behind 9/11.


Quote
Those who buy the guvment's story like to ask people like me to explain every last little detail, while letting the guvment get away with glaring inaccuracies and half truths. 

Again, you keep throwing out this false dichotomy as a strawman: "Either you believe the government did it, or you believe the 'government version' unquestioningly."

I've told you repeatedly that the official reports are suspicious and full of hasty conclusions, but you continue to accuse me of being a government apologist when I point out the malarkey in your "government did it" nonsense. By this point, you're beyond simply ignoring my position: you're deliberately misrepresenting it to the point of dishonesty.

Quote
What would it be like, KB, if you held the government to the same standards as you hold those who challenge it on the issue of 9/11?

What makes you think I don't? I'm not arguing the official position.

And vice-versa, Caleb: what if you held Alex Jones to the same standards you demand of politicians?

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 09, 2006, 02:07 PM NHFT
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080261/#anc_QOD_060908

   Do you believe any 9/11 conspiracy theories that indicate the U.S. government was involved?   * 14833 responses   
Yes, I believe there's evidence.
48%
   
No, that's ridiculous.
39%
   
I'm not sure.
13%
Thank you for voting.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 09, 2006, 06:01 PM NHFT
KB ...

It's quite simple, really, and anyone with knowledge of criminal investigations can tell you that the government's behavior is indicative of a guilty person.  Michael Ruppert (noteworthy because he WAS a criminal investigator) has explained this quite concisely in his book Crossing the Rubicon.

If you were an investigator, and found that one of the prime suspects was a) intentionally lying b) destroying evidence  c) silencing witnesses d) obstructing the investigation      what would be the natural conclusion?

Why won't you apply the same logic to the government?  My answer (that you didn't like) is that you have emotional reasons for not wanting to accept it: namely, that it is a horrible thing to contemplate.  But we should not let these emotional concerns keep us from objectively considering the evidence.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 10, 2006, 03:51 AM NHFT
KB ...

It's quite simple, really, and anyone with knowledge of criminal investigations can tell you

Good thing I qualify on that front. Do you?


Quote
If you were an investigator, and found that one of the prime suspects was a) intentionally lying b) destroying evidence  c) silencing witnesses d) obstructing the investigation      what would be the natural conclusion?

The logical conclusion is that the person lying wants to lie. The wrong conclusion would be that the person lying is the guilty party, and the really wrong conclusion is that the lying party is doing so for any logical reason.

I've seen countless cases where people blatantly lie out of a sense of embarassment. Or a sense of shame that they "should have done something", but didn't. Or a desire to protect someone they believe might be guilty (but who isn't necessarily). Or, most commonly, out of a desire to make themselves look better. Or sometimes --ta-da!-- just because they're psychopaths, and they get off on making people dance to their lies.

There's a southern phrase that seems appropriate: "He'd rather walk a mile to tell a lie than cross the street to tell the truth."

I am not arguing the government position, yet you seem determined to put me in that role. Sorry. Not playing.

Quote
Why won't you apply the same logic to the government?  My answer (that you didn't like) is that you have emotional reasons for not wanting to accept it: namely, that it is a horrible thing to contemplate.  But we should not let these emotional concerns keep us from objectively considering the evidence.

 ;D

Okay, so now you want to objectively consider evidence? That's quite a switch. I've been consistent in my arguments and concerns, while you've flitted about from Messianic Jew to Congregationalist "pastor"; from candidate for U.S. House of Representatives to hard-core anarchist; from Republican to Libertarian to independent anarchist.

You've consistently been a Colts fan, and I'll support you in the "Peyton v. Eli" match on Monday. Cheers!  ;D

I don't have any "emotional reasons for not wanting to accept" your position. Yes, it would be a horrible thing to contemplate if our own government committed the 9/11 attacks, but I'm perfectly willing to examine objective evidence. Not to mention, my emotional bent is quite contrary to the government, and I'm quite distrusting of the bureaucracies (especially since I work for one). The best you've offered are distorted snippets and twisted factoids. You gleefully profer easily-countered nonsense, while simultaneously rejecting logical and obvious evidence.

The "evidence" offered by ST911, et al., is so flimsy that it doesn't merit further examination. It's rather like citing the Flat Earth Society in an argument about whether or not the Apollo program really landed a man on the moon.

We'll have a beer over this when I land in NH. I do like you. I don't like your arguments, and I really don't like ad hominem accusations.

But when we've downed a few brews while the Colts kick butt, I'm confident we'll agree that we're both working together to secure greater Liberty in NH and America.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 10, 2006, 07:17 PM NHFT
Quote
while you've flitted about from Messianic Jew to Congregationalist "pastor"; from candidate for U.S. House of Representatives to hard-core anarchist

Wow!  Can't let you get away with that personal attack.  One, never been a messianic Jew.  A long time ago, in my youth, I flirted with some of the ideas that a Christian could keep the Torah, but wouldn't really say that qualifies me as a Messianic Jew. Perhaps you're thinking of Joey for President? In fact, on the FSP Christian forum, I have been fervently critical of the Messianic Jews, as quite some time ago I came to the realization that they are, in fact, not Christians.  They have convinced many Christians that they are just a Christian outreach to the Jews (and in fact, I believe many who are affiliated with the Jews for Jesus group are, in fact, just that), but more radical elements are Judaizers, and I have never advocated for Judaizing. As I am of Jewish ethnic extraction (though NOT of the Jewish faith), I have been recruited by Messianic Jewish groups for evangelization.

Congregationalist?  Don't know where you got that idea. Just a Christian. Eschew denominational labels.

Not that my religious beliefs are any of your business, but like Peter says, I stand ready to give a defense for those who have requested of me.

My religious affiliations went even deeper than you know, and I don't particularly care to elaborate on a public forum. If you'd care to know more, I'd be happy to discuss it in a PM.

As to my run for Congress, what can I say other than that I am still running, except I switched parties since Hodes' lead was insurmountable.  I didn't particularly care to spend $500 just to get on the ballot and face a guy with that much money. The development of the Republic of NH and the opportunity to start a new Independence Party is something that I think is worth my time, though I have maintained my affiliation with the Democrat Party.  Once again, not that its any of your business.

Quote
from Republican to Libertarian to independent anarchist.

Never been a Republican (yuck) although I have helped them in their campaigns.  Never been a Libertarian either, though I probably prefer their platform to any other.

So, now that we've addressed the ad hominem, care to get back to the issue of 9/11?

Quote
Good thing I qualify on that front. Do you?

Ruppert does, as an LAPD investigator, not as a jailer.  You can read his analysis in his books. 


Quote
I am not arguing the government position, yet you seem determined to put me in that role. Sorry. Not playing.

Well, then why don't you just ignore these threads, KB?  Frankly, you are the main person on this forum that likes to debunk other people's questions.  Whatever the answer is, it can't be complicity.  No.  That can't be.

I'm not trying to get on your case, and I thank you for your well wishes in tonights game. We will need it tonight, as this will be an emotionally charged game for the Giants.

But I do think you bit my head off needlessly.  I never attacked you, I just suggested that you have emotional reasons for your position, which in my opinion reflect a lot of fear.  You can't let a  9/11 post go by without comment.  This indicates that it is an emotional issue for you.  That's all I'm saying.  If I'm wrong, I'm wrong.  But that's just my opinion, take it or leave it.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 10, 2006, 07:38 PM NHFT
Here's the problem, KB, and I think this will explain it concisely:

1)  Apparantly, we both agree that the government has lied through its teeth.  It has destroyed evidence, it has obstructed justice.  It has obtained "gag orders" to silence witnesses. Since there have been so many untruths told by the government, we know have no effective way of knowing what really happened on 9/11. These untruths affect nearly every part of the story:

a) we don't know who the hijackers were
b) we don't know how the planes were hijacked
c) we don't know when the planes were hijacked, nor when or how the government responded
d) we don't know what happened to the evidence in many cases, and when we do know its whereabouts, the government has generally either destroyed it or classified it.
e) we don't know how the buildings fell.

In addition to these questions, we have other evidence that has accumulated. Among others:

a) evidence that there was foreknowledge of the attacks by 1) government FBI agents 2) Intelligence operatives 3) foreign governments, and that furthermore this evidence was ignored and attempts to investigate further were obstructed prior to 9/11

b) evidence that the US government had considered these attacks to be possible, as evidenced by their war games planning.

c) the strong coincidence of 9/11 style war games occurring on the same day: 9/11.

d) strong evidence that the government had the opportunity to respond to the attacks, and yet failed to do so. In responding to these accusations the government concealed the evidence. Specifically, the federal government lied about 1) the readiness status of fighters at Andrews AFB 2) the capabilities of Norad's radar system 3) the communication times when information relating to the hijackings was relayed to NORAD by the FAA 4) the speed and response times of fighters on alert that were dispatched.

e) strong evidence that there is an ongoing relationship between the principle suspect, Osama Bin Laden's Al Qaeda group, and the federal government. As examples: 1) a CIA agent met with Osama Bin Laden at a hospital in the months prior to 9/11 2) credible evidence shows that Osama Bin Laden's phone lines were tapped; thus, he could not plan anything without their knowledge. 3) evidence that the US government and Al Qaeda collaborated in Chechnya in 2002, after the events of 9/11. 4) evidence that the US government has maintained strong relationships with Al Qaeda by means of Pakistani ISI agents, including the chief of Pakistani Intelligence himself.

And this is just off the top of my head, KB. There are many, many more. As you can see, many times the lies coincide with places where the truth would necessitate some version of complicity.  The Sherlock Holmes test applies:  when you have eliminated the impossible ... whatever remains ... however improbable, must be the truth.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 10, 2006, 08:45 PM NHFT
Final results from that poll:

   Do you believe any 9/11 conspiracy theories that indicate the U.S. government was involved?   * 31527 responses   
   Yes, I believe there's evidence.
58%
   No, that's ridiculous.
30%
   I'm not sure.
11%

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080261/                     
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 10, 2006, 08:51 PM NHFT
Quote
while you've flitted about from Messianic Jew to Congregationalist "pastor"; from candidate for U.S. House of Representatives to hard-core anarchist

Wow!  Can't let you get away with that personal attack.

I apologize for bringing religion into it. It had nothing to do with the issue. And for the record, I have no problem with Christians keeping kosher, and I certainly don't have a problem with Messianic Jews (ethnic/bloodline Jews who accept Jesus as Messiah).




Quote
Quote
I am not arguing the government position, yet you seem determined to put me in that role. Sorry. Not playing.

Well, then why don't you just ignore these threads, KB?  Frankly, you are the main person on this forum that likes to debunk other people's questions.  ( . . . ) You can't let a  9/11 post go by without comment.

I let almost all of them go by without comment. I'm responding to this because you brought my name up specifically:
most of the debunking has been debunked ... but that won't stop the Kbcraig and the Lildog's of the world from clutching the debunking sites like a security blanket.  A little too scary for some of us.

So you see, the ad-hominem has been mutual. I apologize for crossing that line, because I've tried to base my entire discussion of 9/11 on facts, not wild conjecture.
Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 10, 2006, 09:15 PM NHFT
Kevin,
 Just curious. Have you read John Taylor Gatto's book The Underground History of American Education?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 11, 2006, 12:00 AM NHFT
Well, Kevin, I apologize to you for the ad hominem attack too.  I wasn't trying to demean you.  I get sick of old, worn out, debunking sites, that are based on very old information that has been discredited.

I'll give you just one example:  from the Popular Mechanics article, it says that the reason Norad didn't know where the planes were is because its radar was focused outward (into the ocean) and not inward.  It also makes a false claim (if I remember right) that Norad is prohibited by posse comitatus from monitoring domestic airspace.

This overlooks two points:  First, THE SECRET SERVICE has its own radar system that is intertwined with the FAA's, and is state of the art. Even if the Norad story were true, that doesn't explain why the secret service would not have been able to communicate with Norad, especially since they were aware of the hijackings from the very outset, according to Dick Cheney's interview with Tim Russert.

The second point that is overlooked is that it has been demonstrated that that story is false.  Norad DOES have internal radar, and is authorized to monitor domestic airspace.  In fact, they are not only "authorized", but actually required to protect UN and Canadian domestic airspace, and accomplish this on a daily basis.

So, the "debunking" has been debunked ... and yet it keeps cropping its head up.  It gets a little irritating to keep seeing the same arguments over and over again, when they have been demonstrated to be false.

I'm not willing to assign pure motives to the government.  When I observe them lying, destroying evidence, interfering in the investigation, and intimidating witnesses, I tend to feel that its not so benign, especially when the evidence that they are covering up is so damning.  Sorry, but it DOES MATTER that a CIA agent met Bin Laden in the Dubai hospital in the months prior to 9/11.  That DOES matter.  There's no way to spin that away and make it less damning.  We can ignore it, we can focus on the weakest links of the 9/11 truth movement, we can demand that those who are asking questions try to demonstrate how every little detail could be accomplished. We can post old debunking sites, but the questions remain, and in fact grow by the day.  The government's story has fallen apart. If it wants to try to regain legitimacy, it should come clean on what really happened. Until that happens, I would be remiss if I didn't challenge them on it.

But like I said, they have to explain more than just 9/11.  They have to explain their ongoing relationship with Al Qaeda, continuing even after the events of 9/11.  I'm not optimistic that they will be able to do so in a way that doesn't show that they are complicit.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 11, 2006, 12:38 AM NHFT
Kevin,
 Just curious. Have you read John Taylor Gatto's book The Underground History of American Education?

I've read it online. Or, to be more accurate, I've read most of it, taking it in chunks, limited by my patience and the medium. A book-length work really doesn't lend itself to reading via a website. I do appreciate Gatto putting it online, and I've recommended it to others in debates about public/private/homeschooling.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 11, 2006, 12:46 AM NHFT
Well, Kevin, I apologize to you for the ad hominem attack too.  I wasn't trying to demean you.  I get sick of old, worn out, debunking sites, that are based on very old information that has been discredited.

Just as I grow weary of dealing with "truth" sites that are based not just on old and discredited information, but information that is plainly implausible on its face at best, and downright lies at worst.

So... enough.

Good job, Peyton!

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 11, 2006, 08:09 AM NHFT
Kevin,
 Just curious. Have you read John Taylor Gatto's book The Underground History of American Education?

I've read it online. Or, to be more accurate, I've read most of it, taking it in chunks, limited by my patience and the medium. A book-length work really doesn't lend itself to reading via a website. I do appreciate Gatto putting it online, and I've recommended it to others in debates about public/private/homeschooling.

Kevin

Good, you've read it.
Don't you think a government, composed of the Elitists he describes, who are willing to sacrifice the lives of millions of children into intellectual slavery, all in the name of the common good, also capable of doing the same (sacrificing the lives, in this case) to the workers in the WTC? Again for a public policy objective it sees as being for the greater good?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on September 11, 2006, 08:35 AM NHFT
Hi Alan
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 11, 2006, 08:37 AM NHFT
Hi Alan

Hi Lloyd.  :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 11, 2006, 10:21 AM NHFT


Patriotism surge now is slipping
Copyright 2006 Deseret Morning News

By Lisa Riley Roche
Deseret Morning News
      Most Utahns continue to consider themselves more patriotic as a result of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States ? but a growing number no longer share that feeling, according to a new poll.
      While 72 percent of residents surveyed statewide for the latest Deseret Morning News/KSL-TV poll said they have a deeper sense of patriotism post-9/11, nearly one-fourth said they don't.
      The poll, conducted for the newspaper and television station by Dan Jones & Associates, was conducted Aug. 28-31 of 425 Utahns and has a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percent.
      The results are a significant change from the first time Utahns were asked that question, in October 2001. Then, an overwhelming 92 percent considered themselves more patriotic with just 8 percent saying the attacks hadn't affected their level of patriotism.
      "Immediately after, we really were a united country," said Kirk Jowers, director of the University of Utah's Hinckley Institute of Politics. "So there really was that strong feeling of America and sticking together. We didn't yet have the baggage."
      Concerns raised about some of the methods used by the Bush administration to counter terrorism ? such as questioning the patriotism of anyone opposed to war ? has caused conflicting feelings among many Americans in the past five years, Jowers said.
      "That whole mentality of, 'either you support the war or you're not patriotic' was a turn-off to people," he said. "We all want our government to protect us, but we're very divided on how it does that and what measures we will accept. Utah is no exception."
      Pollster Dan Jones agreed. "More people are starting to question the war," he said, even in Utah. Jones said it would take something on the scale of capturing terrorist leader Osama bin Laden "for the people to become more united and feel we are starting to win the battle."
      The divide created over whether dissent can be considered patriotic was evident in the reaction to protests surrounding President Bush's visit to Salt Lake City last month to deliver the first in a series of speeches intended to boost lagging support for the war in Iraq.
      Salt Lake Mayor Rocky Anderson's involvement in an anti-war rally during the visit attracted both cheers and jeers from Utahns, and some of his critics went so far as to challenge his patriotism.
      But even as the president warned during his speech to the American Legion that giving up the fight overseas would mean facing terrorists here at home, he made a point of describing those who want to end the country's involvement in Iraq as both sincere and patriotic.
      "Bush finally realized there can be patriotic protesters," Jowers said, something that could eventually help reverse the trend identified in the poll results as people decided they couldn't call themselves patriotic "in the sense it was being defined by their government."
      That drop in patriotic feeling does not mean, however, that Utahns feel the administration's efforts haven't been effective. The poll found that 73 percent believed the country's anti-terrorism efforts have made the United States safer than it was on Sept. 11, 2001.
      And 60 percent of Utahns polled said they did not believe it was likely they or someone they know would someday become a victim of a terrorist act on U.S. soil. Around one-third of respondents over the past three years have said their anxiety levels have decreased.
      "Utah still supports its president more than any other state in the country, and this poll seems to bear out that it has faith in the way he's protecting us from terrorism," Jowers said. "But as in the rest of the country, there are people here who have issues."
      That's inevitable, he said, in the long-term aftermath of the attacks.
      "Nobody wants another 9/11 attack to occur, and yet we are conflicted about how far the administration has to go to protect us. Every step the administration takes in the name of keeping us safe will cause questions."


http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,645199937,00.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on September 11, 2006, 10:44 AM NHFT
Good, you've read it.
Don't you think a government, composed of the Elitists he describes, who are willing to sacrifice the lives of millions of children into intellectual slavery, all in the name of the common good, also capable of doing the same (sacrificing the lives, in this case) to the workers in the WTC? Again for a public policy objective it sees as being for the greater good?

Don't you think it's a little ridiculous to equate sending kids off to public schools with brutally killing 3,000 people?

And you're missing the point - whether they were "capable" of doing so, either intellectually or practically,  has little bearing on whether they actually did except in the fever-swamps of the 9/11 "Truth" movement.

There are actually people who postulate that there were no airplanes, just missiles wrapped in "holograms." Does anyone here find that theory to be plausable, or are there limits to the absurdity?

Once I was passing a semi truck in a little blue Ford Escort, when a piece of the truck's tread flew off.  It smacked into the pavement and bounced, and sounded like a rifle shot right next to the car.  And after reading that, I have no doubt that the 9/11 theorists would be looking for bullet holes.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 11, 2006, 10:50 AM NHFT
I think the government used planes to kill people on 9/11.
The government also pushes vaccinations on kids in schools that can kill them.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 11, 2006, 11:34 AM NHFT
Good, you've read it.
Don't you think a government, composed of the Elitists he describes, who are willing to sacrifice the lives of millions of children into intellectual slavery, all in the name of the common good, also capable of doing the same (sacrificing the lives, in this case) to the workers in the WTC? Again for a public policy objective it sees as being for the greater good?

Don't you think it's a little ridiculous to equate sending kids off to public schools with brutally killing 3,000 people?

And you're missing the point - whether they were "capable" of doing so, either intellectually or practically,  has little bearing on whether they actually did except in the fever-swamps of the 9/11 "Truth" movement.

There are actually people who postulate that there were no airplanes, just missiles wrapped in "holograms." Does anyone here find that theory to be plausable, or are there limits to the absurdity?

Once I was passing a semi truck in a little blue Ford Escort, when a piece of the truck's tread flew off.  It smacked into the pavement and bounced, and sounded like a rifle shot right next to the car.  And after reading that, I have no doubt that the 9/11 theorists would be looking for bullet holes.

I'll ask you the same question. Have you read Gatto's book?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on September 11, 2006, 01:06 PM NHFT
Yes, I've read parts of it.

I'll ask you the same question, again:  SO WHAT?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on September 11, 2006, 02:21 PM NHFT
Yes, I've read parts of it.

I'll ask you the same question, again:  SO WHAT?

Well, MV, the original question was addressed to Kevin. You haven't read it all, so there's no reason to continue discussing this with you.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on September 11, 2006, 02:51 PM NHFT
Wow, lildog, so many errors in just a tiny little post.  Where to begin?

Not knowing what theories you buy into I made a general statement about the theories I?ve read so far.

I appreciate the link as until now I haven?t heard ANY theories as how everything suggest could have been pulled off without thousands of people involved.

Now since you believe these theories, would you be willing to go through fact by fact with me and see which we can identify as true facts and which are just theories?  Being an engineer, I always believe to look at the facts and see what they point too? most theorists I?ve found come up with a theory then look for the facts to support it.

For instance, most theorists believe the buildings were taken down by explosives.  I haven?t seen ANY facts to support this, only theories.  Can you work with me listing some of the facts surrounding the buildings?

For instance, you can agree that one plane hit each of the towers is fact yes?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on September 11, 2006, 04:42 PM NHFT
Well, MV, the original question was addressed to Kevin. You haven't read it all, so there's no reason to continue discussing this with you.
Uhh... wait.  I thought we were discussing 9/11?

Did you even see my response above, where I said that a willingness to do something like that does not constitute evidence that they did it?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 11, 2006, 06:15 PM NHFT
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2006/110906Jones.htm

Good interview with Professor Steven Jones.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 11, 2006, 07:58 PM NHFT
Quote
Now since you believe these theories, would you be willing to go through fact by fact with me and see which we can identify as true facts and which are just theories?

Not really, because there is no way to persuade you.  For instance, I could agree to the terms, with the caveat that you would have to apply the same techniques to the government's theories.  Unfortunately, as we've been told, your opinion is that "the fact that the government lies doesn't implicate them".  So there is no way for me to win. I've already told you that I don't know, exactly, how every detail was pulled off.   I can tell you that the governments theories are BS.  The framework for the debate, therefore, has been set up by you in this way:

I POKE A HOLE IN YOUR THEORY = MEANINGLESS

YOU POKE A HOLE IN MINE = CONCLUSIVE PROOF THAT THE GOVERNMENT WAS NOT COMPLICIT.

Sorry, but I don't like the terms of the debate, unless you can come around to some reasonable way in which you would accept damage to your theory as evidential that the underpinning assumptions might be false.

Quote
For instance, most theorists believe the buildings were taken down by explosives.  I haven?t seen ANY facts to support this, only theories.  Can you work with me listing some of the facts surrounding the buildings?

For one, the existence of thermate in structural steel residue from WTC.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 11, 2006, 08:53 PM NHFT
http://infowars.com/articles/sept11/video_911_truth_alex_jones_unanswered_questions.htm

Really good video....I especially like the part where he says the police are the most controlled/brainwashed of all of us, and the part where he makes it clear that we can indeed make a difference...we can change the horrible things that are happening to this country.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on September 12, 2006, 10:52 AM NHFT
Here's a little blast from the past - call it the "Pearl Harbor Truth Movement:"

Quote from: Franklin D. Roosevelt, Fireside Chat, February 23, 1942
The consequences of the attack on Pearl Harbor -- serious as they were -- have been wildly exaggerated in other ways. And these exaggerations come originally from Axis propagandists; but they have been repeated, I regret to say, by Americans in and out of public life.

You and I have the utmost contempt for Americans who, since Pearl Harbor, have whispered or announced "off the record" that there was no longer any Pacific Fleet -- that the Fleet was all sunk or destroyed on December 7th -- that more than (1,000) a thousand of our planes were destroyed on the ground. They have suggested slyly that the Government has withheld the truth about casualties -- that eleven or twelve thousand men were killed at Pearl Harbor instead of the figures as officially announced. They have even served the enemy propagandists by spreading the incredible story that ship-loads of bodies of our honored American dead were about to arrive in New York harbor to be put into a common grave.

Almost every Axis broadcast -- Berlin, Rome, Tokyo -- directly quotes Americans who, by speech or in the press, make damnable misstatements such as these.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on September 12, 2006, 10:58 AM NHFT
Quote
Now since you believe these theories, would you be willing to go through fact by fact with me and see which we can identify as true facts and which are just theories?

Not really, because there is no way to persuade you.

A fact is a fact is a fact.  If something is factual there is no debating about it.

For instance, two planes hit each of the two towers.  That is fact.  There are tons of videos showing this, eyewitnesses, a list of those who were on the planes etc.  It?s not something that can be agreed or disagreed with.

For instance, I could agree to the terms, with the caveat that you would have to apply the same techniques to the government's theories.  Unfortunately, as we've been told, your opinion is that "the fact that the government lies doesn't implicate them".  So there is no way for me to win. I've already told you that I don't know, exactly, how every detail was pulled off.   I can tell you that the governments theories are BS.

For a theory to be B.S. there have to be facts, which prove it to be false.  So far I have yet to see those facts.

That?s what I?m looking for here.  You?re refusal to even attempt that is unfortunately that of every other theorist I?ve tried to discuss with.  They either refuse to debate, or they refuse to accept any evidence they dislike (usually trying to claim it?s fake) or they demand evidence that does exist.

Case in point, there is video showing the hijackers in an airport.  One theorist I?ve tried to discuss this with said that isn?t proof that they boarded the plane, they in turn demanded video showing them actually boarding the plane.  Now the commission report points out that there weren?t any security cameras set up to capture that.  In fact there weren?t any beyond security, so they refused to even accept any discussions about terrorists boarding the plane unless I could somehow provide this video that didn?t exist.  The insisted that the manifests were fake, the cell phone calls were somehow doctored, etc.

It is because of those types of conversations I have yet to be convinced.  So I?m asking you to build your case, I?m the open minded jury here? convince me.

The framework for the debate, therefore, has been set up by you in this way:

I POKE A HOLE IN YOUR THEORY = MEANINGLESS

YOU POKE A HOLE IN MINE = CONCLUSIVE PROOF THAT THE GOVERNMENT WAS NOT COMPLICIT.

Sorry, but I don't like the terms of the debate, unless you can come around to some reasonable way in which you would accept damage to your theory as evidential that the underpinning assumptions might be false.

That?s just it, no one has been able to poke a hole in the government theory that I've seen.  The best argument the theorists have is the demolition argument but there is very little supporting evidence to back it and nothing I?ve seen disproves the theory that the planes did in fact take down the buildings.  Only opinions.

Quote
For instance, most theorists believe the buildings were taken down by explosives.  I haven?t seen ANY facts to support this, only theories.  Can you work with me listing some of the facts surrounding the buildings?

For one, the existence of thermate in structural steel residue from WTC.

Actually the only actual statements I?ve found about Thermate is comments from Steven Jones who said he found ?strong evidence? of Thermate.  If you can direct me to further comments I?d be interested in reading them.

Also we would have to question whether or not Thermate (or is it thermite?) was used in the cleanup.  If it was that would explain why traces could have been found.  Also has the question of whether or not the traces that were found were used in the construction been asked?

I willing to explore this as a possibility but currently there aren?t enough facts to say it?s definitely true.  And it does raise questions?
Why are there no reports of anyone seeing people planting the explosives in the buildings?  You?d need just about a quarter pound for every pound of steel it?s cutting through so there would have had to have been a large amount needed.
And I would assume all these thermite charges would need to have been set off by something.  Either wiring going the length of the building or remote chargers.  None were found during the clean up efforts.  Why?

So I?ll keep that open as a possibility but we?d need more evidence to conclude it to be fact.

I ask again, are you willing to go through fact by fact?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on September 12, 2006, 11:26 AM NHFT
Quote
For instance, two planes hit each of the two towers.  That is fact.  There are tons of videos showing this, eyewitnesses, a list of those who were on the planes etc.  It?s not something that can be agreed or disagreed with.

Believe it or not, some people actually do disagree with it - a couple in London recently featured in the news claims that what actually hit the towers were missiles wrapped in holograms - I assume using some super-secret Star Trek military technology that nobody realizes has been invented yet.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 12, 2006, 11:35 AM NHFT
Then the landing gear and other pieces of the planes which fell to the ground several blocks from the WTC complex were also holograms?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 12, 2006, 11:37 AM NHFT
caleb and the kannings are correct.

look, it's not up to the people of america to do a indepth research into what happened on 9/11. but the research that several independent people and groups have done, WITHOUT the cooperation of MOST government officials, leads us to be able to very quickly point out not only holes in the official story, but a series of simply unexplained "coinicidences" that logically point to either the govt being complicit or actually organizing or even carrying out the attacks.

the same false flag activities were being done in london on 7/7/05 as were done in nyc and in the skies on 9/11/06. these activities do not happen every day.

that is simply one item. there are numerous. it is NOT THE JOB of the PEOPLE to suppoena government insiders for real information. it is the job of OUR elected officials to INSIST that there is a truly independent investigation.

the bush administration has lied about nearly every single aspect of its domestic and foreign policies. and the bush administration and its corporate attachments (the definition of fascism, btw) have far and away profited the most from the 9/11 attacks.

i met with a lot of these activists yesterday in washington. there is a lot of ONGOING research by independent groups. they wouldnt have to do this research if we had a government that was trustworthy. and there wouldnt be ANY holes in ANY of the THEORIES (including the govt's story, which is also merely a THEORY) if there was ONE conclusive and solid investigation into those events. we dont want to insist that one theory is valid over another. we want the truth. plain and simple. we want full disclosure. we want testimony UNDER OATH from the administration.

however, the bottom line is that whether or not the govt participated in 9/11 is relatively immaterial. the bush administration's list of impeachable offenses is endless. i would prefer that the people of the US, via these debates that point out holes in the government's story, launches a government effort from responsible elected officials to get a truly independent investigation into 9/11. any crimes that may have been committed by our administration or military need to be investigated this way, not by independent filmmakers and researchers.

we can impeach bush for what he has done independent of 9/11. once we really know what happened that day, any legal action can be initiated against those who may have committed crimes.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on September 12, 2006, 11:40 AM NHFT
Like a typical 9/11 conspiracy theorist, they simply disregard or attribute to cover-up any evidence that doesn't fit their ideas.

http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2006/09/121820.php
Quote
I ask Shayler if it's true he has become a "no planer" - that is, someone who believes that no planes at all were involved in the 9/11 atrocity. Machon looks uncomfortable. "Oh, f-- it, I'm just going to say this," he tells her. "Yes, I believe no planes were involved in 9/11." But we all saw with our own eyes the two planes crash into the WTC. "The only explanation is that they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes," he says. "Watch the footage frame by frame and you will see a cigar-shaped missile hitting the World Trade Center." He must notice that my jaw has dropped. "I know it sounds weird, but this is what I believe."
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on September 12, 2006, 12:12 PM NHFT
look, it's not up to the people of america to do a indepth research into what happened on 9/11. but the research that several independent people and groups have done, WITHOUT the cooperation of MOST government officials, leads us to be able to very quickly point out not only holes in the official story, but a series of simply unexplained "coinicidences" that logically point to either the govt being complicit or actually organizing or even carrying out the attacks.

Firsty, there was a 9/11 commission that was made up of both republcians and democrats that DID look into what happened.  The theorists have claimed it was all lies so now the burden is on them to show WHY it is all lies.

I have yet to see where these holes are and I'm asked here for someone to walk me through the facts that show the government's claim of the events to be wrong.  Since you beleive them to be wrong, can you show me to these facts that made you believe the way you do?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 12, 2006, 12:21 PM NHFT
The holes in the government's official story are, unfortunately for the "9-11 truth movement," few and far between.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 12, 2006, 12:38 PM NHFT
look, it's not up to the people of america to do a indepth research into what happened on 9/11. but the research that several independent people and groups have done, WITHOUT the cooperation of MOST government officials, leads us to be able to very quickly point out not only holes in the official story, but a series of simply unexplained "coinicidences" that logically point to either the govt being complicit or actually organizing or even carrying out the attacks.

Firsty, there was a 9/11 commission that was made up of both republcians and democrats that DID look into what happened.  The theorists have claimed it was all lies so now the burden is on them to show WHY it is all lies.

I have yet to see where these holes are and I'm asked here for someone to walk me through the facts that show the government's claim of the events to be wrong.  Since you beleive them to be wrong, can you show me to these facts that made you believe the way you do?

i havent versed myself in entire details because watching video of 9/11 causes flashback problems for me. the impact of the jets rocked my building. i saw the south tower collapse from a couple of blocks away. if you drop a large pen on my desk, i will duck every time.

there are a few things that i subscribe to in the truth movement. one is the way that the towers fell was simply inconsistent with the way buildings fall. this is from scholars, not me. i dont know engineering. another is the eyewitness accounts of a lot of people who heard explosions on the scene. another is the fact that the pentagon plane supposedly disintegrated on impact, including 2 steel and titanium engines which their manufacturer (rolls royce) has said could not disintegrate in any kind of heat created by rocket fuel. and, this disintegrated jet, which is now simply dust, then, i think 3 internal rings away, supposedly sent its landing gear (rubber and steel which is the only thing that didnt "disintegrate") into a concrete re-inforced wall, creating a 16-foot hole.

bush and cheney did not give sworn testimony to the 9/11 commission. this may not mean much for bush, but damn sure means a lot for cheney.

the administration has lied about every single thing theyve done. congress is meaningless in this country. the democrats are just as corrupt as the republicans.

the biggest reason there are holes in the alternative theories behind 9/11 is because they had limited access to government documents. the govt supplied images to popular mechanics in order to "debunk" the "theories" but those images are not available to the public.

why were they running false flag drills on the mornings of 9/11 and 7/7?

why did NORAD fail?

the 9/11 commission report does not answer these questions. until we have answers, the drive and desire and need of individuals in america to get to the truth, to have questions answered, is going to create speculation.

my only request to the government is that they give us something we can believe. if the govt wishes to reduce the nearly 40% of people in this country who believe that 9/11 was, to some degree, an inside job, they should answer and even work with the independent researchers, the scholars, the engineers and scientists who doubt some of the official details.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 12, 2006, 12:43 PM NHFT
also, the bbc has reported that at least four of the 19 hijackers are still alive.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

this means either the govt named the wrong guys by mistaken identity, or that the individuals to whom they applied names simply had nothing to do with it.

the fbi acknowledges that the identity is in doubt.

i'm not satisfied with that answer. why should i be?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 12, 2006, 12:48 PM NHFT
OH, that again? Those four were later found to have been victims of identity theft. Try again.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 12, 2006, 01:03 PM NHFT
yeah. identity theft.

one of the organizers of the assembly in DC yesterday was unable to pick up his purchased ticket because his credit card, the one he bought the ticket with, was "scrambled" and unusable when he got to the airport.

is it identity theft when the author of a book critical of bush ends up on a no-fly list, or when an infant needs to pass extra security because she shares a name with a "suspected terrorist"?

the bush administration has given us EVERY REASON to believe they are lying about everything, and deceiving us in ways we may not fully understand for 40 years.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 12, 2006, 01:11 PM NHFT
The no-fly list is definitely out of hand. But it has nothing to do with any of the above allegations re 9/11.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 12, 2006, 01:16 PM NHFT
what the government's handling of the no-fly list indicates is their lack of regard for human rights. i dont have to mention the other, more vastly harmful, aspects of bushco's policies that demonstrate their lack of regard for human rights.

with publicly available information, we can prove operation northwoods, which has connections to the current administration, and goes to establish a pattern of military strategy that includes carrying out terrorist attacks in america in order to justify a war with another countyr.

these arent large leaps to take. the number of abnormalities that day justify a much deeper, truly independent investigation (made by legal experts, not congressional whores).
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 12, 2006, 01:22 PM NHFT
Operation Northwoods has been gathering dust for years. That it exists is a far cry from that a similar plan was implemented. You have nothing but unproven allegations and a sheer lack of evidence to back them up.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 12, 2006, 01:25 PM NHFT
Operation Northwoods has been gathering dust for years. That it exists is a far cry from that a similar plan was implemented.

thats your point of view and i respect it. i dont think any harm would come from a more independent investigation. if it proves me wrong, i'd be thrilled. we dont need more enemies than we already have.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on September 12, 2006, 02:07 PM NHFT
Quote
there are a few things that i subscribe to in the truth movement. one is the way that the towers fell was simply inconsistent with the way buildings fall. this is from scholars, not me. i dont know engineering.

There are no other buildings in the world that were built in quite the same way as the Twin Towers, and certainly none that have fallen or been taken down.  Their design was unique and highly innovative, with the exterior walls as load-bearing.  They were the first super-tall buildings to be constructed without masonry.  To compare their collapse with "how buildings fall" is absurd on its face.  Does these "scholars" suggest how they "should" have fallen when hit by airplanes, if not precisely as they did?  And on which of the unique design characteristics of the Twin Towers did they base their suggestions?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 12, 2006, 02:13 PM NHFT
here is a good article to read from alternet:

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/41474/

Last week, Bush conceded that there were indeed secret CIA prisons, when finally announcing that the group of "key witnesses" to the 9/11 disaster would be moved to Guantanamo and for once afforded visits form the Red Cross and minimal legal representation. Some of them have been interrogated in secret for up to five years, with the Bush Administration left as the sole interpreter of what they revealed.

After five years of official deceit, it is not too difficult to believe that the isolation of those prisoners was done less for reasons of learning the truth about 9/11 and more in an effort to politically manage the narrative released to the public.

There is glaring evidence that the latter was the case. The 9/11 Commission report contains a disclaimer box on page 146, in which it is stated that the report's account of what happened on 9/11 was in considerable measure based on what those key witnesses allegedly told interrogators, and that the commissioners were not allowed to meet the witnesses or their interrogators.


so, even the 9/11 commission wasnt able to get a complete report.

the 9/11 commission report is expressly incomplete.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 12, 2006, 02:41 PM NHFT
Quote
Detainee Interrogation Reports
Chapters 5 and 7 rely heavily on information obtained from captured al Qaeda members. A number of these "detainees" have firsthand knowledge of the 9/11 plot.
    Assessing the truth of statements by these witnesses--sworn enemies of the United States--is challenging. Our access to them has been limited to the review of intelligence reports based on communications received from the locations where the actual interrogations take place. We submitted questions for use in the interrogations, but had no control over whether, when, or how questions of particular interest would be asked. Nor were we allowed to talk to the interrogators so that we could better judge the credibility of the detainees and clarify ambiguities in the reporting. We were told that our requests might disrupt the sensitive interrogation process.
    We have nonetheless decided to include information from captured 9/11 conspirators and al Qaeda members in our report.We have evaluated their statements carefully and have attempted to corroborate them with documents and statements of others. In this report, we indicate where such statements provide the foundation for our narrative. We have been authorized to identify by name only ten detainees whose custody has been confirmed officially by the U.S. government.

There you go misrepresenting the facts again. I've provided the actual text from page 146 of the 9/11 Commission report so that everyone can compare what it really said to what you claimed it said and see the difference for themselves.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on September 12, 2006, 02:45 PM NHFT
Here's one joker's attempt to attack the plane crash facts, as posted on DU:

(http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/spooked/4_fire.jpg)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 12, 2006, 02:50 PM NHFT
Quote
Detainee Interrogation Reports
Chapters 5 and 7 rely heavily on information obtained from captured al Qaeda members. A number of these "detainees" have firsthand knowledge of the 9/11 plot.
    Assessing the truth of statements by these witnesses--sworn enemies of the United States--is challenging. Our access to them has been limited to the review of intelligence reports based on communications received from the locations where the actual interrogations take place. We submitted questions for use in the interrogations, but had no control over whether, when, or how questions of particular interest would be asked. Nor were we allowed to talk to the interrogators so that we could better judge the credibility of the detainees and clarify ambiguities in the reporting. We were told that our requests might disrupt the sensitive interrogation process.
    We have nonetheless decided to include information from captured 9/11 conspirators and al Qaeda members in our report.We have evaluated their statements carefully and have attempted to corroborate them with documents and statements of others. In this report, we indicate where such statements provide the foundation for our narrative. We have been authorized to identify by name only ten detainees whose custody has been confirmed officially by the U.S. government.

There you go misrepresenting the facts again. I've provided the actual text from page 146 of the 9/11 Commission report so that everyone can compare what it really said to what you claimed it said and see the difference for themselves.

your inability to recognize the difference between me and the author of the article i linked to is all the evidence i need to dismiss your opinions as simplistic and facile.

cheers.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 12, 2006, 02:55 PM NHFT
You weren't the author of the article? Oops, sorry, my mistake.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on September 12, 2006, 04:05 PM NHFT
i havent versed myself in entire details because watching video of 9/11 causes flashback problems for me. the impact of the jets rocked my building. i saw the south tower collapse from a couple of blocks away. if you drop a large pen on my desk, i will duck every time.

So you?re willing to push theories you are unwilling to actually look into?

I?ll give you a name: Christopher Mozzillo

He was a member of my fraternity, Alpha Phi Delta.  Pledge master and all around good kid.  He was also a NY city fireman who died.

I was there in the city days after it happened.  At the time I was the fraternities national president.  He was one of three guys we lost that day.  I saw first hand the pit of rubble, the bodies and the damage.  I looked at countless photographs taken from those who were there including my own sister.  Some of which depicted bodies and body parts.

So you don?t need to tell me how horrible that day was.  But if you?re going to push out conspiracy theories and actually post them on message boards as if you are quoting fact then you better be prepared to point to the facts backing it up when questioned by people!

there are a few things that i subscribe to in the truth movement. one is the way that the towers fell was simply inconsistent with the way buildings fall. this is from scholars, not me.

There are even MORE scholars stating it is consistent.  Remember these weren?t blocks falling over, they were buildings whose insides were mostly empty air.  How exactly would you expect them to fall?  So just because someone said so doesn?t make it so.

another is the eyewitness accounts of a lot of people who heard explosions on the scene.

The sites quoting people talking about explosions take them out of context.

http://www.debunking911.com/explosions.htm

That site has the quotes posted on many conspiracy sites AND their full context as well as the links as to where they came from.

another is the fact that the pentagon plane supposedly disintegrated on impact, including 2 steel and titanium engines which their manufacturer (rolls royce) has said could not disintegrate in any kind of heat created by rocket fuel. and, this disintegrated jet, which is now simply dust, then, i think 3 internal rings away, supposedly sent its landing gear (rubber and steel which is the only thing that didnt "disintegrate") into a concrete re-inforced wall, creating a 16-foot hole.

So where did the plane go?  There was a plane, there were people on it.  Heck I can give you the name of a guy who had a ticket for that flight but had to change it at the last minute because his mom was sick and having surgery.

the administration has lied about every single thing theyve done. congress is meaningless in this country. the democrats are just as corrupt as the republicans.

I agree but if you look at facts such as Clinton?s signing policies that prevented government agencies from sharing data, its clear both sides had a lot of covering their asses to do.  Doesn?t mean the government set this up, only that they were incompetent fools.

the biggest reason there are holes in the alternative theories behind 9/11 is because they had limited access to government documents. the govt supplied images to popular mechanics in order to "debunk" the "theories" but those images are not available to the public.

Search the web, I found a number of sites that have photos showing alternate views to building 7 which clearly show the damage it received after the towers fell.  But the conspiracy sites leave that photo out because it disproves what they want to push.  In fact that link I gave above has at least one such picture.

why were they running false flag drills on the mornings of 9/11 and 7/7?

How often do they run these drills in general?

why did NORAD fail?

Why did the system we develop that was intended to shoot down missiles from Russia fail every test?  It?s a government system, just about every thread on this forum is talking about a government program failing, suddenly you?re shocked about NORAD?

the 9/11 commission report does not answer these questions. until we have answers, the drive and desire and need of individuals in america to get to the truth, to have questions answered, is going to create speculation.

There?s the great thing about conspiracy theories? until every single question is answered to the satisfaction of the theorist the theory can remain.  This is what a lot of defense lawyers use to create reasonable doubt as well.  EVERY situation will have unanswered questions.  Heck, just look at the OJ case.  Do you think he?s innocent because the gloves didn?t fit?  I could give you a lot of theories on that case I got directly from Henry Lee when I worked at the Hospital Association in CT.  But that?s off the topic.

my only request to the government is that they give us something we can believe. if the govt wishes to reduce the nearly 40% of people in this country who believe that 9/11 was, to some degree, an inside job, they should answer and even work with the independent researchers, the scholars, the engineers and scientists who doubt some of the official details.

I still fail to see why what they?ve put out as the story is so hard to believe.  And the only data I?m aware of that they are actually preventing from going public is video from the pentagon which is after all our nation?s military nerve center so can you understand why video there would be held back?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on September 12, 2006, 04:07 PM NHFT
also, the bbc has reported that at least four of the 19 hijackers are still alive.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

this means either the govt named the wrong guys by mistaken identity, or that the individuals to whom they applied names simply had nothing to do with it.

the fbi acknowledges that the identity is in doubt.

i'm not satisfied with that answer. why should i be?

How many IDs did the hijackers have in their cars and rooms?  And you think identy theift is not reasonable here?  Why?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on September 12, 2006, 04:16 PM NHFT
with publicly available information, we can prove operation northwoods, which has connections to the current administration, and goes to establish a pattern of military strategy that includes carrying out terrorist attacks in america in order to justify a war with another countyr.

I've seen and read the Northwoods document.  It's nothing that can't be faked with a common typewriter.  I've seen nothing to prove it real (although I would be interested in exploring this).

The question I have is, why, if this document were in fact real, wouldn't every major network and newspaper have put out a story about?

Instead it was first disclosed in a book put out by an ABC producer.  And the ONLY network to have anything about it was ABC... funny how that works.  Question, weren't they the ones who got caught with their pants down pushing a fake document about Bush?

And the only other sites I've seen even mention this document are 911 conspiracy sites.

But even assuming it were 100% real, showing the govenrment under JFK ran the ideas of a govenrment attack prove the 9-11 attack were actually pulled off by the government?  It doesn't, but if it's real it at least helps build your case.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 12, 2006, 04:20 PM NHFT
to clarify, this is not MY case. i am not educated enough in engineering or military tactics etc to respond to these challenges. there are PLENTY of people who can respond directly to those challenges. nothing posted here contradicts the few items i said i subscribed to, other than simply promoting a different opinion.

neither set of theories (the govt's nor the "alternative" theories) is complete or without challenge. there is enough to contradict the govt's story and there is enough evidence that information supplied to the 9/11 commission was incomplete to demand a truly independent investigation.

i think you'll find that, in the coming months, the demand for that investigation will increase. i think it's worthwhile.

thats it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 12, 2006, 04:36 PM NHFT
The holes in the government's official story are, unfortunately for the "9-11 truth movement," few and far between.
The government says fires caused the collapses. That has never happened before or since.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on September 12, 2006, 04:44 PM NHFT
The holes in the government's official story are, unfortunately for the "9-11 truth movement," few and far between.
The government says fires caused the collapses. That has never happened before or since.

747s have never crashed into sky scrapers before or since either.

Seriously, how many chances have the experts really have to see what would happen if burning jet fuel was to be poured through the channels of the inside of a skyriser?  What I read in popular mechanics makes as much sense as what the theorists put out so I fail to see how they can just say it's not true period.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on September 12, 2006, 04:56 PM NHFT
One more thing to add... look at the video of the fire of the skyscraper in Madrid.  Theorists are using that as "proof" but personally I see it as proof of just the oposite.

It shows fire nearly brought that building down.  Add in additional damage from falling buildings or a plane and the extra heat from jet fuel.... and I think you see where I'm going.

Also I notice in that video the same falling "molten steel" I see on many conspiracy sites can be seen in the video falling from the building in madrid.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: NC2NH on September 12, 2006, 05:42 PM NHFT
or when an infant needs to pass extra security because she shares a name with a "suspected terrorist"
not doubting your claim here, just stating my disgust:

I find it utterly incredible that 1) anyone involved with the air travel process would ask for an infant passenger's name 2) a parent would have no problem with disclosing the name of the child

???
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dreepa on September 12, 2006, 08:00 PM NHFT
I know that many people love when Penn & Teller debunk myths.
What if the myth is:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3143048862360929736&q=bullshit&hl=en
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 12, 2006, 11:31 PM NHFT
Quote
A fact is a fact is a fact.  If something is factual there is no debating about it.

For instance, two planes hit each of the two towers.  That is fact.  There are tons of videos showing this, eyewitnesses, a list of those who were on the planes etc.  It?s not something that can be agreed or disagreed with.

I?ll agree that facts are facts.  But not every fact can be known.  That is why ?theories? are developed. Theories take known facts and attempt to suggest a rational explanation that includes all the facts. 

It is interesting that you chose this particular ?fact?, because in a sense it undermines the government?s theory.  You say that we have ?a list of those who were on the planes?.  Unfortunately, that list has never included any of the hijacker?s names.  So, no, we don?t know that the men named as ?hijackers? were on the plane.  That is NOT a fact. It may be that the flight manifests we have been given simply omitted the names of the hijackers as part of government policy.  I?m not contesting that.  I?m just showing you that you don?t really have a fact that you think you have.  You must take the government?s word for it, that the hijacker?s names are on the unedited version, because you have not seen it, nor has it been printed in the paper.

Quote
They either refuse to debate, or they refuse to accept any evidence they dislike (usually trying to claim it?s fake) or they demand evidence that does exist.

I didn?t refuse your debate, I said that I wouldn?t accept it on the terms offered.  I basically challenged you to come up with some terms that would enable me to convince you, and asked you what that would be.  The problem is that you guys won?t take the government?s lies as evidence, because you take it for granted that the government has been untruthful.  But the government?s lies are all over the spectrum, and since theories are based on facts, when the facts have been eroded so completely, there?s nothing left to build a theory on, and you?re left taking the government?s word that it wasn?t complicit based merely on authority. And the government's word is more often than not worthless.

Quote
Case in point, there is video showing the hijackers in an airport.  One theorist I?ve tried to discuss this with said that isn?t proof that they boarded the plane, they in turn demanded video showing them actually boarding the plane.  Now the commission report points out that there weren?t any security cameras set up to capture that.  In fact there weren?t any beyond security, so they refused to even accept any discussions about terrorists boarding the plane unless I could somehow provide this video that didn?t exist.  The insisted that the manifests were fake, the cell phone calls were somehow doctored, etc.

So what if the terrorists boarded a plane?  I don?t think that is even in question.  There were people who made calls to their family members saying that there were hijackers on board, so I?m certainly not disputing that there were hijackers. 

It?s interesting that you mention this particular episode, however, because it, too, undermines the official story.  Why would the hijackers fly to Maine, and then back again to Boston on that day?  It doesn?t make any sense, EXCEPT if the purpose were to intentionally show up on a video monitor.  But why would terrorists who were unaffiliated with the government want to do such a thing?

Quote
So I?m asking you to build your case, I?m the open minded jury here? convince me.

Well, keep in mind this is just a theory, but I like to apply Occam?s razor.  I think there were terrorists and planes, frankly.  Those who deny that are ? well, they?re further out than I want to be, and frankly they are making it far too complicated in my opinion.  My rough outline would go something like this.  The government (which has, by the way, thoroughly infiltrated Al Qaeda) finds out about an Al Qaeda plot to attack the WTC and several sites in Washington. This would be sometime in about 1998. Rather than stop the plot, they decide it would be in their advantage to allow it to happen in a controlled way.  They infiltrate the cells with CIA operatives of Middle Eastern descent on stolen passports, (who incidentally, don?t know that it is a suicide mission, but think it is a routine hijack.  This would explain the voice of the hijacker saying ?We?re going back to the airport?.  It also makes it far less complicated to explain why they were in strip clubs, etc. They weren?t particularly Islamic zealouts: They didn?t know they were going to die!) The planes are controlled from the ground, out of the pilots? control. (The technology to do this existed at the time.)  This explains a) why none of the pilots ever pressed the hijack button (they COULDN?T if the controls had been taken away)  b) why hijackers were able to fly expertly when none of them were known to be expert flyers. 

Like I said, just a theory, but one that fits in with a lot of dangling facts.

Here?s a link to a story about the thermate.  It was done by a chemical analysis, according to the article. http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml

It?s inconceivable that thermate was used in the construction, as that would be a clear fire hazard.  Possibly the cleanup, (if they used explosives to make the pieces smaller that could be conceivable), but its unclear why they would want to add the sulpher to the thermite for a cleanup operation, since it would make it burn hotter and increase the cooling time, delaying removal.  Since Dr. Jones had predicted thermate, specifically, prior to the discovery (based on his theory as to how the WTC fell), then the presence of thermate adds to the prestige of his theory (a good theory should be predictive), and puts the onus on his critics to demonstrate conclusively how and under what circumstances thermate could be found in the residue.

Quote
Why are there no reports of anyone seeing people planting the explosives in the buildings?  You?d need just about a quarter pound for every pound of steel it?s cutting through so there would have had to have been a large amount needed.
And I would assume all these thermite charges would need to have been set off by something.  Either wiring going the length of the building or remote chargers.  None were found during the clean up efforts.  Why?

Good questions, and frankly, I don?t know. I think you need far less thermate than thermite, for one. I think it would be relatively easy to plant them, since most people would simply assume that anyone they saw was with building maintenance, and it wouldn?t even occur to them otherwise, even afterwards. It would be easy enough for the government to secure whatever identification would be needed to have whatever access they wanted.  The detonation devices will probably never be known with complete certainty, but presumably they could have a remote device that self destructs on explosion.  I would think that would be fairly normative, actually.  It would be hard to imagine an explosive device that didn?t self-destruct. Should there be some evidence of it somewhere?  You?d think, but who knows what all was found, catalogued, or recycled in the mess that followed?  Those doing the investigations may not have known one piece of plastic or metal from another, and it seems to me that they probably weren?t looking for evidence of that nature anyway, so it may have just been thrown out with a lot of the other pieces of office furniture and other pieces of who knows what.

Quote
I assume using some super-secret Star Trek military technology that nobody realizes has been invented yet

This is what is known as a Straw Man.

Quote
Firsty, there was a 9/11 commission that was made up of both republcians and democrats that DID look into what happened.  The theorists have claimed it was all lies so now the burden is on them to show WHY it is all lies.

And David Ray Griffin has done precisely that.  Have you read his book, ?The 9/11 Commission Report:  Errors and Omissions??

Quote
The holes in the government's official story are, unfortunately for the "9-11 truth movement," few and far between.

To the contrary, the number of holes in the government?s story are so voluminous that it is overwhelming.  To attempt to catalogue all the evidence that has accumulated undermining the government?s story ? well, to quote St. John, ?I suppose the world itself could not contain the scrolls written.?

Quote
OH, that again? Those four were later found to have been victims of identity theft. Try again. (referring to the hijackers who are still alive)

This is a very good point, and Error actually made my point for me:  They were victims of identity theft!  YES!  EXACTLY!  This is such a crucial point:  They were victims of identity theft!  Let?s all say it together:  THEY WERE VICTIMS OF IDENTITY THEFT.

Error, don?t you see how significant that is?  Actually, almost ALL the ?hijackers? had reported their passports lost or stolen in the years preceding 9/11.  The four that are still alive (actually, its more like six or possibly seven) obviously did have their identity stolen.  So ? WHO WERE THOSE PEOPLE?  The answer is, WE DON?T KNOW AND IF THE GOVERNMENT ISN?T COMPLICIT NEITHER DOES THE GOVERNMENT!!!  All the government can say is that someone using such and such?s identity hijacked a plane.  But who was the ultimate hijacker?  It obviously wasn?t the person whose identity was stolen.  And a real Muslim hijacker would have no reason to conceal his identity:  he would want to get credit for his jihad after the fact.  Someone has a vested interest, therefore, in convincing us that 19 Middle Eastern Muslim men (mostly of Saudi descent) hijacked the planes?  But who?

Another interesting story about the hijackers involves ? Jeddeh, I think. I might have the wrong name.  The interesting story here is that he WAS A LEBANESE CHRISTIAN!  DOH!  Whoever stole his identity sure screwed the pooch on that one; seems someone forgot that not all Middle Eastern men are Muslims. 

Quote
Operation Northwoods has been gathering dust for years. That it exists is a far cry from that a similar plan was implemented. You have nothing but unproven allegations and a sheer lack of evidence to back them up.

Of course it isn?t evidential in this particular case, but it is evidential of the fact that the government WOULD do such a thing.  In fact, Northwoods was approved by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the only reason it wasn?t implemented was because JFK pulled the plug on it. So, the argument that ?the US government just doesn?t think that way? is certainly invalid.  Let?s call Northwoods what it is:  It?s a character witness

Quote
Remember these weren?t blocks falling over, they were buildings whose insides were mostly empty air.

YOU are mostly air.  Don?t believe me? Ask the physics pro, Tracy.  99.9999% of the area of an atom is empty space. 

Then again, I would be most shocked to see Lildog collapse into his own footprint, regardless of how much his head was on fire.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 13, 2006, 12:24 AM NHFT
I know that many people love when Penn & Teller debunk myths.
What if the myth is:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3143048862360929736&q=bullshit&hl=en

 ;D ;D ;D

To draw an analogy: just picture Jesus Himself bitch-slapping Fred Phelps.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: firsty on September 13, 2006, 09:38 AM NHFT
caleb, thank you for stating those points so clearly.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on September 13, 2006, 10:00 AM NHFT
I?ll agree that facts are facts.  But not every fact can be known.  That is why ?theories? are developed. Theories take known facts and attempt to suggest a rational explanation that includes all the facts.

That?s just it Caleb, many of the theories I?ve seen surface do NOT look at facts but take lack of facts as ways to form their theories.

For instance, as I already pointed out there are videos of the hijackers in the airports.  In face there is evidence that at least one was pulled aside for extra screening (lot of good that did) and as a result the airline held his bags until it was confirmed he was on the plane.  So there is evidence showing he and the other terror suspects boarded the plane.  There is also evidence (the many ids found in their cars and or rooms) that show they faked Ids.  But since some of the names suspected to have been used were found to be those of living people, theorists discount that the terrorists were ever on the planes.  Come on, that?s ignoring facts and going off into left field!

It is interesting that you chose this particular ?fact?, because in a sense it undermines the government?s theory.  You say that we have ?a list of those who were on the planes?.  Unfortunately, that list has never included any of the hijacker?s names.

Actually Caleb, you need to do your homework and stop listening only to the conspiracy sites alone for your information.  They were shown to be WRONG on this point.  But since many of these sites also pimp books or DVDs, it?s in their best interest not to be proven wrong.

The conspiracy sites use the list of victims printed in most major newspapers as the list of passengers which since the terrorists where terrorists they were not victims and hence left off those lists.  CNN printed the actual manifest days after 9-11, which did show the names of the terrorists and even gave their seat numbers.

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/those-passenger-lists.html

I didn?t refuse your debate, I said that I wouldn?t accept it on the terms offered.  I basically challenged you to come up with some terms that would enable me to convince you, and asked you what that would be.

Just list facts, that?s all I?m asking.  Then we can examine the facts and a) see if they are real facts and b) see what theories they actually support or disprove.

So what if the terrorists boarded a plane?  I don?t think that is even in question.  There were people who made calls to their family members saying that there were hijackers on board, so I?m certainly not disputing that there were hijackers.

Well doesn?t that fly directly in the face of the theories that say the hijackers are still alive?  Clearly if you support the idea that they were on the planes as fact then unless there is evidence showing something happened to the planes other then their hitting the towns, the hijackers would be dead as well.  And that supports the theory that 19 hijackers flew the 4 planes into 4 different locations.

So far I don?t see where the conspiracy theories would come up from that?
 
It?s interesting that you mention this particular episode, however, because it, too, undermines the official story.  Why would the hijackers fly to Maine, and then back again to Boston on that day?  It doesn?t make any sense, EXCEPT if the purpose were to intentionally show up on a video monitor.  But why would terrorists who were unaffiliated with the government want to do such a thing?

They tested security on a number of occasions.  I don?t see why this is even relevant?  Why would someone believe that killing themselves would send them to heaven where 71 virgins would be waiting for them?  Can?t answer that either but it doesn?t mean people don?t believe it and blow themselves up.

Well, keep in mind this is just a theory, but I like to apply Occam?s razor.  I think there were terrorists and planes, frankly.

Ok, we have a starting point we agree on.  Some theorists don?t even agree on that point.

My rough outline would go something like this.  The government (which has, by the way, thoroughly infiltrated Al Qaeda) finds out about an Al Qaeda plot to attack the WTC and several sites in Washington.

Ok this so far isn?t unbelievable.  Thanks to Clinton the agencies were unable to share information so I do believe they had all the information needed to prevent 9-11 but walls prevented them from actually connecting the dots and doing something about it.

This would be sometime in about 1998. Rather than stop the plot, they decide it would be in their advantage to allow it to happen in a controlled way.

See that?s where I disagree.  I think it?s just government incompetence and even though they knew what (maybe not when) and might have even known who, they weren?t able to get their act together enough to actually do something about it.

Napoleon once said, ?Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.?

They infiltrate the cells with CIA operatives of Middle Eastern descent on stolen passports, (who incidentally, don?t know that it is a suicide mission, but think it is a routine hijack.  This would explain the voice of the hijacker saying ?We?re going back to the airport?.

Another explanation could be that the hijackers knew people would fight for survival if they were told they were going to die.  If you say sit back and everything will be ok vs. I?m going to kill you, the person has more of a chance of sitting back in hopes you wont actually kill them (at least prior to 9-11 they would).

It also makes it far less complicated to explain why they were in strip clubs, etc. They weren?t particularly Islamic zealouts: They didn?t know they were going to die!)

I can show you tons of cases of religious hypocrites, some who even devote their lives to a faith then turn around a rape young boys.

The planes are controlled from the ground, out of the pilots? control. (The technology to do this existed at the time.)  This explains a) why none of the pilots ever pressed the hijack button (they COULDN?T if the controls had been taken away)  b) why hijackers were able to fly expertly when none of them were known to be expert flyers.

You don?t need to be an expert pilot to point a plane and crash it.  Heck, I?ve done that tons of times in flight simulator games.

Also, if the pilots lost control PRIOR to the hijackers taking over, why wouldn?t they have communicated that over the intercoms?  This is a case of a theory with no evidence to support it.

I can come up with tons of theories of what could have happened, but the probability of their being true (especially considering there is no evidence to support them) is slim to none.

Here?s a link to a story about the thermate.  It was done by a chemical analysis, according to the article. http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml

I?ve been looking for a site with his actual words on them or his actual finding.  As I pointed out with the manifests, many conspiracy sites either twist the truth or have been shown to report false information.  I?m going to keep reading up on this.

Quote
Why are there no reports of anyone seeing people planting the explosives in the buildings?  You?d need just about a quarter pound for every pound of steel it?s cutting through so there would have had to have been a large amount needed.
And I would assume all these thermite charges would need to have been set off by something.  Either wiring going the length of the building or remote chargers.  None were found during the clean up efforts.  Why?

Good questions, and frankly, I don?t know. I think you need far less thermate than thermite, for one. I think it would be relatively easy to plant them, since most people would simply assume that anyone they saw was with building maintenance, and it wouldn?t even occur to them otherwise, even afterwards.  It would be easy enough for the government to secure whatever identification would be needed to have whatever access they wanted.

Ok, fair explanation.  But this is adding to the level of complexity and the number of people involved necessary to pull this off.  When you start getting into theories where hundreds or thousands of people needed to be in on it then I wonder how that many people could have been in the know on a plan where they were going to kill their own country men and in the case of the pentagon, co-workers and not a single person blew the whistle.  That?s just a little hard to swallow.  Heck I know if I caught wind of a plot to kill people I?m be yelling from every soapbox I could find.

The other thing that wouldn?t make sense is why if they were plotting this out to blow up buildings with explosives, would they have picked WTC 7?

There are so many other things that would seem out right stupid if the government in fact was trying to do this in a way not to arise suspicion.  Such as Bush months before saying we were going to be attacked on National TV? why raise a flag if he were in fact the one doing the attacking?

And David Ray Griffin has done precisely that.  Have you read his book, ?The 9/11 Commission Report:  Errors and Omissions??

I don?t doubt the government may have gotten parts of its story wrong.  Remember, they are doing just what conspiracy theorists are doing and trying to guess what happened based on the facts on hand (which some theories out right ignore).

If you look at murder cases, they sometimes theorize incorrect about what happened.  Heck look at Jack the Ripper, how many different theories are there around that.  And most of them are plausible.

To the contrary, the number of holes in the government?s story are so voluminous that it is overwhelming.

Then why can?t someone show me the facts that clearly show these holes.

The best I?ve seen is thermite which I?m still reading up on and it hasn?t proven anything to me yet.

This is a very good point, and Error actually made my point for me:  They were victims of identity theft!  YES!  EXACTLY!  This is such a crucial point:  They were victims of identity theft!  Let?s all say it together:  THEY WERE VICTIMS OF IDENTITY THEFT.

Error, don?t you see how significant that is?  Actually, almost ALL the ?hijackers? had reported their passports lost or stolen in the years preceding 9/11.  The four that are still alive (actually, its more like six or possibly seven) obviously did have their identity stolen.  So ? WHO WERE THOSE PEOPLE?  The answer is, WE DON?T KNOW AND IF THE GOVERNMENT ISN?T COMPLICIT NEITHER DOES THE GOVERNMENT!!!  All the government can say is that someone using such and such?s identity hijacked a plane.  But who was the ultimate hijacker?  It obviously wasn?t the person whose identity was stolen.  And a real Muslim hijacker would have no reason to conceal his identity:  he would want to get credit for his jihad after the fact.  Someone has a vested interest, therefore, in convincing us that 19 Middle Eastern Muslim men (mostly of Saudi descent) hijacked the planes?  But who?

See this is where I don?t understand the leap of faith.  You accept the fact that 19 men did hijack the planes.  There?s evidence to support that.  You also accept the fact that at least two of the planes flew into buildings (there?s theories around the other two so I?ll leave them out).  But you suddenly leap to a belief for which there is no real evidence to support, which is they were not the ones who actually flew the planes into the buildings.  Why is that so hard to believe but a plot involved demolition experts, remote control planes and hundreds of people if not thousands required to turn on their own country without saying a word about it is totally believable?  And with very little evidence to support (mostly just unanswered questions)?

Another interesting story about the hijackers involves ? Jeddeh, I think. I might have the wrong name.  The interesting story here is that he WAS A LEBANESE CHRISTIAN!  DOH!  Whoever stole his identity sure screwed the pooch on that one; seems someone forgot that not all Middle Eastern men are Muslims.

If they were stealing identities why would it matter who?s they stole?  If they were Muslim I could understand why they wouldn?t want Billy Joe Bob as that wouldn?t be believable but as long as it?s another Muslim name, does it matter who?s it is?

Of course it isn?t evidential in this particular case, but it is evidential of the fact that the government WOULD do such a thing.  In fact, Northwoods was approved by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the only reason it wasn?t implemented was because JFK pulled the plug on it. So, the argument that ?the US government just doesn?t think that way? is certainly invalid.  Let?s call Northwoods what it is:  It?s a character witness

Ok, assuming it?s actually a true document, I agree it would be a character witness.  But then shouldn?t the countless terror attacks including the 1993 WTC bombing be considered as well?  There is FAR more evidence showing terror attacks then 1 document showing JFK?s staff considered attacks on their own country.

YOU are mostly air.  Don?t believe me? Ask the physics pro, Tracy.  99.9999% of the area of an atom is empty space.

Then again, I would be most shocked to see Lildog collapse into his own footprint, regardless of how much his head was on fire.

Then why do controlled demolitions fall into their own footprints?

The above argument would lean toward buildings NEVER falling into their own footprints.

Here?s a good article you should read:
http://progressive.org/mag_wx091106
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 13, 2006, 10:07 AM NHFT
Oh, there was plenty of government incompetence. I've even documented some of it (http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/09/11/911-whistleblowers-ignored-retaliated-against/).
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on September 13, 2006, 11:29 AM NHFT
YOU are mostly air.  Don?t believe me? Ask the physics pro, Tracy.  99.9999% of the area of an atom is empty space.

Physics pro Tracy would probably correct you by saying that "air," consisting mainly of atoms of nitrogen and oxygen, is not the same thing as "empty space." 

Quote
Then again, I would be most shocked to see Lildog collapse into his own footprint, regardless of how much his head was on fire.

Did you ever visit the WTC?  Did you ever stand quietly on the observation floor just to feel the building swaying just a little in the wind beneath your feet?  Have you ever stood in the plaza and gazed up in wonder at the enormity of human achievement that they represented?  I remember the last time I was there, and I really regret that I didn't bother to take the trip up to the top.

But your statement here, Caleb, suggests to me that you have utterly no understanding of how the WTC towers were designed and constructed, with a load-bearing outer wall, tubular inner core, open floorplan, and concrete floors supported by 32-inch trusses topped with corrugated metal.

Because if you did have even the slightest understanding, you would realize that the design of the WTC towers made it virtually impossible for them to collapse in any other way than straight down.  If someone is postulating otherwise, then it is incumbent upon them to show how the buildings "should have" collapsed when their principal supporting members softened and weakened.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 13, 2006, 11:30 PM NHFT
I'll try to get to a commentary on this tomorrow, if I can, Lildog.  I don't have time right now to give your commentary the analysis it deserves.  From what it seems, we are in agreement on much.  I'm not a far out conspiracy theorist, as I believe a little common sense can go a long way. I think you'll find most of those on this forum who believe the government was complicit do *not* buy into the more radical theories.  In fact, I am more suspicious of some in the truth movement than I am of people like yourself who believe that the government was not complicit, and require strong evidence for the assertion. That is, after all, the basis for any belief:  strong evidence.  If strong evidence is not available, then strong conclusions are, at best, merely a hunch.  My suspicion is that much in the 9/11 truth movement is disinformation designed to make us look like kooks. Unfortunately, in discussing 9/11, I end up having to explain repeatedly to people that I do not buy into certain theories.  That's why I gave you the rough outline.  It wasn't designed to "prove" anything, per se, but just to give you a rough outline of what I consider plausible so you'll know where I stand.

To mvpel, I would say that you might benefit from some research into the design of the WTC building. The assertion that the walls were what held most of the weight was an assertion made in the 9/11 Commission report, but it does not stand up to the evidence. There were 47 central steel columns that supported the weight of the building.  Even in the unlikely event of the collapse of the floors, the collapse of these columns is inexplicable. The 9/11 report ignores these columns entirely.

Caleb

Quote
Physics pro Tracy would probably correct you by saying that "air," consisting mainly of atoms of nitrogen and oxygen, is not the same thing as "empty space."

Correct, but then again, air actually provides some resistence, whereas "empty space" does not. Therefore, Lildog should be more likely to collapse into his own footprint than was WTC.  ;)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on September 14, 2006, 12:16 PM NHFT
Correct, but then again, air actually provides some resistence, whereas "empty space" does not. Therefore, Lildog should be more likely to collapse into his own footprint than was WTC.  ;)

 ::)

Is Rick's atomic structure arranged as a load-bearing outer wall, tubular inner core, open floorplan, and concrete floors supported by interior trusses topped with corrugated metal?  You're getting flat-out ridiculous here, Caleb, is it the cognitive dissonance kicking in?

Let me try again, in the interests of FSP camraderie.

The visual evidence of the air providing resistance to the fall of the towers is the plumes of smoke, paper, ash, and dust that were forcibly ejected from each floor as the thousands of tons of the floor above pancaked downward.  Is it possible for you to slap two pieces of plywood together from an inch apart without having them deflect significantly?  Think about it.

The width of each WTC tower was 208 feet - that is to say each floor in the 110-story was wider than the wingspan of a 767, and almost exactly one acre in area.  And they were 1,362 feet high, for an average floor height of about 12 1/2 feet.  The width and breadth of each floor was 15.3% of the height.  The floors themselves were about three feet deep, counting the 32" trusses and the concrete floor surface:

So for example, if you had a piece of half-inch thick plywood represent the 36-inch-thick floors, or 1/72 scale, your model would be nearly three feet (2 feet 10 inches) wide, and each piece would be separated by - get this - 1.5 inches.  So something along these lines:

|------------------------------------|
|------------------------------------|
|------------------------------------|
|------------------------------------|

Or more precisely:

(http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/fig3.gif)

I would really love to know how 110 acre-sized slabs of concrete can fall any way other than essentially straight down, as each floor above comes slamming down with all the enormous accumulated weight of the upper floors on each floor below, especially when the towers were built to withstand about 11 million pounds of deflecting wind-shear force on a single face.  What would push such a structure with such immense inertia off to one side?

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 14, 2006, 11:12 PM NHFT
mvpel,

I've never said the tower should not have come down; it's how it came down that I find suspicious.

1)  For one, if it "pancaked" down it should have left the central steel columns intact.

2)  Secondly, the tower's supports on the weakened floors should not have fallen uniformly.  The weakened joints should have given first, with the result that the weakened side of the building would have collapsed, placing undue stress on the unweakened joints, which then would have collapsed.  The collapse was too uniform, in my opinion. 

3) Thirdly, the floors below the impact point should have been unaffected by the fires or impact.  That means that their collapse would be due entirely to the weight of the collapsing floors weakening the joints.  Whereas an object that falls naturally (without resistance) will fall at a uniform rate of acceleration, the towers should have fallen with an initial burst of acceleration (representing the weakened joints collapsing initially), followed by a sudden decrease in the rate of acceleration (as the collapsing floors met resistence from unweakened joints) while the rate of acceleration gradually increased with each subsequent floor (since each floor would have a greater weight than the previous floor, each lower floor would be able to resist the accumulating weight for gradually lower periods of time, resulting in an increase in the RATE of acceleration.)

Let me explain this point 3 a little more.  On earth, objects fall at a rate of acceleration of 10 meters per second each second.  (The first second, it falls 10 meters, the second second it falls 20 meters, the third second it falls 30 meters, etc.) This is the rate of acceleration, and will hold true unless their is resistance. The floor joints should have provided a gradually reducing amount of resistance, (since as weight was added, they would collapse sooner  with each floor).  I don't have the engineering talent to work the numbers out for you, but it should be possible to determine roughly how long it should have taken the floors to collapse, given a certain amount of weight, and this number would result in an increasing rate of acceleration.  On the other hand, the controlled demoliton theory would predict the destruction of the underlying supports prior to the collapse of each floor, and therefore the controlled demolition theory (perfectly executed) should anticipate a roughly even rate of acceleration, without significant variance. If it were not perfectly executed, the controlled demolition theory should predict fluctuating rates of acceleration (with no pattern, as opposed to the pancaking theory, which should anticipate a steady upward pattern in the rate of acceleration).  The point is, it should be possible to determine which theory is correct merely by timing the collapse at various points and determining if the rate of acceleration increased or was even or haphazard.  To my eyes, the rate of accleration looked even ... but that having been said, we could be talking about tiny fractions of a second, so we would probably need precise instrumentation to make that call.  I've not seen any studies done on that, but it would be a relatively easy way to decide whether the collapse was natural or not.

4)  The final point I want to make on the towers is that I don't know who suggested that they should just have toppled over on their side.  I haven't heard that, but I have heard a lot of talk about whether they should have toppled at all.  I personally don't think they should have toppled at all.  I think the firemen should have put out the fires, the buildings should have been repaired, and they should still be standing today.  The man who designed the towers said that he thought they could take multiple plane impacts.  I know, I know "it failed the field test" ... but a cynic could simply retort right back at you "or DID IT?"  It's just begging the question, since the question is, precisely, whether the towers collapsed naturally.

Caleb

ps, mvpel, you need to lighten up a little, bud.  Loosen the tie and have a few beers or something.  The comment about lildog collapsing into his own footprint was a quip.  That's why I put the little  ;) sign.  I'm not expecting that to happen anytime soon, and as far as I know he isn't composed of "a load-bearing outer wall, tubular inner core, [weight bearing central steel columns], open floorplan, and concrete floors supported by interior trusses topped with corrugated metal."   ;)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 15, 2006, 03:49 AM NHFT
Caleb, according to the NIST, that's exactly what happened (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm):

Quote
In other words, the momentum (which equals mass times velocity) of the 12 to 28 stories (WTC 1 and WTC 2, respectively) falling on the supporting structure below (which was designed to support only the static weight of the floors above and not any dynamic effects due to the downward momentum) so greatly exceeded the strength capacity of the structure below that it (the structure below) was unable to stop or even to slow the falling mass. The downward momentum felt by each successive lower floor was even larger due to the increasing mass.

From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: FTL_Ian on September 16, 2006, 12:19 AM NHFT
If Truthers are really looking at all the evidence, then they owe it to themselves to read:
http://loosechangeguide.com
I was persuaded by some of Loose Change.  It's a very slick production.  This site pointed out how gullible I was.

http://911myths.com
Just digging into this one, also interesting.  I like this page: http://911myths.com/html/site_faq.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 16, 2006, 02:06 AM NHFT


(http://media.salemwebnetwork.com/TownHall/Car/b/06.09.14.NewDesecrater.jpg)

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 16, 2006, 02:57 PM NHFT
Digging for truth is not an insult to victims.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 16, 2006, 03:52 PM NHFT
Digging for truth is not an insult to victims.

Digging for truth, finding it and rejecting it, now that's an insult.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 16, 2006, 09:45 PM NHFT
I agree, Error.  ;)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 17, 2006, 02:45 AM NHFT
Thank you, Error. No wink.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 26, 2006, 04:57 PM NHFT
CENTCOM Sergeant Details Traitorous Stand Down Orders On 9/11
Military whistleblower comes forward with key information

Steve Watson / Infowars | September 26 2006

Alex Jones was joined on air yesterday by a former Sergeant in the United States Army named Lauro "LJ" Chavez. Chavez was stationed at MacDill AFB where he claims he witnessed unusual preparations for a potential airplane hitting the base on the morning of 9/11 and distinctly heard officers talking about a stand down. This has led him to go public in questioning the NORAD stand down and the demolition of the twin towers.

In a letter that first appeared on the 9/11 Veterans For Truth Website, Sergeant Lauro "LJ" Chavez responds to a Cincinnati Post hit piece article by outlining his own doubts about the official version of 9/11 and his personal experiences of the strange prelude to the events of that morning.

Despite early (and healthy) reactions claiming this may be a hoax designed to poison the well of the 9/11 truth movement, Sergeant Chavez has now provided us with evidence of his credentials, his honorable discharge documents showing the military installations he was located inside. The last station he held was inside United States Central Command in Tampa - the pdf can be viewed here.  http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/LChavez_214.pdf

Mr Chavez was quick to point out that he does not have all the answers, but does have what he feels is vital information regarding the events of 9/11:

''I'm in no way in a position to tell people that 'this is the official story so believe me', no, I want to give people the information so they can go away and look for themselves and formulate a logical decision with all the evidence." Chavez said.

Mr Chavez worked within CENTCOM, one of the five American regional unified commands consisting of Marines, Navy and air force officers. CENTCOM's area of jurisdiction is in the Middle East, East Africa and Central Asia. CENTCOM has been the main American presence in many military operations, including the Persian Gulf War, the United States war in Afghanistan, and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Chavez was stationed at CENTCOM's headquarters at MacDill AFB, in Tampa, Florida. His commanding officer was Four Star General Tommy Franks.

Chavez worked in the J6 department that was in charge of all the computer systems, the network backbone of CENTCOM. Chavez ran a team of six soldiers on the helpdesk network side. He was personally responsible for the maintenance of commanding officers computers, including those of General Tommy Franks. He has letters of recommendation from Franks and even went to Franks' house to work on his computers.

Chavez described how the military has a ring of computer networks according to different security clearance levels. Chavez worked only with systems classified as top secret or higher.

On the morning before 9/11 Chavez was in the Secure Compartmented Information Facility, the secure bunker at the base of CENTCOM HQ which is populated by high ranking military intelligence personnel. This is a facility that requires a top secret gamma clearance. Inside are systems that can monitor weather systems and flight paths of all aircraft within the country.

That day he was involved with supporting computer equipment being used in the Vigilant Guardian exercise and another exercise based in Egypt. On this day Chavez got to see information that he wasn't supposed to see.

"I was working on psyops commander's computer and next to his PC was a top secret document that was open, his neglect was my ally, I was sitting there working on his computer and was waiting for some passes to download and I look over and I'm reading the document, and it's the off order for the exercise that they are participating in."

This raises major questions because normally wargames or exercises are not classified as top secret as it is a requirement to let some information be public, especially if the exercise is taking place in a populated area.

Chavez continued:

"So I'm reading this document and it's giving proposed situations for scenarios for this wargame the scenarios include a hijacked plane, most of them were hijacked planes, I saw one that was like a car bomb trying to blow up something, but one of them was a hijacked plane crashing into a nuclear power plant in California, the Sears Tower, the World Trade Center, The Pentagon obviously, the White House, our building was one of the targets as well."

Chavez went on to describe how CENTCOM HQ was being heavily fortified the day before 9/11 and access to the base was restricted to top secret personnel only. This ties in with a declaration of Martial Law by Jeb Bush two days previously throughout the entirety of Florida.

Chavez also described how during the exercises the aerospace grid with "enemy" blips on it has to be piped in to the air traffic controllers of all the airports in the affected area so they know there is a military exercise going on. This ties in with the released NORAD/NEADS and FAA tapes and accounts that are riddled with references to the drills and exercises taking place on 9/11.

Chavez described the plot as "genius" and stated:

"If you want to crash planes into a building, and you've got the aerospace grid at your beckoning call, so you put a bunch of blips on it so no one knows which ones are real and which ones are fake... All you have to do is have someone in charge of the computer systems to put the blips on the screen and then you can do whatever you want."

Chavez proceeded to detail the key discussions that he heard inside the bunker on the day of 9/11:

"I didn't get to see tower one hit, I was in there talking with individuals and i was tired, I'd been there since four in the morning. Then all of a sudden everybody started hustling and bustling. it was like NASA when Apollo 13 was about to crash, everybody running around, and then they put it on the big screen, CNN with the tower on fire.

Then we see the other plane come in and hit it and at that point everybody is standing up. The air force had commanders in contact with NORAD. The plane, or whatever, hit the Pentagon and then we were like 'Why aren't they scrambling jets?' We were asking, there was eight or nine people... Colonels and Lieutenant Colonels asking the Lieutenant Colonel in charge of the air force 'why isn't NORAD scrambling jets? and he said 'we received an order to stand down''. And that just perplexed everybody."

Mr Chavez did not know the Lieutenant Colonel and so does not know his name, yet if he can be identified, then we have uncovered a direct link to the stand down order. If that man or any others who were present at CENTCOM on 9/11 can be identified and made to testify under oath, then the whole cover operation could be blown. A real independent investigation would have secured this.

The entire riveting interview is freely available online at Prisonplanet.tv now. Please spread this information far and wide.
http://prisonplanet.tv/audio/260906chavez.mp3

Mr Chavez has since been informed that the computer company he now works for, as information security manager, has been receiving threatening phone calls demanding his dismissal. Mr Chavez is another example of someone who is bravely putting his career, reputation and life on the line to get the truth out about the 9/11 cover up.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 26, 2006, 07:51 PM NHFT
That was really interesting and useful, except for all the Alex Jones conspiracy type stuff, which really detracts from the sergeant's information.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 26, 2006, 10:02 PM NHFT
You keep moving the bar, error.  For years, we've been told "Stand down order?  There was no stand down order!"

Now, I suppose we're going to progress to, "Of course there was a stand down order.  But that doesn't prove the government was complicit!"

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 27, 2006, 03:13 AM NHFT
Moving the bar? Hell, all I wanted was a clear account of what the guy was saying, and Alex Jones is no journalist.

As for the "stand down" order. What stand down order? He said he overheard something about an order to stand down. That says nothing about what the order was or what it applied to. So that's something you might want to look into.

And we all know the reason planes weren't scrambled is because (1) the FAA is a bunch of incompetent idiots (I've spent some time lately documenting this), and (2) there weren't very many to be had anyway (much better people than I have well documented this).
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on September 27, 2006, 08:10 AM NHFT
Moving the bar? Hell, all I wanted was a clear account of what the guy was saying, and Alex Jones is no journalist.
That is a reason I like him.

So should we fire the FAA and the military and start over again?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on September 27, 2006, 08:19 AM NHFT
Alex Jones' Terror Storm

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5948263607579389947&q=alex+jones
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 27, 2006, 12:03 PM NHFT
No, we should fire the FAA and the military, and not start (a government) again.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 30, 2006, 02:27 PM NHFT
Apparently, the conspiracy theorists might not be such nutcakes after all. *dodges everyone's fists*  ;)

Blaise Pascal said, in his dying words now to be found in the book "Pens?es," that "pyrrhonien," or extreme skepticism, is one of a good scientist's three defining qualities. In other words, please excuse my extreme skepticism, and also, please realize that such a quality is not a vice.

Finally, please excuse my unusually extensive use of bold, but this is earth-shattering evidence in my view.


Woodward book portrays a White House in turmoil
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003282308_woodward30.html

...

Snow confirmed one detail in the book: Henry Kissinger has been advising Bush about Iraq.  :o

In an interview scheduled to air Sunday on "60 Minutes," Woodward says Kissinger, who served in the Nixon and Ford administrations, has been telling Bush and Cheney that in Iraq, "'victory is the only meaningful exit strategy.' "This is so fascinating. Kissinger's fighting the Vietnam War again, because in his view, the problem in Vietnam is we lost our will. That we didn't stick to it."

...

The book also reported that then-CIA Director George Tenet and his counterterrorism chief, Cofer Black, grew so concerned about a possible al-Qaida attack in summer 2001 that they abruptly decided to drive straight to the White House to get high-level attention.

Tenet called Rice, then the national-security adviser, from his car to ask to see her in hopes that the surprise appearance would make an impression.

But the meeting on July 10, 2001, left Tenet and Black frustrated and feeling brushed off, Woodward reported. Rice, they believed, did not feel the same sense of urgency about the threat and was content to wait for a policy review.

 :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 30, 2006, 02:30 PM NHFT
The unfortunate thing here is, if Tenet would have announced this to the national media on 9/11 or 9/12, the Bush administration would probably not exist right now.

As it is, he kept his mouth shut and eventually took credit for the "intelligence failure." ::)

What was he THINKING?  ???
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dreepa on September 30, 2006, 02:38 PM NHFT
Since when is Woodward a source we can trust?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 30, 2006, 05:35 PM NHFT
Since when is Woodward a source we can trust?

Why else would fear strike the White House upon publishing this book?

"State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, responding on behalf of Rice, said Tenet and Black had never publicly expressed any frustration with her response. Tenet and Black did not respond to messages Friday."

It sounds to me like Woodward is telling the truth.

But why would they allow 9/11 to happen? I do not understand how anyone with even the smallest heart could do that. THAT is what I find unbelievable, even assuming Woodward's book is factual.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 30, 2006, 06:06 PM NHFT
CENTCOM Sergeant Details Traitorous Stand Down Orders On 9/11
Military whistleblower comes forward with key information

Yet another fake crashes and burns:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=64837

Reminds me of Jesse Macbeth.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 30, 2006, 07:37 PM NHFT
CENTCOM Sergeant Details Traitorous Stand Down Orders On 9/11
Military whistleblower comes forward with key information

Yet another fake crashes and burns:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=64837

Reminds me of Jesse Macbeth.

Kevin

I zoomed in on the document myself. These guys are apparently lying about the pixel patterns unless something is drastically wrong with my installation of Paint Shop Pro 7, but I doubt that.

Why would they lie about this?   :-\ ???

I pulled out the offending sections of the document for you to see for yourselves:

(http://www.fcsbrookline.com/files/MilitaryRecord-Pixel-Copying.gif)

As you can see, NONE of the "4" characters match, nor do the sets of "YRS" characters.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Michael Fisher on September 30, 2006, 07:41 PM NHFT
Ah, nevermind, I see what happened. The version of the document I zoomed in on was originally saved, by one of them, in a zoomed-out version, as a bitmap.

They're right. This document has been modified after being scanned.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on September 30, 2006, 08:16 PM NHFT
They're right. This document has been modified after being scanned.

Yes, I wasn't even looking for problems with the DD-214 to start with. It was offered up as proof of the guy's service before anyone had even questioned it. So since it was there, I took a look at it.

When I opened it, it immediately jumped out at me that the "4 WKS" looked wrong (bold and blobby), and the "14 WKS" was obviously pasted in, with the "1" overlapping a slash. And the "1" in "14 WKS" doesn't match the "4 WKS" part, which is identical to the other problematic "4 WKS".

Then there's the fact that there's no such thing as an "expert marksman" badge, and where "expert" was pasted in, there's still a remnant of the top of a slash.

It's not even a good fake. For those of you who keep up with Alex Jones, has he addressed this development? Or glossed right over it? Or claimed it as evidence of a conspiracy shooting down a whistleblower? Anything?

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on September 30, 2006, 09:12 PM NHFT
They're right. This document has been modified after being scanned.

It's not even a good fake. For those of you who keep up with Alex Jones, has he addressed this development? Or glossed right over it? Or claimed it as evidence of a conspiracy shooting down a whistleblower? Anything?

But... but... Alex Jones would NEVER lie about ANYTHING!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 30, 2006, 10:01 PM NHFT
Well, I'm probably going to surprise some of you here by issuing a mea culpa on the Chavez situation:  It appears he is a fraud.

The underlying question here is whether the fraud was perpetrated by Alex Jones, or on Alex Jones.  Either way, he has some explaining to do.  If the papers were scanned by him ... then he is trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Hard to believe he would be that dumb.  But if the papers were scanned by Chavez (which I'm going to assume is the case,) Jones was sloppy in not demanding copies of the originals.

Either way, I apologize for jumping on it too soon, as it now appears the story was quite false.

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on September 30, 2006, 10:08 PM NHFT
Sorry, Michael, but I think you're swallowing a line.  First of all ... Woodward is probably a CIA asset.  Think it's a coincidence that he "broke" the Nixon story?

The goal of this story is to create the impression that the CIA is not culpable and to shift blame onto the Administration (specifically the President).  If people are inclined to blame the government for 9/11, they want to make sure that the finger points towards the (temporary) Administration and not where it properly belongs on the (permanent) institutions (CIA, FBI, NSA, Pentagon).

My hunch is that the Administration, and particularly the President, was set up from the very beginning to take the fall here in the worst case scenario. They *will* let Bush be the scapegoat if push comes to shove. 

And trust me ... I'm no Bush apologist.  But my hunch is that Bush is scared because he knows he ought to be scared. He knows the gig ... and has known it from the beginning.  He knows who's going to take the fall if everything hits the fan.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on October 29, 2006, 11:41 AM NHFT
Rockefeller Predicted "Event" To Trigger War Eleven Months Before 9/11
Hollywood director Russo recalls remarkable "forecast" of coming attack

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | October 28 2006

Hollywood director and documentary film maker Aaron Russo, currently receiving a wave of plaudits for his latest release, America: From Freedom to Fascism, told The Alex Jones Show that Nicholas Rockefeller had personally assured him there was going to be an "event" that would trigger the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq eleven months before 9/11 took place.

Saying he had been approached many times by the Rockefellers and other members of the CFR elite in an attempt to recruit him, Russo recalled a conversation that would come home to roost on September 11, 2001.

"Here's what I do know first hand - I know that about eleven months to a year before 9/11 ever happened I was talking to my Rockefeller friend (Nicholas Rockefeller) and he said to me 'Aaron there's gonna be an event' and he never told me what the event was going to be - I'm not sure he knew what the event was going to be I don't know that he knew that," said Russo.

Russo related how Rockefeller knew precisely what the event would lead to and which countries would be militarily targeted by the elite.

"He just said there's gonna be an event and out of that event we're gonna invade Afghanistan so we can run pipelines through the Caspian sea, we can go into Iraq to take the oil and establish bases in the middle east and to make the middle east part of the new world order and we're going to go after Venezuela - that's what's going to come out of this event."

"Eleven months to a year later that's what happened....he certainly knew that something was going to happen."

"In my relationships with some of these people I can tell you that it's as evil as it really gets - this is it - this is the game," stated Russo - also relating how members of the elite were routinely obsessed by creating a world identification society where people had to carry ID cards and prove who they were at all times.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Launch of Aaron Russo's From Freedom to Fascism on DVD!
Neither left- nor right-wing, this startling examination exposes the systematic erosion of civil liberties in America, the federal reserve scam and the plan to track and trace the movements of every US citizen.
Click here to get your copy!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rockefeller also told Russo that the elite families created and financed the women's lib movement so they could tax another half of the population and so that the children would be trained by them in government schools rather than in the context of the family unit.

Russo also sounded off on 9/11, openly airing his view for the first time that it was a complete inside job.

"People know that 9/11 was an inside job," said Russo, "look what they did here in America, look at 9/11, look what they did - they killed thousands of Americans - people jumping out of windows from a hundred floors up - they don't care," said the director.

"There's no way that Building 7 came down without a controlled demolition, it takes weeks to do the controlled demolition, they couldn't have done it in a few hours like Larry Silverstein said - it blows the whole game - concrete doesn't turn to powder unless its exploded."

"We all know that 9/11 was a fraud - an inside job," concluded Russo.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Braddogg on October 29, 2006, 12:31 PM NHFT
 ::)  As long as these major "9/11 Truth" folk are alive, I'm going to have trouble believing that a secret society/Jewish conspiracy/Masonic lodge/Rotary club/American government did this.  If there's a super-powerful organization willing to slaughter thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of brown folk for oil, then you can bet it'll have no problem killing Russo.  And where's all that oil we were promised from Iraq?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on October 29, 2006, 12:36 PM NHFT
Super-secret agencies that want to control American government ...

Try NSA ... CIA ...
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on October 29, 2006, 12:38 PM NHFT
::)  As long as these major "9/11 Truth" folk are alive, I'm going to have trouble believing that a secret society/Jewish conspiracy/Masonic lodge/Rotary club/American government did this.  If there's a super-powerful organization willing to slaughter thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of brown folk for oil, then you can bet it'll have no problem killing Russo.  And where's all that oil we were promised from Iraq?

You put your fnger on it without realizing it. If Aaron Russo, et al, were to be killed, or mysteriously die or disappear, people would KNOW they were telling the truth. Too many people look at things staight on, and this is why the devious ones succeed.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 29, 2006, 12:49 PM NHFT
Maybe the oil isn't for us.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on October 29, 2006, 12:59 PM NHFT
  It isn't about the oil itself, it is about selling oil in dollars. It is the fact that oil is sold in dollars that keeps the US dollar strong. It is the world's base currency. If oil were to be sold in Euros, the US dollar would collapse.
  We knew Saddam Hussein was evil long before Gulf War 1. It was only when he started talking about selling his oil for Euros that we attacked him. We knew Iran had a nuclear program, but it only became a real problem when Iran floated the idea of an Oil Exchange based on Euros, that they became a real problem.
  If Chavez were to start selling oil in euros, instead of dollars, you can bet we would have him assassinated, or, failing that, Bush would invade Venezuela.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 01, 2006, 12:39 AM NHFT
You put your fnger on it without realizing it. If Aaron Russo, et al, were to be killed, or mysteriously die or disappear, people would KNOW they were telling the truth. Too many people look at things staight on, and this is why the devious ones succeed.

Ludicrous.  Gary Webb is offed and they "KNEW" then.   ::)

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: AlanM on November 01, 2006, 10:34 PM NHFT
You put your fnger on it without realizing it. If Aaron Russo, et al, were to be killed, or mysteriously die or disappear, people would KNOW they were telling the truth. Too many people look at things staight on, and this is why the devious ones succeed.

Ludicrous.  Gary Webb is offed and they "KNEW" then.   ::)



Who was Gary Webb?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SeanSchade on November 01, 2006, 10:52 PM NHFT
I have friends who were either in the WTC, across the street, or in Jersey City who would confirm the fact that two airliners hit the towers. These stupid conspiracy theories really bring your credibility into question Kat.  :( :( :(
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on November 02, 2006, 12:03 AM NHFT
I have friends who were either in the WTC, across the street, or in Jersey City who would confirm the fact that two airliners hit the towers. These stupid conspiracy theories really bring your credibility into question Kat.  :( :( :(
But, no plane hit Building #7. Plenty of eyewitnesses heard explosions going off as the towers came down. Planes hitting the Towers only serves as the cover story. According to the above Russo story, I would say that this should serve as the straw that broke the camel's back. This shows the magnitude of the powers of the banking elite. In order for liberty to ever thrive, these people need to be exposed and stopped. Finally, these people should be relinquished of control over our lives.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on November 02, 2006, 02:53 AM NHFT
But, no plane hit Building #7.

The falling towers did, though.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 02, 2006, 08:04 AM NHFT
I have friends who were either in the WTC, across the street, or in Jersey City who would confirm the fact that two airliners hit the towers. These stupid conspiracy theories really bring your credibility into question Kat.  :( :( :(
When have you heard Kat say that she doesn't think 2 planes hit the towers?
Do you believe the government's version of what happened?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on November 02, 2006, 10:47 AM NHFT
Can you explain to me why I need credibility with SeanS?  I don't care.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SeanSchade on November 02, 2006, 11:58 AM NHFT
Then there's the fact that there's no such thing as an "expert marksman" badge, and where "expert" was pasted in, there's still a remnant of the top of a slash.

The link won't open up for me so I don't know the context that this statement was made in. But, if you're talking about military service there most certainly is such a thing as an "expert marksman" badge in the Army. I qualified for it every time while in the service. ;)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on November 02, 2006, 12:05 PM NHFT
I recall the Air Force had an expert marksman ribbon.

I don't see anything for the army here:
http://www.gruntsmilitary.com/rackbuilder/armyribs.php

But they do have the air force one here:
http://www.gruntsmilitary.com/rackbuilder/airforceribs.php
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SeanSchade on November 02, 2006, 12:20 PM NHFT
I recall the Air Force had an expert marksman ribbon.

I don't see anything for the army here:
http://www.gruntsmilitary.com/rackbuilder/armyribs.php

But they do have the air force one here:
http://www.gruntsmilitary.com/rackbuilder/airforceribs.php

It's not a ribbon, but a badge. :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weapons_Qualification_Badge

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on November 02, 2006, 12:30 PM NHFT
zoomies like ribbons!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on November 02, 2006, 12:48 PM NHFT
Then there's the fact that there's no such thing as an "expert marksman" badge, and where "expert" was pasted in, there's still a remnant of the top of a slash.

The link won't open up for me so I don't know the context that this statement was made in. But, if you're talking about military service there most certainly is such a thing as an "expert marksman" badge in the Army. I qualified for it every time while in the service. ;)

No, you didn't.

There are three weapons qualification badges: "marksman", "sharpshooter", and "expert". "Expert marksman" is a contradiction, an oxymoron, a conflation of the highest and lowest rankings of shooting proficiency.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SeanSchade on November 02, 2006, 02:23 PM NHFT
OK, you got me...I only qualified "Expert" then. I misread marksman for marksmanship.  :P
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on November 02, 2006, 02:41 PM NHFT
But, no plane hit Building #7.

The falling towers did, though.

Kevin
Planes hitting the towers were needed to cover the reality of the situation. Just like at the OKC bombing, the ampho bomb in the truck out front was needed to cover the shake charges that were placed in the building itself.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SeanSchade on November 02, 2006, 02:47 PM NHFT
the shake charges that were placed in the building itself.

Shape Charges... ::)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge

More paranoid hogwash...
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 02, 2006, 03:46 PM NHFT
Tolstoy use to laugh about military men and their scraps of ribbon.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on November 02, 2006, 03:53 PM NHFT
BUSH: So, what's the plan again?

CHENEY: Well, we need to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. So what we've decided to do is crash a whole bunch of remote-controlled planes into Wall Street and the Pentagon, say they're real hijacked commercial planes, and blame it on the towelheads; then we'll just blow up the buildings ourselves to make sure they actually fall down.

RUMSFELD: Right! And we'll make sure that some of the hijackers are agents of Saddam Hussein! That way we'll have no problem getting the public to buy the invasion.

CHENEY: No, Dick, we won't.

RUMSFELD: We won't?

CHENEY: No, that's too obvious. We'll make the hijackers Al Qaeda and then just imply a connection to Iraq.

RUMSFELD: But if we're just making up the whole thing, why not just put Saddam's fingerprints on the attack?

CHENEY: (sighing) It just has to be this way, Dick. Ups the ante, as it were. This way, we're not insulated if things go wrong in Iraq. Gives us incentive to get the invasion right the first time around.

BUSH: I'm a total idiot who can barely read, so I'll buy that. But I've got a question. Why do we need to crash planes into the Towers at all? Since everyone knows terrorists already tried to blow up that building complex from the ground up once, why don't we just blow it up like we plan to anyway, and blame the bombs on the terrorists?

RUMSFELD: Mr. President, you don't understand. It's much better to sneak into the buildings ourselves in the days before the attacks, plant the bombs and then make it look like it was exploding planes that brought the buildings down. That way, we involve more people in the plot, stand a much greater chance of being exposed and needlessly complicate everything!

CHENEY: Of course, just toppling the Twin Towers will never be enough. No one would give us the war mandate we need if we just blow up the Towers. Clearly, we also need to shoot a missile at a small corner of the Pentagon to create a mightily underpublicized additional symbol of international terrorism -- and then, obviously, we need to fake a plane crash in the middle of fucking nowhere in rural Pennsylvania.

RUMSFELD: Yeah, it goes without saying that the level of public outrage will not be sufficient without that crash in the middle of fucking nowhere.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

BUSH: Oh, OK.

RUMSFELD: The other good thing about saying that it was a passenger jet is that that way, we have to invent a few hundred fictional victims and account for a nonexistent missing crew and plane. It's always better when you leave more cover story to invent, more legwork to do and more possible holes to investigate. Doubt, legwork and possible exposure -- you can't pull off any good conspiracy without them.

BUSH: You guys are brilliant! Because if there's one thing about Americans -- they won't let a president go to war without a damn good reason. How could we ever get the media, the corporate world and our military to endorse an invasion of a secular Iraqi state unless we faked an attack against New York at the hands of a bunch of Saudi religious radicals? Why, they'd never buy it. Look at how hard it was to get us into Vietnam, Iraq the last time, Kosovo?

CHENEY: Like pulling teeth!

RUMSFELD: Well, I'm sold on the idea. Let's call the Joint Chiefs, the FAA, the New York and Washington, D.C., fire departments, Rudy Giuliani, all three networks, the families of a thousand fictional airline victims, MI5, the FBI, FEMA, the NYPD, Larry Eagleburger, Osama bin Laden, Noam Chomsky and the fifty thousand other people we'll need to pull this off. There isn't a moment to lose!

BUSH: Don't forget to call all of those Wall Street hotshots who donated $100 million to our last campaign. They'll be thrilled to know that we'll be targeting them for execution as part of our thousand-tentacled modern-day bonehead Reichstag scheme! After all, if we're going to make martyrs -- why not make them out of our campaign paymasters? Shit, didn't the Merrill Lynch guys say they needed a refurbishing in their New York offices?

RUMSFELD: Oh, they'll get a refurbishing, all right. Just in time for the "Big Wedding"!

ALL THREE: (cackling) Mwah-hah-hah!

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11818067/the_low_post_the_hopeless_stupidity_of_911_conspiracies/1
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on November 02, 2006, 04:11 PM NHFT
I liked South Park's 9-11 explanation better.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SeanSchade on November 02, 2006, 04:25 PM NHFT
Excellent post lildog!  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 03, 2006, 02:50 AM NHFT
It seemed to work on some people.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 07, 2006, 11:45 AM NHFT
Who was Gary Webb?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb

In short, he's the guy who exposed the CIA connection to drug running.  He was prepping another expose and turned up dead.  Coroner ruled it a suicide, but many people think otherwise.

My point is, the Gary Webb "suicide" story was trumpeted in all the usual conspiracy places as evidence that the NWO is real and the conspiracy is true!  While totally plausible and possible that Webb was murdered, what has changed as a result of all this knowledge? 

Not a damn thing.  In fact, for many conspiracy theorists, this knowledge just scares them even more into doing nothing.  Killing off Alex Jones and the rest of them would also result in a continuing lack of action on the part of those "in the know".
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 07, 2006, 12:48 PM NHFT
I agree Ian. I think it is helpful to know what is true about events like 9/11, but it is a shame to watch most theorists scared into inactivity. Alex Jones seems to want to work within the voting system, even though he knows it is corrupt and built to enslave him. Hopefully guys like him will be willing to stand up against the monster more in the near future.

BTW (in the Alex Jones voice)
the government is killing people!

I want to know the truth, but I also should help people not just preach.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 07, 2006, 01:24 PM NHFT
Things get really bizarre when you talk to some of them who embrace the idea of inaction as they believe the NWO is leading the world towards the return of Jesus.  The essentially say to themselves that they shouldn't do anything so as to hasten "His" return.

The entire conspiracy movement is disempowering to its followers, as it insists that the govt is effective and efficient.  Therefore reinforcing their feeling of hopelessness.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on November 07, 2006, 03:24 PM NHFT
Don't forget vigilant!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 07, 2006, 04:56 PM NHFT
Things get really bizarre when you talk to some of them who embrace the idea of inaction as they believe the NWO is leading the world towards the return of Jesus.  The essentially say to themselves that they shouldn't do anything so as to hasten "His" return.
Especially when the Bible doesn't mention anything about cooperating with evil to speed up the process.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Objectivist on November 07, 2006, 10:47 PM NHFT
That's it! I want a divorce.
Title: Re: 9/11 Factoid of the Day
Post by: Objectivist on November 16, 2006, 12:06 PM NHFT
The CIA probably should be disolved.

But Americans are not responsible for planning or executing 9-11. Maybe inept, ignorant, slow to react to the threat, but complicity? Thats whak-o. You'd be better off spending your time looking for info on UFO cover-ups. They're more likely (though also assanine).

-Objectivist
Title: Re: 9/11 Factoid of the Day
Post by: AlanM on November 16, 2006, 12:12 PM NHFT
The CIA probably should be disolved.

But Americans are not responsible for planning or executing 9-11. Maybe inept, ignorant, slow to react to the threat, but complicity? Thats whak-o. You'd be better off spending your time looking for info on UFO cover-ups. They're more likely (though also assanine).

-Objectivist

Ever hear of a false-flag operation? The sinking of the Maine and the Lusitania? Pearl Harbor? Gulf of Tonkin? 9-11 is the same.
Title: Re: 9/11 Factoid of the Day
Post by: Braddogg on November 16, 2006, 02:13 PM NHFT
The sinking of the Maine

1999 National Geographic Magazine investigation showed that "it appears more probable than was previously concluded that a mine caused the inward bent bottom structure and the detonation of the magazines."  Of course, many people hold on to the position that it was the crew's error.  I haven't heard any credible sources saying this was a deliberate destruction by the U.S.

Quote
and the Lusitania?

A German U-Boat did, indeed, fire a torpedo at the Lusitania.  The torpedo caused the contraband to explode, and the two explosions caused the Lusitania to sink.

Quote
Pearl Harbor?

I don't know as much about this as I probably should.  I have Stinnett's book on my reading list, so I won't comment on it beyond to say that the Japanese did lead an attack on a US naval base.

Quote
Gulf of Tonkin?

There was an attack on a US ship in the Gulf of Tonkin.  That there was one attack is virtually undisputed.

Quote
9-11 is the same.

The similarity to those incidents is the way the President failed to put the attacks in context of previous US aggression and used the incidents to go to wars far exceding proportional response to the incident.
Title: Re: 9/11 Factoid of the Day
Post by: aries on November 16, 2006, 04:47 PM NHFT
The CIA and FBI usually do a cost-benefit analasys when hiring spies. The man was surely an operative, but they decided it was better that he be free and working for evil, while informing the US of the greater operations of the organization, than taken and killed. He might have been our only eye in to al quaeda.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on January 30, 2007, 09:13 AM NHFT
Rockefeller told Russo that 9/11 would happen, 9 months before it did.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1263677258215075609&hl=en
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Braddogg on January 30, 2007, 09:27 AM NHFT
Two months ago, I was having a chat with George Soros, and he told me that it would be really warm in early January, and then it would get really cold at the end of January.  Soros said that it was a test of a weather control project by the new world order.  That project would develop a weapon that the NWO could then use to control politicians in countries that tried to defy the NWO.  I guess the test went as planned!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on January 30, 2007, 09:28 AM NHFT
I thought they already controlled most politicians.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Braddogg on January 30, 2007, 09:31 AM NHFT
I thought they already controlled most politicians.

Yeah, most.  But if the political revolution that Denis and the folks at the NHLA are planning occurs, then the NWO may have to use the threat of the weather weapon to get compliance from US politicians.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on January 30, 2007, 09:48 AM NHFT
George Soros joined the NWO?! Oh no! Now what are we going to do?!?!?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Braddogg on January 30, 2007, 10:13 AM NHFT
The most important thing is education.  Let people know the truth about January's weather.  Then, people will finally be convinced that the NWO exists.  There's been a direct correllation, according to Mr. Soros, between the number of people who know about the NWO and its power: More educated people, less power.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on January 30, 2007, 10:35 AM NHFT
Rockefeller told Russo that 9/11 would happen, 9 months before it did.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1263677258215075609&hl=en

I just watched that this morning, creepy!  Why do you think he told Russo though?

I'm sick of feeling like these rich people's toy! What am I saying "feeling like", aren't I already?  Something's gotta be done to stop all of this, but what? :-\
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on January 30, 2007, 10:41 AM NHFT
I thought they already controlled most politicians.

Yeah, most.  But if the political revolution that Denis and the folks at the NHLA are planning occurs, then the NWO may have to use the threat of the weather weapon to get compliance from US politicians.

Geesh, this sounds like it's from a cartoon. I know it really exists but remember when the evil villian wanted to take over the world using stuff like this in cartoons?  All of the protests, petetions, ect. aren't going to stop something like this.  Someone on the inside has to destroy weapons like this, but who?  ???
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on January 30, 2007, 10:46 AM NHFT
I'm sick of feeling like these rich people's toy! What am I saying "feeling like", aren't I already?  Something's gotta be done to stop all of this, but what? :-\

Exactly what we're already doing: downsize the government and reduce its power at all levels.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on January 30, 2007, 10:50 AM NHFT
I'm sick of feeling like these rich people's toy! What am I saying "feeling like", aren't I already?  Something's gotta be done to stop all of this, but what? :-\

Exactly what we're already doing: downsize the government and reduce its power at all levels.

Is it going to work though? Even against weapons like this?  I read that Russia and China have the same weather weapon capabilities. 
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on January 30, 2007, 12:06 PM NHFT
Who cares what the weather is. You can have a nonviolent revolution rain or shine! :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on January 30, 2007, 02:32 PM NHFT
Who cares what the weather is. You can have a nonviolent revolution rain or shine! :)

I guess your right but what if  "they" produce tornados and hurricanes?  Just messing, I get your point! Thanks
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on January 30, 2007, 02:40 PM NHFT
Tornadoes and hurricanes in New Hampshire?! Since when?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on January 30, 2007, 02:42 PM NHFT
Tornadoes and hurricanes in New Hampshire?! Since when?

A.  Magnetic Pole Shift
B.  Evil Government weather weapons
3.  I don't know what I'm talking about

 ;D
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on January 30, 2007, 04:12 PM NHFT
I'm sick of feeling like these rich people's toy! What am I saying "feeling like", aren't I already?  Something's gotta be done to stop all of this, but what? :-\
a nonviolent way to no longer be a slave of the current ruling elite .... ideas from Jesus, Thoreau, Tolstoy, Gandhi, and King:
http://underground.soulawakenings.com/tiki-index.php?page=Readings%20for%20Civil%20Disobedience

The truth can set you free, but you have to take that next step that has been revealed to you. :)
Most people say that they feel like they are carrying a heavy burden. I say it is time for atlas to shrug.

Matthew 11:30 "For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on January 30, 2007, 04:14 PM NHFT
All of the protests, petetions, ect. aren't going to stop something like this.
Their whole goal is to enslave you .... if you refuse ... they cannot win.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on January 30, 2007, 04:42 PM NHFT
All of the protests, petetions, ect. aren't going to stop something like this.
Their whole goal is to enslave you .... if you refuse ... they cannot win.

I agree 100% about their goal to enslave me but what ways can I refuse?  That's what I want to do but I don't understand how, maybe I'm so used to having a certain mind-set and I want to break free from it but what actions do I take?
Like when Rick goes to work they take taxes out already so I can't think of anything to do there.
My thoughts on not being a slave are this:  Learn how to live off the grid but I need money to intiate this, alternative sources of energy cost money to set up, buying bulk foods cost money, would I have to give up a telephone and internet? I don't know. So Rick would have to continue to work to set this up, we'd have to move to a smaller, lower mortgage house (which is fine with me, if we could sell the house we have).  Am I on the right track?
Cathleen said something awhile ago to me that makes perfect sense. She said to learn a tool that was in demand and trade services also. I'm pretty sure I have that right (what Cathleen said), so for weeks I thought about anything I have a talent in that would be beneficial and I honestly can't come up with any.  I don't know how to sew good, I'm not a good writer (thought about writing a book), I am horrible in math blah, blah.  I could clean people's houses though is that maybe something useful? I love kids and babies so I could babysit but I don't want to babysit for people I don't know because if the kid gets a bruise or falls I don't feel like getting sued or going to jail for something I didn't do.
I am sorry for all of the questions but I really want to learn so I have to ask all of these questions.


Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: stitcherman on January 30, 2007, 06:12 PM NHFT
All of the protests, petetions, ect. aren't going to stop something like this.
Their whole goal is to enslave you .... if you refuse ... they cannot win.

I agree 100% about their goal to enslave me but what ways can I refuse?  That's what I want to do but I don't understand how, maybe I'm so used to having a certain mind-set and I want to break free from it but what actions do I take?
Like when Rick goes to work they take taxes out already so I can't think of anything to do there.
My thoughts on not being a slave are this:  Learn how to live off the grid but I need money to intiate this, alternative sources of energy cost money to set up, buying bulk foods cost money, would I have to give up a telephone and internet? I don't know. So Rick would have to continue to work to set this up, we'd have to move to a smaller, lower mortgage house (which is fine with me, if we could sell the house we have).  Am I on the right track?
Cathleen said something awhile ago to me that makes perfect sense. She said to learn a tool that was in demand and trade services also. I'm pretty sure I have that right (what Cathleen said), so for weeks I thought about anything I have a talent in that would be beneficial and I honestly can't come up with any.  I don't know how to sew good, I'm not a good writer (thought about writing a book), I am horrible in math blah, blah.  I could clean people's houses though is that maybe something useful? I love kids and babies so I could babysit but I don't want to babysit for people I don't know because if the kid gets a bruise or falls I don't feel like getting sued or going to jail for something I didn't do.
I am sorry for all of the questions but I really want to learn so I have to ask all of these questions.



living absolutly debt free and make a plan to move to a simpler lifestyle obtainable at a moment of personal or society emergency.

here is a great song about the times we live in.   http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=18359&Disp=All

click on a "great song about 911"  (in red text)

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on January 30, 2007, 06:28 PM NHFT
yes, getting out of debt is one of the most powerful ways to free yourself from their grasp.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: cathleeninnh on January 30, 2007, 06:52 PM NHFT
It is a process. A never ending process. The easy steps first, like getting debt free, living simply, and becoming more self sufficient. I am still trying to master the level of risk tolerance that Russell exhibits.

The most freeing step yet was the move to NH.

Cathleen
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: maineiac on January 30, 2007, 08:14 PM NHFT
  Looking at the history of government conspiracy, from the lies surrounding the impeachment trial of Andrew Johnson, to the sinking of the Maine, to the Lusitania, to Pearl Harbor, then on to the Bay of Pigs, the Tonkin Gulf incident, the Kennedy assasinations, the MLK assasinations, and most recently the Weapons of Mass destruction, can anyone doubt the ability of Government to attempt something on the scale of 9-11?

Although the events that followed the conspiracies you discribe, up to Tonkin, were horrible, the conspiracies themselves  to actually pull off, were not of the scale of 911.
The government probably had nothing to do with the assasinations of R. Kennedy or MLK. 
Even though Iraq's possesion of WMD's was none of our business and no excuse to invade, many experts in many countries assumed they had these weapons.

You were wrong, I believe, about JFK and MLK, and now, in hindsight, it turns out you were wrong about WMDs.

God I love a good conspiracy thread! 8)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: maineiac on January 30, 2007, 08:20 PM NHFT

What about WTC 7?

Larry Silverstein, who owned the WTC properties and purchased them several months before 9/11 even, was on PBS a year or two ago and sat right in that chair and admitted to the public that he had ordered FDNY to "pull" Building No. 7.

In other words, that building went down like a stack of um, well, floors used in a controlled demolition.



Use the photography, folks! Even the AP stuff, the CNN stuff, the Washington Post, Time Magazine stuff! You can't fit a commercial airliner into the hole that hit the Pentagon. There's  just no way. If a jetliner did in fact hit the Pentagon, where's the massive security camera footage of it all? We have yet to see one credible piece of footage that shows a jetliner hitting the Pentagon.

That Cleveland, Ohio TV station's report about Flight 93 isn't credible? Give me a break! It landed two hours after we were "told" it crashed!!

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

Not once has anyone said, "look at their organizations they're tied to." You don't think the Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderbergers, Skull & Bones and all those other "organizations" wouldn't put their agenda (i.e., Rockefellers, etc.) forward by putting a bunch of fruitcake figurehead politicians in power to carry it out? Come on!

This is all in plain view! I do believe a lot of folks in the libertarian community have very thick blinders on. Either you're just too trusting, or just won't pry open your brain a little to question everything you read or hear.

Must be the reporter in me.


Jeebus!

Joey's been around here since 2005? :o Good post, too.

New found respect for Joey! :P
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on January 31, 2007, 06:53 AM NHFT
I'm sick of feeling like these rich people's toy! What am I saying "feeling like", aren't I already?  Something's gotta be done to stop all of this, but what? :-\
a nonviolent way to no longer be a slave of the current ruling elite .... ideas from Jesus, Thoreau, Tolstoy, Gandhi, and King:
http://underground.soulawakenings.com/tiki-index.php?page=Readings%20for%20Civil%20Disobedience

The truth can set you free, but you have to take that next step that has been revealed to you. :)
Most people say that they feel like they are carrying a heavy burden. I say it is time for atlas to shrug.

Matthew 11:30 "For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."


Thanks Russell, that link is very helpful. :D  Thanks too Caleb, Sticherman, and Cathleen! ;D
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on January 31, 2007, 05:34 PM NHFT
It's funny that none of the anti-truthers from FTL ever chime in here on this post. They stay over at the BBS where they feel more at home. I have negative Karma over there (like I care) for just discussing the topic even though I'm a plat amplifier. Clearly the moderator over there is a hater. There's just too many teenagers over there that are so impressionable that they'll ride Ian's coattails on anything. And of course, it takes lots of time to sift through all the relevent info. What's even more funny is that they call anyone that peruses Jones' sites asshats. I mean Bush and co. could admit to wrong-doing and these juveniles still wouldn't believe it. When I move to NH this year, I think I'll be done with the FTL BBS.

P.S. as another example of these chumps immaturity, they'll hijack 9-11 truth threads and start chatting about cocks, assholes, who's gay and who isn't. These crybabies aren't the type of freedom folks that I want to work with. It's hard to apply the Zero-Aggress-Princ to annoying lowlifes like them
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on January 31, 2007, 05:44 PM NHFT
I just ignore the talk about cocks, assholes, and who's gay and who wants to fuck whom. That's the main reason I spend a lot more time over here.

As for the "truth" about 9/11, I'm not even going there. It's useless to attempt to bring reason into this.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on January 31, 2007, 06:59 PM NHFT
Seems like it makes sense to be reasonable about what is the truth about 9/11.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: stitcherman on February 06, 2007, 03:12 PM NHFT
check out this great song !

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=18359&Disp=All

open and click on the red print "hear a great song about 911"

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on February 06, 2007, 03:47 PM NHFT
http://www.911timeline.net/whatwouldyoudo.ra
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: stitcherman on February 06, 2007, 04:15 PM NHFT
http://www.911timeline.net/whatwouldyoudo.ra

i like the liberty post better !   

it gives the lirics ; with each line web sites to each verse to check out.   :P

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: ladyattis on February 06, 2007, 05:12 PM NHFT
It's funny that none of the anti-truthers from FTL ever chime in here on this post. They stay over at the BBS where they feel more at home. I have negative Karma over there (like I care) for just discussing the topic even though I'm a plat amplifier. Clearly the moderator over there is a hater. There's just too many teenagers over there that are so impressionable that they'll ride Ian's coattails on anything. And of course, it takes lots of time to sift through all the relevent info. What's even more funny is that they call anyone that peruses Jones' sites asshats. I mean Bush and co. could admit to wrong-doing and these juveniles still wouldn't believe it. When I move to NH this year, I think I'll be done with the FTL BBS.
Maybe because for any complex organized plan to work it requires lots of data to be left around. No just some papers, but actual odd things like bills of sales, warehouse invoices, and other such stuffs. You make a complex story with no real paper trail to be found. Hell, we can find paper trails on Hoffa, J. Edgar Hoover, MK-Ultra, and other such government travesties, but we can't find a single decent speck of truth out of the 9/11 crackpottery. Not a tittle. If you can give me more than Loose Change and Alex "I hate gay people" Jones, then I'll listen. But if you can't then please keep your opinion to yourself or expect reprisals in kind.

Quote
P.S. as another example of these chumps immaturity, they'll hijack 9-11 truth threads and start chatting about cocks, assholes, who's gay and who isn't. These crybabies aren't the type of freedom folks that I want to work with. It's hard to apply the Zero-Aggress-Princ to annoying lowlifes like them

You're not being "aggressed" upon, since words are not physical force against your person.

-- Bridget
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: ladyattis on February 06, 2007, 05:13 PM NHFT
Seems like it makes sense to be reasonable about what is the truth about 9/11.

Idiotic government pencil necks setting us up for a fall due to 50+ years of aggressive foreign policy against brown people? Yeah, that's the most logical answer to it all, tbh.

-- Bridget
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: stitcherman on February 06, 2007, 06:06 PM NHFT
Seems like it makes sense to be reasonable about what is the truth about 9/11.

Idiotic government pencil necks setting us up for a fall due to 50+ years of aggressive foreign policy against brown people? Yeah, that's the most logical answer to it all, tbh.

-- Bridget

it is more complicated than that but , yeah could be a "means to an end".

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on February 06, 2007, 06:10 PM NHFT
Yeah, you forgot utterly incompetent.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: stitcherman on February 06, 2007, 06:38 PM NHFT
Yeah, you forgot utterly incompetent.
everything is going as planned for the people who gw work for .

farenheight 911 is a great example of that propoganda wants to portray that this messed up world is because of incompetence. HELLO !
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: stitcherman on February 06, 2007, 09:08 PM NHFT
It's funny that none of the anti-truthers from FTL ever chime in here on this post. They stay over at the BBS where they feel more at home. I have negative Karma over there (like I care) for just discussing the topic even though I'm a plat amplifier. Clearly the moderator over there is a hater. There's just too many teenagers over there that are so impressionable that they'll ride Ian's coattails on anything. And of course, it takes lots of time to sift through all the relevent info. What's even more funny is that they call anyone that peruses Jones' sites asshats. I mean Bush and co. could admit to wrong-doing and these juveniles still wouldn't believe it. When I move to NH this year, I think I'll be done with the FTL BBS.

P.S. as another example of these chumps immaturity, they'll hijack 9-11 truth threads and start chatting about cocks, assholes, who's gay and who isn't. These crybabies aren't the type of freedom folks that I want to work with. It's hard to apply the Zero-Aggress-Princ to annoying lowlifes like them
  everyone learns the truth at there own pace. unfortunatly our society teaches simplness and simple judgment calls that are kept as fact; and the door to learn more is closed for decades; if not a lifetime.
  unfortunatley the american trained mind is to make a judgment and hold a perspective on whatever subject and never take another objective look at it again.  like their ego is involved to admit they were wrong.
 
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: ladyattis on February 06, 2007, 09:10 PM NHFT
It's only the fearful and the weak that seek a complex cause to a simple problem. -- Me.

-- Bridget
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: stitcherman on February 12, 2007, 06:38 PM NHFT
  let the "trolls" give this a fresh review.

why "COMPLAIN" ?
 

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SAK on February 12, 2007, 08:34 PM NHFT
I'm in 0% denial of the truth of 9/11

I accept as fact with absolutely no doubt that 9/11 was an inside job.  This is after years of study and research.  It's not a conclusion that's easy to come to or quick to come to.  It takes some time for it to really "set in."


I'm offering my support for a solution to the problem by acknowledging the problem.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: erisian on February 12, 2007, 10:12 PM NHFT
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity" ...or something like that.  ;)

One problem with the application of that axiom in this case is the overwhelming evidence of preexisting malice.
See:http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf (http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf) [page 51] "...absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."
for example,
or:http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm (http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm) signed by Elliott Abrams, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, I. Lewis Libby, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, among others.

Then there are the many unanswered questions about policy violations and other actions which seem insensible if no malice existed. One of my personal favorites is the flight of Air Force One from Florida.

Air Force One was located within less than 30 minutes flying time (including scramble) from one of the few Air Force bases on the east coast with actual "alert birds", Homestead AFB.

When the order was given to clear US airspace, all commercial and civilian flights were ordered to proceed to the nearest appropriate airfield, not to their intended destinations. The immediate result of this stupid order was that almost every commercial flight in the air was now off its flight path, and air traffic control in US commercial airspace was reduced to near chaos. So now, after at least three known hijackings, the "land ASAP" order had eliminated the single best method of identifying a hijacked airliner, since all of them were now off their flight paths.

Then, in the midst of the worst air traffic control crisis in the history of US aviation, the decision was made to put Air Force One in the air with no fighter escort, even though one was readily available, and even though there were an unknown number of unidentifiable and potentially hostile hijacked airliners still in the air over the US, any of which might be intending to attempt a midair collision with Air Force One.

If this was all done by stupidity, I have to give credit where it's due; it was truly world class stupidity. If, on the other hand, malice was involved, it makes perfect sense. They knew it was safe to fly Air Force One, because they knew where the dangerous aircraft were in the midst of the chaos.

Troublesome little details like that just make you wonder, don't they? :-\
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on February 12, 2007, 11:44 PM NHFT
Their whole goal is to enslave you .... if you refuse ... they cannot win.

I agree 100% about their goal to enslave me but what ways can I refuse?  That's what I want to do but I don't understand how, maybe I'm so used to having a certain mind-set and I want to break free from it but what actions do I take?

Sorry I didn't join this thread earlier - The whole idea of the Alternatives Expo that we're putting on (during the NH Liberty Forum coming up) is to offer a chance to get these questions answered by a bunch of folks already in New Hampshire. Check out http://www.AltExpo.org - we're loading up our schedule with a lot of really interesting stuff. The only reason we won't have more, because they're all out there, is due to the short time schedule this was put together in. I hope you'll check out the program sessions. The Second Life guys may even broadcast them in Second Life for people who aren't in attendance.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on February 12, 2007, 11:49 PM NHFT
I'm in 0% denial of the truth of 9/11

I accept as fact with absolutely no doubt that 9/11 was an inside job.  This is after years of study and research.  It's not a conclusion that's easy to come to or quick to come to.  It takes some time for it to really "set in."

I'm offering my support for a solution to the problem by acknowledging the problem.

You've got to come hear Steve Goodale of Western Mass 911 Truth present at the Alt Expo (http://www.altexpo.org/). His talk is titled: "Fast Train Out of La-La-Land: A Brief History of Information Warfare, Mind Control and Synthetic Terror & Explanations of Why 9/11 and Our War On Terror Have Succeeded to Date"

Here's the program list, still being updated a couple of times a day: http://www.altexpo.org/programs.htm
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on February 12, 2007, 11:54 PM NHFT
I'm going to bring along a bunch of videos pertaining to the events of 9/11 to the expo, as well as the book which has proven to be the authority on the subject: "Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil" written by Michael C. Ruppert. http://www.amazon.com/Crossing-Rubicon-Decline-American-Empire/dp/0865715408/sr=8-1/qid=1171342322/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/105-9051422-0181221?ie=UTF8&s=books

Likewise I haven't gotten engaged in to this topic, largely because of the enormity of the thread  :o and my only recent move to NH and getting involved on the forum.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on February 13, 2007, 12:11 AM NHFT
BTW, one of the 9-11 Truth filmmakers, Michael Berger, is touring New England in April and help is needed to organize his appearance in Concord and Nashua, if anyone's interested. He'll also be in Keene, but that one is all set up, I think.

I'll post the other info I've got on it later, but here's what I remember:
Michael Berger is the filmmaker of "Improbable Collapse; The Demolition of our Republic" - he's the media director of 911Truth.org. Jonathan Mark of flybynews.com in Western Mass. is organizing the N.E. tour - Jonathan will be at the AltExpo in Concord Saturday the 24th if anyone wants to talk to him about helping organize and promote this.

Michael Berger will be going to Keene, Concord (still needs organizing), Dover, Nashua (still needs organizing) and Wilton in N.H., Amherst and elsewhere in Mass, Burlington and elsewhere in Vermont, and Hartford, Connecticut on his New England tour.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SAK on February 13, 2007, 10:10 PM NHFT
Ordo ab Chao

Order out of chaos.  The way to bring a malicious "order" (as if any social order isn't malicious) is by creating chaos.  The social engineers do this all the time.  The worse things get with welfare programs, utilitarian laws, disarmament, centralization, etc, the better things are for the "reformers."  Constant unrest in society means job security for the politicians!

If you don't think the federal government is malicious, look at how they handle ANY crisis.  Katrina, anyone?  I guess holding trucks and boats filled with food/water for relief back at GUN POINT is standard operating procedure for FEMA?  Cutting all the communication lines and power lines helps things too, right?

That's OK, just bring in the national guard, the army, and even the Mexican military!  Then disarm everyone, pack them into stadiums, and call it a day.


Anyhow, the "foreign attackers" ploy is as old as dirt.  They used to do it in Egypt when the people would start to see through the pharaohs.  Right before the people were ready to revolt, attackers (mercenaries) would come in from elsewhere, fight, lose, and leave.  The sure way to get support of your people, no matter HOW bad you are to them, is to give them a foreign enemy that threatens them.  A threat from an outside force instantly unifies people and throws their support behind their leader.

These operations are also known as "false flag" operations.  It's like attacking your own ship with another one of your ships, but flying the flag of another country.  The U.S. has done this 1000 times now.  Look up the USS Liberty -- attacked by our own allies, and was going to be used to go to war with the arabs.  Our own president, LBJ at the time, said he wanted that ship SUNK.  Hours and hours the attack lasted, and the jets that had been sent out from a nearby carrier were CALLED BACK IN by the president.  The commander of the carrier was FREAKING OUT.  They wanted that ship gone, and they wanted to blame it on Egypt or some other country to have reason for war.

Terrorism has been used all over the world to scare the population into giving up rights.  It has also been used to sustain political unrest.  Guess who's responsible for a lot (probably the majority) of the attacks?  The intelligence agencies worldwide.  We (USA) started Al Qaeda -- which was named after an intelligence database we ran (interestingly enough, it also sounds like "I'm going to go take a shit" in Arabic).  Nice name for a big bad terrorist organization.

Who do you think was behind the countless revolutions of South American countries?  African and Middle-Eastern countries?  You guessed it -- US.  We've been killing people all over the world for over a century.  Do you honestly think the people who make these decisions -- the people that are supposed to serve us -- value our lives anymore than they value the lives of the victims in other countries?  You don't think they're willing to sacrifice a few of us for "the greater good?"

It would sure seem that we want to take out Iran now.  We had a boner for Iraq for the longest time, and came up with the perfect "weapons of mass destruction" bullshit to go in there.  It looks like Iran will be next.  But what if the American people don't want another crazy war?  What if we don't support this policy?  Simple, there will be yet another convenient terrorist attack. Perhaps a nuke will go off in one of our cities, and it'll be blamed on Iran.

Terrorism accomplishes nothing.  You need perhaps only 2 brain cells to understand that attacking America is the most stupid thing in the world -- it's a quick ticket to getting your entire country razed.  Terror attacks don't take land, they don't take valuables, they capture nothing.  They guarantee only that you're going to get fucked -- especially if it's the U.S. that you attack.  Terrorism is actually quite unnatural.  It's only real purpose is to control a population with FEAR.  And guess what, no Arab expects to accomplish this.  A lot of people in power sure do.

If you can't see "both" parties and almost everyone in the major positions in our government ALL pushing us towards a one world government -- international government -- then perhaps your eyes will never be opened.  The true enemies of this country are domestic.  You can't even call them traitors because they were NEVER on our side.  They were recruited, commissioned, and promoted because of their loyalties which lie elsewhere.

I haven't been able to understand how so many people can so easily attribute evil to other cultures, races, ethnicities, religions, and the like.  Do you honestly think other human beings are different for these reasons?  The truth is that most human beings are the same -- good.  They wish no harm on others, nor wish to take from others.  They want to live their lives, be left in peace, raise a family, etc.  Most of humanity shares these values -- I believe they are inherent to humans -- if not all, then the vast vast vast majority.  However, there exists a tiny minority of deviants.  These people wish to victimize others and take that which does not belong to them.  They take pleasure from manipulation, coercion, and trickery.  They exist in every race and supposed creed.  Many of them resolve to work together and have been doing so generation after generation.  These types of people try to keep us fighting with one another over stupid things.  While we are fighting one another, they conquer us.

Well, I could go on forever.  I can't fight a lifetime of propaganda and programming.  Hopefully more will awake from the deep sleep.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on February 13, 2007, 10:26 PM NHFT
I hope you will awaken, too, and stop accusing us of being any part of, or worse, complicit in the actions of the U.S. government.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SAK on February 15, 2007, 01:16 PM NHFT
I was just reading about a guy named Dan Wallace.  He died recently -- at the end of last month.  He was 23 years old and died mysteriously in his sleep -- no health problems or anything before that.  It is said he died of a heart attack.


His dad was killed in the attacks, and he began researching into it.  He became out of the most outspoken activists for the truth movement.  He was the ONLY direct family member of a victim that was outspoken in the truth movement.  Apparently he just finished a 9/11 documentary film on the attacks as well.


This is all the info I have.  He's certainly not the first 9/11 truth activist to die in a weird way.  I guess with all the 23 year olds dying of heart attacks these days, you just never know  ::)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on February 15, 2007, 10:52 PM NHFT
Sometimes when a nail pops up, it has to be pounded back down again.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on March 02, 2007, 06:02 PM NHFT
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/260207building7.htm

BBC reported Building 7 collapse 20 mins before it collapses, and with it standing in the background of her report.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: stitcherman on March 03, 2007, 09:35 PM NHFT
6 minutes well done starring larry silverstein


http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/280207Perspective.htm



[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on March 03, 2007, 11:57 PM NHFT
I heard from someone just yesterday that CNN also reported WTC7 collapsed an hour before it did. Has anyone heard this or do you have a link to a clip of that newscast?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: stitcherman on March 05, 2007, 11:58 AM NHFT
    a new episode (#250) of OUT THERE TV ; news and anthony hilder.  new federal laws, 911 police state, mind control, weather analomies,globalization, immigration, pat robertson, false flags, $10 a gallon gas,supression of technology, and more .

    1 hour long.

http://www.lvitv.com/OutThereTV/playflash.php?v_id=250&state=flash

    enjoy

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SAK on March 06, 2007, 12:01 AM NHFT
So, raise your hand if you feel like just talking about it.

It seems to me that if we keep talking or taking the Gandhi -- let my ass get whipped -- route of resistance...we're in for some real trouble.

We aren't accepting their war or their national ID cards.  That means they'll need to orchestrate another synthetic terror attack.  I imagine they'll do something far worse than last time, like nuke one of our cities.  We could prevent this, but we'll have to get off our asses and make a stand (like Ed Brown is doing).

Keep your powder dry, people.  I for one think this has gone far enough.  9/11 should be a sobering wake-up call for all of the peaceniks around here.  I look forward to a revolt no more than you, but I see no alternative other than SEVERE losses of innocent American life by the hands of a ruthless and corrupt totalitarian government.

What do I propose?  I'm not 100% sure.  I know I don't condone ANY acts of uninitiated violence.  I also don't condone ANY offensive moves that would result in innocent deaths (like how they tried to blame the Oklahoma bombing false-flag op on the "militia movement").  So start this off by standing your ground.  If they come to arrest/kill you when you've done no wrong, defend yourself and help your neighbor defend himself.  This alone should do the trick and start things rolling in the right direction.  The military will be on our side, just watch out for special government agents.  Our boys and girls in Iraq should get their asses home and start killing the real enemies.

Our battle isn't about race, religion, ethnicity, color, or even politics.  It is about the basic natural rights of men and women.  You have the right to life, liberty, owning property, and protecting yourself.  Time to start exercise those rights, hold fast to them, and start blasting away the enemies of these rights -- starting with the worst.

Watcha gonna do if they try to attack Ed Brown or someone like him?  What do you think you're supposed to do?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on March 06, 2007, 12:22 AM NHFT
I prefer to stand up to the government in Gandhi fashion than "keeping my powder dry". I can actually take steps this way. I don't have to just keep talking about violent revolution. Anyone can join the nonviolent revolution .... now.

If all the peacenic talk on this forum bothers you, I am sure you can join other forums where the talk will be 100% powder and bullets.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SAK on March 06, 2007, 01:17 AM NHFT
I love nonviolence actually an am a nonviolent person myself.  I feel very comfortable with the nonviolent people here.

I would say it's a good idea to be prepared for defense, though.  Soon they may decide to start killing us off in droves.  They could nuke a city at any time and blame it on Iran.  Those 600+ detention facilities in the country are ready for action.  Care to see a repeat of the Nazi concentration camps or the Soviet Gulags?  I do not.

We didn't fight off the British by holding hands and locking arms.  Although we were allowed to win the war, the battles were still very real.  Gandhi may have won doing it his way, but I guarantee they let him win that one as well.  Perhaps it was a useful "defeat" if only to bring about this idea of nonviolence.  We never separated from Britain completely and neither did India.

Unarmed nonviolent citizens being slaughtered in droves vs. active militia members willing to meet force with force.  I'll take the latter.  I don't wish to fight any more than the next guy, but at least by fighting we are giving ourselves a CHANCE.

Edit: How many of Gandhi's followers died?  Thousands?  Tens of Thousands?  Weren't 100s of 1000s imprisoned?  He lost his wife, did he not?  Quite a sacrifice there.  It would have been morally superior for the aggressors to die instead of the victims.  I've seen enough of my fellow Americans die by the hands of our tyrannical government.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on March 06, 2007, 09:33 AM NHFT
I would say it's a good idea to be prepared for defense, though.  Soon they may decide to start killing us off in droves.  They could nuke a city at any time and blame it on Iran.  Those 600+ detention facilities in the country are ready for action.

 Gandhi may have won doing it his way, but I guarantee they let him win that one as well.
what is your plan for nuclear defense?
When we win ... the government will have let us win. It is called voluntary activity.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SAK on March 06, 2007, 11:16 AM NHFT
I don't have a plan for nuclear defense.  I have a plan for nuclear prevention.  That plan is simple -- make our move and take these SOBs out now.

Most people would like to think that humans have evolved over the years.  I think it is the exact opposite.  I think we have devolved, and there is a lot of evidence to show that.  Human children used to do HIGH level mathematics in grade school.  We have lost a considerable amount of our mental power.  Even right now, the population is becoming more and more and more and more dumbed-down.  People sit in front of TVs and totally veg-out.  It's sickening.

So, rather than view us as having "evolved" and becoming or attaining more than that with which we were created, I think it is the opposite.  I believe we were created with FAR more than what we have and use now.  I believe we were far more spiritual beings, connected with nature, connected with one another, and living peacefully in groups.  There were few deviants (even fewer than today) to society.  It may have been those very deviants that have banded together to form a brotherhood/priesthood, and used systems like religion, money, government, etc to control the populations.

The point I'm trying to make is that we're not more advanced or moral than we were before.  We haven't moved up and become higher spiritual beings.  We haven't become morally superior to what we were.  We aren't on some new higher plane.  These ideas of absolute nonviolence aren't part of some evolution.

Look at every other living creature on this planet.  They have a defense mechanism, and it is usually one of two things -- fight or flight.  If the animal can't fight a predator, it flees.  Sure there are other animals that have shells (turtles, etc) or other curious mechanisms, but for the most part it's fight or flight.  No animal rolls over and lies down before its predator and surrenders to the violent attack.

No animal except the human does this.  The human, for whatever reasons (usually fear and non-preparedness) freezes up or worse thinks that the best course of action is to COMPLY with its aggressor, it's predator.  I do not believe this is wise, "evolved," or even moral.  We're at the point where society actually punishes self-defense.  Nothing could be more dangerous to the security of all.

My problem with this absolute nonviolent approach is that it seems HIGHLY UNNATURAL.  This unnatural behavior is unhealthy and dangerous.  How can we teach another person to defy the laws of nature by refusing to run away or fight off an attack?  I think this dangerous doctrine has been put on us for a reason.  It's sure worked damn wonders these last 40 years as our country has floored the gas pedal on its trip to hell.

I doubt anyone here looks forward to a fight -- or a war.  We know what it would mean.  But I promise you that if we don't do it, and we keep going along with what's going on (or keep beating back the branches instead of hacking at the roots), we are in for some SERIOUS trouble.  I bet that worse will happen to this country than has happened to any country the past 2 centuries.  It's on the horizon -- we can see it coming.  Why do we still sit idly and do nothing?  It IS time to make that stand -- that stand will at least give us a chance.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on March 06, 2007, 11:57 AM NHFT
I don't have a plan for nuclear defense.  I have a plan for nuclear prevention.  That plan is simple -- make our move and take these SOBs out now.

Then why not start?

It seems right for me to follow a path of nonresistance to evil and one of the side benefits is that I can actually do it ... now. Jesus instructions are very powerful and can actually be followed.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SAK on March 06, 2007, 04:14 PM NHFT
Then why not start?

It seems right for me to follow a path of nonresistance to evil and one of the side benefits is that I can actually do it ... now. Jesus instructions are very powerful and can actually be followed.

[emphasis added]

New Hampshire Constitution -- Bill of Rights

[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

June 2, 1784

[emphasis added]


Unfortunately, I think the doctrine of complete nonviolence fits perfectly into the plan for a "new world order" or whatever you want to call it.  They put this doctrine out there and sold it to us.  It sounds like a beautiful thing -- it really does.  It also sounds great to have a society without guns.

My research on religions, including Christianity (I used to be a Christian), has shown me that these religions were mostly manufactured for a purpose -- to control or lead society in a certain way.  I agree with most of Christ's teachings -- they truly are an example on how to live.  However, I can't agree with the nonviolence or nonresistance/compliance teachings.  These are destructive to any life we've been given by a Creator.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on March 06, 2007, 06:23 PM NHFT
There's a big difference between nonresistance (or compliance) to evil, and nonviolent noncompliance.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SAK on March 06, 2007, 09:33 PM NHFT
There won't be a big difference for those people who are desperately searching for a firearm.

Over 170,000,000 killed last century by their own governments.  Almost all were disarmed completely before it happened.  They're working hard to disarm us here at this time.  What will follow?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on March 06, 2007, 10:45 PM NHFT
I disagree with the NH constitution.
So what are you going to do SAK?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on March 06, 2007, 11:41 PM NHFT
Having a firearm is all well and good, but since you don't know WHO to shoot, and WHEN to shoot them, what have you accomplished?

And there's much more to it than just "shooting the bastards," anyway.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on March 07, 2007, 01:09 AM NHFT
http://www.keenefreepress.com/mambo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=460&Itemid=36

bbc world coverage of 9/11 building 7
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on March 07, 2007, 08:48 PM NHFT
I'm all in favor of a Revolution--who isn't. There's certainly just cause for it, but as a good friend pointed out to me the other day--"Who's going to be in charge once the Revolution succeeds? Hillary Clinton? The American people aren't ready for a Revolution" and I tend to agree. While a Revolution is certainly justified, the sheeple aren't ready for it. We're not ready for leaders or for anarchy because we've been so dumbed down and helpless. What solutions that offers us...
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on March 07, 2007, 09:03 PM NHFT
The sheeple have leaders right now ... so people must be ready for that.
We don't have to be ready for anarchy. We can just start living it as best we can. Nothing is perfect. :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on March 07, 2007, 09:22 PM NHFT
The tides are swaying, Russell--I am on the verge of embracing the non-violent revolution. It's taken some time for me since I have learned the truth about 9/11 and government, but I am coming around. I'll see you all in the FEMA camp soon enough!

Jeremy
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Incrementalist on March 07, 2007, 10:08 PM NHFT
Having a firearm is all well and good, but since you don't know WHO to shoot, and WHEN to shoot them, what have you accomplished?

An institution that seeks to oppress comes out in the open when they seek to implement their oppression.  It's tough to decide "who" and "when" now, as we are in a state of cuddly fascism, but the lines will be far clearer in the case of open police state tyranny.

Quote
And there's much more to it than just "shooting the bastards," anyway.

True, but the "much more" is doable by individuals willing to band together and fight for their life and liberty.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on March 10, 2007, 11:58 AM NHFT
The person who said I was spitting on the graves of the 9/11 victims really should see this movie:

9/11 Press for Truth
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kYEMu48apIA
9/11 Widows questioning what happened.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lordmetroid on March 10, 2007, 02:33 PM NHFT
I refuse to believe it 9-11 was an inside job. It is obvious that i was an upside job  :-*
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on March 10, 2007, 02:36 PM NHFT
The person who said I was spitting on the graves of the 9/11 victims really should see this movie:

9/11 Press for Truth
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kYEMu48apIA
9/11 Widows questioning what happened.
That was a great documentary. It was from the point of view of the victims families and this guy who has done a decent timeline of all the media reports surrounding 9/11.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on March 15, 2007, 04:24 PM NHFT
Any comments on the newest documents?

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0315071pearl1.html?link=rssfeed

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0314071gitmo1.html?link=rssfeed

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on March 15, 2007, 04:31 PM NHFT
Perfect time for Ian or Mark to chime in :P
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on March 15, 2007, 10:40 PM NHFT
Any comments on the newest documents?

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0315071pearl1.html?link=rssfeed

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0314071gitmo1.html?link=rssfeed

Officials: Mohammed exaggerated claims [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070315/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/terrorist_plots_4]
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on March 15, 2007, 11:49 PM NHFT
Officials: Mohammed exaggerated claims

Whether you think his hatred is justified or not, KSM hates America so much that I wouldn't be surprised if he claimed responsibility for JFK, MLK, and the Lindberg baby.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SAK on March 16, 2007, 12:17 PM NHFT
He probably went back in time and assassinated Lincoln too
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on March 16, 2007, 02:32 PM NHFT
I heard he killed KEITH!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Kat Kanning on March 16, 2007, 02:36 PM NHFT
The bastards.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on March 16, 2007, 03:42 PM NHFT
I think you mean:



BASTARDS!

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on March 16, 2007, 11:02 PM NHFT
Hmmm ... KSM is undoubtedly so full of himself that it's hard to believe a word he says.

That having been said, I'm far more interested in his ISI connections than I am with his Al Qaeda connections.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on March 18, 2007, 01:38 PM NHFT
Terror Mastermind KSM is an Imposter - The Confession is Fake *PIC*

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=100966
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on March 18, 2007, 05:50 PM NHFT
Terror Mastermind KSM is an Imposter - The Confession is Fake *PIC*

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=100966

From the article:
Quote
See: http://www.tribuneindia.com/2003/20030309/world.htm

Note the heavy-set frame, the nearly closed eyes, and the grey sideburn in front of Qudoos right ear.

This is the caption to the photo of Qudoos: Ahmed Abdul Qadus (centre) is brought to an anti-terrorist court in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, on Saturday. Qadus, an activist of the Jamat-e-Islami, was arrested earlier this month with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, suspected mastermind of the September 11, 2001, terror attacks in the USA. ? AP/PTI

Now compare that person's face with that of the alleged terror mastermind, KSM:

http://www.nrc.nl/multimedia/archive/00158/Khalid_Sheikh_Moham_158759a.jpg

Unless they gave him a nose job and added about 3/4 inch, it's not even vaguely the same guy.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on March 22, 2007, 11:29 AM NHFT
"Improbable Collapse: The Demolition of our Republic" with Michael Berger

Thursday, April 12, 2007
6:30 PM
 
KEENE STATE COLLEGE - Putnam Theater and Lecture Hall
Wyman Way
Keene, NH

Monadnock 9/11 Truth

Valley 9/11 Truth presents: “Improbable Collapse: The Demolition of Our Republic,” the first film to look at the events of September 11, 2001 from a scientific perspective. Discussions will follow the film screening with film-maker Michael Berger; DVDs and other resources will be available.

On September 11, 2001, the World Trade Center Twin Towers disintegrated in a manner that some scientists say resembled deliberately calculated demolitions. The facts open for discussion include: at 5:20 p.m. that same day another building, the 47-story WTC 7, completely collapsed within 70 feet of its footprint in 6.6 seconds. These three buildings became the first such structures to ever suffer complete collapse due to fire and structural damage.

“The dramatic collapse of World Trade Center 7 is something everyone ought to see… It really does have the characteristics of an explosive demolition.” –Dr. Steven Jones, physicist, author of “Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?”

The new documentary, “Improbable Collapse – The Demolition of our Republic,” closely examines one of the world’s worst catastrophes from a civil engineering perspective. Using photo and video footage as well as expert scientific testimony, the film thoroughly analyzes the official reports, offering varied criticisms of the official findings, while presenting a more plausible hypothesis. Both government investigations and the mainstream media have quietly ignored the findings from these scientific experts.

"Improbable Collapse – The Demolition of our Republic” is produced by Michael Berger and Connect the Dots LLC. As the media coordinator for 911truth.org, Berger has appeared on ABC World News Tonight, CNN Showbiz Tonight, and Scarborough Country as well as dozens of radio appearances including a recent debate with Matthew Rothschild, editor of The Progressive Magazine.

Please help promote this event. Download one of these flyers, make copies, distribute everywhere!

http://www.911truth.org/images/resources/Poster%20bw-Keene%20NH.pdf http://www.911truth.org/images/resources/Poster%20color-Keene%20NH.pdf
link: www.FlybyNews.com
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on March 22, 2007, 05:50 PM NHFT
Local college students started up this group:

Welcome to Student Scholars for 9|11 Truth. Our goal is to help inform the public of the current happenings surrounding the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks. If you are a student enrolled at a university around the world and are interested in joining, please check out our "Join" page. Thank you in advance for taking the time out to take a look at our website. If you have any questions, please contact us. To the pursuit of truth!

http://sst911.org/index.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on April 04, 2007, 03:21 PM NHFT
http://digg.com/political_opinion/Air_Force_Fighter_Pilot_and_Instructor_Comes_Out_for_9_11_Truth_2 (http://digg.com/political_opinion/Air_Force_Fighter_Pilot_and_Instructor_Comes_Out_for_9_11_Truth_2)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 04, 2007, 05:42 PM NHFT
Every day, additional military and government people come out for 9/11 truth. The latest is Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer .

Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer, MS, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Retired U.S. Air Force fighter pilot (F-111, F-15E, F-16, B-1, F-18, Mig-29, and Suu-22). Flew combat missions over Iraq. Former instructor at the USAF Fighter Weapons School and NATO's Tactical Leadership Program.

• Statement to this website 3/25/07: "After 4+ years of research since retirement in 2002, I am 100% convinced that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were planned, organized, and committed by treasonous perpetrators that have infiltrated the highest levels of our government. It is now time to take our country back.

The "collapse" of WTC Building 7 [570 feet tall, 47 stories, and not hit by an airplane] shows beyond any doubt that the demolitions were pre-planned. There is simply no way to demolish a 47-story building (on fire) over a coffee break. It is also impossible to report the building's collapse before it happened, as BBC News did, unless it was pre-planned. Further damning evidence is Larry Silverstein's video taped confession in which he states "they made that decision to pull [WTC 7] and we watched the building collapse."

We cannot let the pursuit of justice fail. Those of us in the military took an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". Just because we have retired does not make that oath invalid, so it is not just our responsibility, it is our duty to expose the real perpetrators of 9/11 and bring them to justice, no matter how hard it is, how long it takes, or how much we have to suffer to do it.

We owe it to those who have gone before us who executed that same oath, and who are doing the same thing in Iraq and Afghanistan right now. Those of us who joined the military and faithfully executed orders that were given us had to trust our leaders. The violation and abuse of that trust is not only heinous, but ultimately the most accurate definition of treason!"
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SAK on April 04, 2007, 10:10 PM NHFT
If more people don't wake up and acknowledge the truth, then I hope the people we have so far will carry the extra burden.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 05, 2007, 10:07 AM NHFT
Quote
The "collapse" of WTC Building 7 [570 feet tall, 47 stories, and not hit by an airplane] shows beyond any doubt that the demolitions were pre-planned.

Goes to show there's dumbf--ks in the highest level of our military.  No surprise there.  Looks like Rosie O'Donnell could qualify for Lieutenant Colonel.

(http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/wtc7-430.jpg)

(http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/wtc7/wtc7_fires.jpg)

(http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/WTC7-Damage.jpg)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 05, 2007, 10:21 AM NHFT
Why did the 9/11 commission not mention wtc7 at all?
Why did the fema report (I think) only have one line about wtc7s collapse ... and that was about how their was no explanation of its collapse that was very likely?

The government has questions to answer .... not me. They did the cleanup ... they built the buildings .... they used them .... they investigated ... they have no answers ......... they blew the buildings up.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 05, 2007, 10:25 AM NHFT
The entire WTC complex was on a single, multi-story "basement."  I expect that, if you were to collapse one half of my house, the other half would probably be significantly weakened.  Similarly, if you drop two giant towers into the basement, it's going to weaken the other towers.  Then take a chunk out of the corner of one, and what happens?

As I've said many times, I have no doubt that members of the government could decide to destroy the WTC for political gain.  I am not convinced that they did (it's easy enough to goad fanatics until they do something, without needing to hold their hands through the process), but it's certainly well within the realm of possibility.  However, the easiest way to take down a building like that is simply to fly the planes into it.  The planes are enough to destroy it, so why add demolitions and such in a massive conspiracy that's sure to have leaks?  It just doesn't make sense.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 05, 2007, 10:40 AM NHFT
Why did the 9/11 commission not mention wtc7 at all?
Why did the fema report (I think) only have one line about wtc7s collapse ... and that was about how their was no explanation of its collapse that was very likely?

You're talking about the same FEMA that performed so admirably in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, right?  And the 9/11 Commission which had as one of its members the person most directly responsible for the "wall" between the intelligence and law-enforcement communities which hobbled any possibility of identifying and preventing the attack, right?

The explanation for its collapse is right there in front of you in those three pictures - first it was "sandblasted" with hundred-ton chunks of steel and concrete flying at hundreds of kilometers per hour, then it burned for a while, the fires perhaps fed by pressurized generator fuel, and then it collapsed.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 05, 2007, 11:13 AM NHFT
so why didn't they put that in their report?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on April 05, 2007, 07:07 PM NHFT
They're FEMA.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: realitycheck on April 05, 2007, 07:31 PM NHFT
Why did the 9/11 commission not mention wtc7 at all?
Why did the fema report (I think) only have one line about wtc7s collapse ... and that was about how their was no explanation of its collapse that was very likely?

You're talking about the same FEMA that performed so admirably in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, right?  And the 9/11 Commission which had as one of its members the person most directly responsible for the "wall" between the intelligence and law-enforcement communities which hobbled any possibility of identifying and preventing the attack, right?

The explanation for its collapse is right there in front of you in those three pictures - first it was "sandblasted" with hundred-ton chunks of steel and concrete flying at hundreds of kilometers per hour, then it burned for a while, the fires perhaps fed by pressurized generator fuel, and then it collapsed.



what a load of crap. you other people on this thread will not even call this govt. op on this bullshit.  3000 people dead and you people swallow this shit; nhfree what  madness....sandblasted..... pressurised generator fuel.....
here re-eat it again...........
  The explanation for its collapse is right there in front of you in those three pictures - first it was "sandblasted" with hundred-ton chunks of steel and concrete flying at hundreds of kilometers per hour, then it burned for a while, the fires perhaps fed by pressurized generator fuel, and then it collapsed.

    candy asses
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on April 05, 2007, 08:26 PM NHFT
Kat's friend is so nice.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: realitycheck on April 05, 2007, 08:58 PM NHFT
Kat's friend is so nice.

   thank you..
   when someone feeds  a lie that brings humanity down the road to one of the darkest places that humans have ever seen, i am gonna call them on it.
   did you ever consider i spend my time on this thread because i just think of myself?  and get into it with all this disimformation that is being pushed out  because i am a person who only cares only about myself?
   i put myself out in this public internet in this day and age with what is going on in society for me? come on, nails that stick there head up get hit; we all should know that,and where we are all headed if things do not start to turn around. i speak candidly, and i apologise for that; it is who i am, it is what i do.
   god bless you all
 
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: SAK on April 05, 2007, 09:59 PM NHFT
Eyes wide shut.  Watch some films about 9/11 for crying out loud.  For the first time in history, a steel-framed building collapsed because of fire.  It didn't happen once, but 3 times.  Watch the collapses -- they are perfect demolitions.  Open your eyes FFS.

911 -- In Plane Site (http://video.google.com/url?docid=-8585976043115686394&esrc=sr1&ev=v&q=in+plane+site&vidurl=http://video.google.com/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D-8585976043115686394%26q%3Din%2Bplane%2Bsite%26hl%3Den&usg=AL29H208Y2sgCLnnxrNV-rDCndxLmzNsFg)

Loose Change 2e (http://video.google.com/url?docid=7866929448192753501&esrc=sr1&ev=v&q=loose+change&vidurl=http://video.google.com/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D7866929448192753501%26q%3Dloose%2Bchange%26hl%3Den&usg=AL29H20z-LqmSyQXEZLSIDep6w480YP0cw)

Improbable Collapse -- The Demolition of Our Republic (http://video.google.com/url?docid=4026073566596731782&esrc=sr1&ev=v&q=improbable+collapse&vidurl=http://video.google.com/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D4026073566596731782%26q%3Dimprobable%2Bcollapse%26hl%3Den&usg=AL29H204aGgTRagKFa3s34t2bj3NmO1pXw)

Great Illusion p1 (http://video.google.com/url?docid=-1103725146236500421&esrc=sr1&ev=v&q=great+illusion&vidurl=http://video.google.com/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D-1103725146236500421%26q%3Dgreat%2Billusion%26hl%3Den&usg=AL29H22bLMW3v1J8XlICz971Pqeb1bumjQ)
Great Illusion p2 (http://video.google.com/url?docid=-7347491944410924647&esrc=sr2&ev=v&q=great+illusion&vidurl=http://video.google.com/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D-7347491944410924647%26q%3Dgreat%2Billusion%26hl%3Den&usg=AL29H21pp-tKSllxR9u1Ugx_DJHGgAYiHg)

Alex Jones' TerrorStorm (http://video.google.com/url?docid=786048453686176230&esrc=sr1&ev=v&q=terror+storm&vidurl=http://video.google.com/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D786048453686176230%26q%3Dterror%2Bstorm&usg=AL29H23tMS1IUp8sHes3sMYxk9sRHta95g)


NOW LISTEN UP PLEASE THANKS :)

IF YOU ARE SOOOOOOO CONFIDENT THAT IT WAS MUSLIM JIHADISTS WITH BOX CUTTERS (aka the turban+box-cutter theory) THEN WATCH THESE MOVIES.  YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE, RIGHT?  IF THE FILMS ARE WRONG, THEN THEY CAN ONLY MAKE YOU LAUGH AT HOW RIDICULOUS THE POINTS THEY TRY TO MAKE ARE, RIGHT?

So watch these movies -- you have nothing to lose.  If you have a movie that claims to prove 9/11 happened exactly how the government says, I will gladly watch it.  I am confident in my beliefs.  If you refuse to watch the movies, then it suggests you are not confident in yours.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: realitycheck on April 05, 2007, 10:05 PM NHFT
They're FEMA.

 there you go with your incompetence assumsion of fema again; and again.
  think tanks run this matrix. and i think you should know that.
  i think you do know that.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 05, 2007, 11:45 PM NHFT
the latest movie with David Ray Griffin in it is great .... covers all the myths connected with 9/11.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on April 06, 2007, 04:02 AM NHFT
IF YOU ARE SOOOOOOO CONFIDENT THAT IT WAS MUSLIM JIHADISTS WITH BOX CUTTERS (aka the turban+box-cutter theory)

Turbans are an Asian item; the alleged 9/11 hijackers were Arabs who, if, they wore traditional dress, would sport a keffiyeh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keffiyeh), not a turban. Every time you repeat the "turban+box-cutter theory" line, you diminish your own believability.
 

Quote
THEN WATCH THESE MOVIES.  YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE, RIGHT?  IF THE FILMS ARE WRONG, THEN THEY CAN ONLY MAKE YOU LAUGH AT HOW RIDICULOUS THE POINTS THEY TRY TO MAKE ARE, RIGHT?

I have watched them, and others like them. I didn't laugh; I shook my head sadly when I saw people so religiously committed to a lie that they are unable to engage in rational and objective thought.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: realitycheck on April 06, 2007, 08:41 AM NHFT
quote from kbcraig
     "Turbans are an Asian item; the alleged 9/11 hijackers were Arabs who, if, they wore traditional dress, would sport a keffiyeh, not a turban. Every time you repeat the "turban+box-cutter theory" line, you diminish your own believability."

     since sept. 11  2001 my observation of the conspiracy the govt. and corporates mainly use the term "muslim extremists".
    because you use the words or label "keffiyeh" and "arabs" it does not diminish or enhance your "believability" or diminish your ability to express yourself.
   what i have noticed your basis is built upon a lie.
   it comes across clearly.
   those planes did not cause those bulidings collapse into "small piles".
   building 7 ? something is up with that. there is something going on that we are not being told.
 
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 06, 2007, 09:16 AM NHFT
Every time you repeat the "turban+box-cutter theory" line, you diminish your own believability.
So you attack someone on technicalities like flavoraid and keffiyeh .... and then defend the federal government. What kind of heart attitude does that reveal?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 06, 2007, 10:16 AM NHFT
Eyes wide shut.  Watch some films about 9/11 for crying out loud.  For the first time in history, a steel-framed building collapsed because of fire.  It didn't happen once, but 3 times.

Yes, there was only a fire.  No planes crashed into them and destroyed large percentages of the supporting structure first.

It's a very simple failure mode.  Take out a chunk of the structure.  Then heat the remaining structure with a fire.  The steel is softened, and expands, as a result of the heat.  The expansion shifts the loads onto the hottest, weakest elements.  Those elements fail.  Now there are fewer supporting elements, and they are taking even more load.  They fail.  It's a simple cascade failure, which any competent structural engineer can explain.

The steel does not have to be melted by the fire to fail, contrary to what the "armchair experts" in the conspiracy theories claim.

Watch the collapses -- they are perfect demolitions.

Have you ever seen a tall building collapse any other way?  See, there's this thing called gravity.  Oddly enough, it's fairly strong.  When you weaken a building that size to the point that it fails, the downward gravity vector is far stronger than any lateral loading, so the building drops straight - or almost straight - down.  This is basic, basic physics.  I suggest signing up for a few physics classes at a local college...

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on April 06, 2007, 01:09 PM NHFT
Every time you repeat the "turban+box-cutter theory" line, you diminish your own believability.
So you attack someone on technicalities like flavoraid and keffiyeh .... and then defend the federal government. What kind of heart attitude does that reveal?

An attitude that is concerned with actual facts, not Truther nonsense.

And please point out where I've defended the federal government. Good luck in your search.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on April 06, 2007, 03:54 PM NHFT
What I still don't get and maybe some of you here who believe the 9-11 truth movement sites etc can explain this to me is why?

Why would the government blown up WTC 7?

Why, if they planned the whole thing to try to justify invading Iraq wouldn't they have created stronger connections between 9-11 and Saddam?

Why would they have used a missile at the Pentagon yet crashed planes every where else including into the middle of no where PA?

Why even bother crashing planes into the twin towers if they were going to take them down with explosives anyway, especially since there had already been bombing attempts made on them back in 1993?

And lastly, why is it so hard to believe that 19 terrorists flew the planes into buildings when we see others in the middle east blowing themselves up all the time in many cases just to kill one or two others?

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 06, 2007, 04:50 PM NHFT
An attitude that is concerned with actual facts, not Truther nonsense.
And please point out where I've defended the federal government. Good luck in your search.
You attack those of us that want to dismantle the government.
You believe the governments story of 9/11 and attack those of us that would dare question it.
You aid the feds and take money from them. Your actions are even more important than your debates.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: realitycheck on April 06, 2007, 07:47 PM NHFT
Eyes wide shut.  Watch some films about 9/11 for crying out loud.  For the first time in history, a steel-framed building collapsed because of fire.  It didn't happen once, but 3 times.

Yes, there was only a fire.  No planes crashed into them and destroyed large percentages of the supporting structure first.

It's a very simple failure mode.  Take out a chunk of the structure.  Then heat the remaining structure with a fire.  The steel is softened, and expands, as a result of the heat.  The expansion shifts the loads onto the hottest, weakest elements.  Those elements fail.  Now there are fewer supporting elements, and they are taking even more load.  They fail.  It's a simple cascade failure, which any competent structural engineer can explain.

The steel does not have to be melted by the fire to fail, contrary to what the "armchair experts" in the conspiracy theories claim.

Watch the collapses -- they are perfect demolitions.

Have you ever seen a tall building collapse any other way?  See, there's this thing called gravity.  Oddly enough, it's fairly strong.  When you weaken a building that size to the point that it fails, the downward gravity vector is far stronger than any lateral loading, so the building drops straight - or almost straight - down.  This is basic, basic physics.  I suggest signing up for a few physics classes at a local college...

Joe

you are so full of shit.
   there are highrise pictures abound that gut out completely by fire  and the steel frame is still there.
   next time i light my gas grill wich burns 500 degrees hotter than jet fuel and the grill grate does not melt i will think how hundreds of millions of dollars are spent , paid to people like you to push out bullshit by, people who think they are part of the system.     
     you truly have no morals. you live a lie. you think you are better and smarter than us.
   you are fake.
      may god have mercy on your soul.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: realitycheck on April 06, 2007, 08:38 PM NHFT
http://infowars.com/articles/sept11/video_11th_day_of_every_month.htm
 6 minute video to realize every 11th day of the month, to hold the truth self evident on the street on your lawn .

 turn off your television for good and tune in to the 11th of every month.
 

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 06, 2007, 08:43 PM NHFT
you are so full of shit.
   there are highrise pictures abound that gut out completely by fire  and the steel frame is still there.

How many were struck by jet aircraft flying hundreds of miles per hour, prior to the fire?

Of course, as I said, the fire did not melt the steel frame.

next time i light my gas grill wich burns 500 degrees hotter than jet fuel and the grill grate does not melt...

Just how hot do you think the flame of an atmospheric LP burner is, actually?  C'mon, let's hear a number...

...i will think how hundreds of millions of dollars are spent , paid to people like you to push out bullshit by, people who think they are part of the system.

Uh, who's paying these hundreds of millions of dollars?  I could sure use hundreds of millions of dollars, right now.  So far, all the government has ever done to me is take money.

For the record, I'm an anarchist; I'm not part of anyone's system.  I do happen to have a fairly good understanding of engineering, and I call BS on anyone who believes conspiracy websites written by people who clearly don't even understand gravity.

you truly have no morals. you live a lie. you think you are better and smarter than us.
   you are fake.
      may god have mercy on your soul.

Who is "us."  I'm certainly "better and smarter" than many people.  Define who this set called "us" is and I'll tell you if I'm better and smarter than everyone in it... ::)

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 06, 2007, 08:45 PM NHFT
you're right .... why let them sweep this under the rug of history?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 06, 2007, 08:52 PM NHFT
I do happen to have a fairly good understanding of engineering, and I call BS on anyone who believes conspiracy websites written by people who clearly don't even understand gravity.
Some of these guys http://stj911.org/ spend a lot of time studying gravity. :)

That Steven Jones guy has always struck me as a very serious investigator of truth with experience in the field of physics. He had questions about the towers and he has found some answers.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 06, 2007, 09:10 PM NHFT
http://www.keenefreepress.com/mambo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=490&Itemid=36
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: realitycheck on April 06, 2007, 10:32 PM NHFT
you are so full of shit.
   there are highrise pictures abound that gut out completely by fire  and the steel frame is still there.

How many were struck by jet aircraft flying hundreds of miles per hour, prior to the fire?

Of course, as I said, the fire did not melt the steel frame.

next time i light my gas grill wich burns 500 degrees hotter than jet fuel and the grill grate does not melt...

Just how hot do you think the flame of an atmospheric LP burner is, actually?  C'mon, let's hear a number...

...i will think how hundreds of millions of dollars are spent , paid to people like you to push out bullshit by, people who think they are part of the system.

Uh, who's paying these hundreds of millions of dollars?  I could sure use hundreds of millions of dollars, right now.  So far, all the government has ever done to me is take money.

For the record, I'm an anarchist; I'm not part of anyone's system.  I do happen to have a fairly good understanding of engineering, and I call BS on anyone who believes conspiracy websites written by people who clearly don't even understand gravity.

you truly have no morals. you live a lie. you think you are better and smarter than us.
   you are fake.
      may god have mercy on your soul.

Who is "us."  I'm certainly "better and smarter" than many people.  Define who this set called "us" is and I'll tell you if I'm better and smarter than everyone in it... ::)

Joe

   you can kiss my ass if you think i am gonna jump through your questions. you want answers go figure it out yourself.
   if you just open up your mind you might be able to see the way reality really is.     
    What makes you "better and smarter" than most people. genetics ? you  prick.  You are either working for the government or you are ignorant. Which one?
     Building # 7, the world trade centers 1 and 2 fell to the ground into the basement and you know it... Have you ever seen a building the has been prepped with explosives ? remember they always showed buildings being  taken down with explosives before 911 on local and national television, and now you do not ever see it. Why is that? Since then there has never been a demolition of a high rise building on television since. Why? Because it looks just like the buildings that were taken down on 911.... Wake up and see the truth... April 11 is comming up so join us as we expose the truth about 911. ya ever seen the movie the pianist"?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 06, 2007, 10:51 PM NHFT
realitycheck--I have no idea who you are, nor can anyone else by looking at your profile. You may be a troll or you may be sincere, but I can tell you this, that you are not going to win any heart or minds by insulting people on this board. Many of us have been posting for a number of years and have established relationships.

No matter what the argument is, use some respect. There are reasons why your abrasive language and insults have earned you a negative rating.

For the record, I am a "9/11 Truther", whatever that may mean. I've serious misgivings about what the "official conspiracy theory" dictates, and am upfront about it on my MySpace profile. I'm also involved in some activism, but try to be pretty careful about what I say on a public forum. Word to the wise--Let facts speak for themselves without devolving in to elementary name-calling. The same goes for the rest of you!

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on April 06, 2007, 10:52 PM NHFT
Yeah, I'm gonna have to side with the truthers here. The deal clearly didn't happen in the way the government said it did.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: realitycheck on April 06, 2007, 11:01 PM NHFT
realitycheck--I have no idea who you are, nor can anyone else by looking at your profile. You may be a troll or you may be sincere, but I can tell you this, that you are not going to win any heart or minds by insulting people on this board. Many of us have been posting for a number of years and have established relationships.

No matter what the argument is, use some respect. There are reasons why your abrasive language and insults have earned you a negative rating.

For the record, I am a "9/11 Truther", whatever that may mean. I've serious misgivings about what the "official conspiracy theory" dictates, and am upfront about it on my MySpace profile. I'm also involved in some activism, but try to be pretty careful about what I say on a public forum. Word to the wise--Let facts speak for themselves without devolving in to elementary name-calling. The same goes for the rest of you!


  point well taken. thank you.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on April 07, 2007, 01:08 AM NHFT
An attitude that is concerned with actual facts, not Truther nonsense.
And please point out where I've defended the federal government. Good luck in your search.
You attack those of us that want to dismantle the government.
You believe the governments story of 9/11 and attack those of us that would dare question it.

Those are both blatant falsehoods.

I have both publicly and privately cheered attempts to peacefully dismantle the government, even when I have doubts about the long-term success of anarchy.

I do not believe "the government's story"; I believe what I saw. I do not attack anyone who questions the government's story, but I do question the integrity of those who propagate made-up theories as "truth" -- no matter whether those theories are the government's or those opposing the government.


Quote
You aid the feds and take money from them. Your actions are even more important than your debates.

As are yours, and I welcome you to retract your false statements about me.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on April 07, 2007, 01:19 AM NHFT
   you can kiss my ass if you think i am gonna jump through your questions. you want answers go figure it out yourself.
   if you just open up your mind you might be able to see the way reality really is.

To sum up: "Screw your facts and data. They get in the way of my 'reality'!"
 
 ::)

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 07, 2007, 02:25 AM NHFT
You work for the feds .... you cannot possibly work against them while you work for them. You use force to keep people in fed prison. Let them go.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on April 07, 2007, 04:56 AM NHFT
You work for the feds .... you cannot possibly work against them while you work for them. You use force to keep people in fed prison. Let them go.

I would have to use force to let people go. I'd have to use force against many people to let someone out the gate. Maybe you can help me narrow down the list of who should be "let go"; would you choose the cops who beat people and tortured false confessions out of them? Or the men who raped their stepdaughters and posted pictures on the internet? The nursing home attendant who beat and raped elderly patients? Perhaps you'd side with the politicians who took bribes to steal tax money from Person X, to give to Person Y, and help them be free to continue to steal tax money and give it to the biggest briberdonor.

And now for the reality check: how many of them would you welcome into your own home? If they're discharged from prison, would you offer them a room?

I have repeatedly said on this forum that I wish my job didn't exist. Eliminate unconstitutional laws, and my job wouldn't exist. But you don't argue for that; you prefer to accuse me of evil, when you'd do nothing to stop someone from raping your step-daughter in front of her mother, and would then protest any "government" that locked him up.

How do you live with your conscience, Russell? Or do you just ignore it and blow off anything that doesn't fit with your argument of the moment?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 07, 2007, 07:44 AM NHFT
you can kiss my ass if you think i am gonna jump through your questions. you want answers go figure it out yourself.
   if you just open up your mind you might be able to see the way reality really is.

Someone with an open mind has no problem with questions, becuase someone with an open mind has the answers.

What makes you "better and smarter" than most people. genetics ? you  prick.

Most people do derive their intelligence primary through inheritance, although there are rare occurances of random mutations.

You are either working for the government or you are ignorant. Which one?

So, have you stopped beating your wife?

Building # 7, the world trade centers 1 and 2 fell to the ground into the basement and you know it... Have you ever seen a building the has been prepped with explosives ?

Yes.  I could probably calculate where to place the charges, if I wanted to.

remember they always showed buildings being  taken down with explosives before 911 on local and national television, and now you do not ever see it. Why is that? Since then there has never been a demolition of a high rise building on television since. Why? Because it looks just like the buildings that were taken down on 911.... Wake up and see the truth... April 11 is comming up so join us as we expose the truth about 911. ya ever seen the movie the pianist"?

I've seen plenty of demolition videos played on national television since.  And I don't even have cable or an antenna, so those are entirely from watching television at other peoples' houses... a statistically tiny portion of my time.  So I would likely have seen more if I watched television as much as the average American.

Any vertical collapse of a tall building will look like that, due to physics.  It does not take explosives.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 07, 2007, 08:44 AM NHFT
How do you live with your conscience, Russell? Or do you just ignore it and blow off anything that doesn't fit with your argument of the moment?
If I had your job ... I would just have to quit.
I would free all the prisoners if I could ..... even evil government paid guys who killed others on 9/11.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on April 07, 2007, 10:51 AM NHFT
"But if you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another." Galatians 5:15
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on April 07, 2007, 12:24 PM NHFT
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5224963246223576086&hl=en (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5224963246223576086&hl=en). This video was excellent and it makes some points that you don't really hear that much.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on April 07, 2007, 04:40 PM NHFT
You work for the feds .... you cannot possibly work against them while you work for them. You use force to keep people in fed prison. Let them go.

I would have to use force to let people go. I'd have to use force against many people to let someone out the gate. Maybe you can help me narrow down the list of who should be "let go"; would you choose the cops who beat people and tortured false confessions out of them? Or the men who raped their stepdaughters and posted pictures on the internet? The nursing home attendant who beat and raped elderly patients?

And now for the reality check: how many of them would you welcome into your own home? If they're discharged from prison, would you offer them a room?
I have repeatedly said on this forum that I wish my job didn't exist. Eliminate unconstitutional laws, and my job wouldn't exist. But you don't argue for that; you prefer to accuse me of evil, when you'd do nothing to stop someone from raping your step-daughter in front of her mother, and would then protest any "government" that locked him up.

I agree with you KB Craig and I wouldn't want a murderer, rapist or child molester in my home let alone out of prison; it's where they belong.  There are a lot of innocent people in prison but that's not KB's fault, he's not the prosecutor that perhaps overlooked facts on a particular case. Everyone needs a job it doesn't make them evil just because they have a job that others don't agree with.  The judgment written about here against KB is ignorant and cruel!  How about some body pay his bills then and support his family?  Sometimes life isn't as easy as you make it out to be Russell.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Pat K on April 07, 2007, 05:41 PM NHFT
"But if you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another." Galatians 5:15

Here Here, this is getting out of hand.

I make this post just knowing I am going to be sorry for getting involved.

Maybe every one can just debate facts and leave out name calling and
who is what.

Russell you are one RCH from sounding like the decider=
Either you are totally with everything I say or your against me.

Every one is on a different rung of the freedom ladder
if we start kicking people in the head, that are on a lower
rung or grabbing people on a higher one.

The ladder is going to be empty and fallen over.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 07, 2007, 05:49 PM NHFT
I am calling to KB .... who is on a ladder leading in a different direction. :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on April 07, 2007, 06:06 PM NHFT
I do not believe "the government's story"; I believe what I saw. I do not attack anyone who questions the government's story, but I do question the integrity of those who propagate made-up theories as "truth" -- no matter whether those theories are the government's or those opposing the government.

So what do you believe happened on 9/11?  I think that's the crucial point here.  You can say, "I don't believe the government's story, and I don't believe the conspiracy theorists.  I only believe what I saw with my eyes."

OK.  Well and good.  But what you saw with your eyes is incredibly limited.  You saw two planes strike the twin towers.  Then you saw three buildings fall.  You don't *know* who was responsible from that.  For all you know from what your eyes tell you, it was all a grievous accident:  some poor soul was trying to land his jumbo jet in LaGuardia, and accidentally hit the world trade center. Then another pilot went in with his jumbo jet to get a closer look, and he accidentally hit the second one.  You don't know, (going strictly by what you saw) who the pilot was, nor the circumstances surrounding the events.  So this whole "I believe what I saw with my eyes is a red herring."  I, for one, also believe what I saw with my own eyes.  But you and I have a totally different understanding of who planned and executed it.  And I can guarantee you that neither of our conclusions are based on what we actually saw.

And that's another point, Kev.  I say, "I believe the US government is complicit."  Sometimes, I might even omit the "I believe" part and just say, "The US government is complicit."  Either way, it's clear that when I say that, I'm talking about my belief.  You inserting things calling people who believe certain things to be "dishonest" (as you have done from time to time.  You may say that you haven't done that, but I remember specifically a conversation you and I had wherein you specifically called Professor Griffin a liar) is every bit as inflammatory as Russell calling you out on your job.  Because you are asserting that I am being dishonest just by holding certain beliefs and positions.  It's a form of intellectual intimidation.

Anytime you say, "I believe this or that" you put yourself out on a limb, because someone can always challenge you on it.  So in fairness, on this issue, I'm going to ask you to do one of two things:

Either:

a)  specify, in a very specific manner, what you believe actually happened on 9/11.  Name names and point fingers at the culprits.  Explain how it was not prevented, and correlate all this together in a seamless story that completely matches all available evidence...

or

b) lighten up on people who have a different understanding of what happened.  If you aren't willing to put yourself "out there" then you shouldn't be so quick to attack others who are trying to figure it all out.  
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: powerchuter on April 07, 2007, 06:06 PM NHFT
You work for the feds .... you cannot possibly work against them while you work for them. You use force to keep people in fed prison. Let them go.

I would have to use force to let people go. I'd have to use force against many people to let someone out the gate. Maybe you can help me narrow down the list of who should be "let go"; would you choose the cops who beat people and tortured false confessions out of them? Or the men who raped their stepdaughters and posted pictures on the internet? The nursing home attendant who beat and raped elderly patients?

And now for the reality check: how many of them would you welcome into your own home? If they're discharged from prison, would you offer them a room?
I have repeatedly said on this forum that I wish my job didn't exist. Eliminate unconstitutional laws, and my job wouldn't exist. But you don't argue for that; you prefer to accuse me of evil, when you'd do nothing to stop someone from raping your step-daughter in front of her mother, and would then protest any "government" that locked him up.

I agree with you KB Craig and I wouldn't want a murderer, rapist or child molester in my home let alone out of prison; it's where they belong.  There are a lot of innocent people in prison but that's not KB's fault, he's not the prosecutor that perhaps overlooked facts on a particular case. Everyone needs a job it doesn't make them evil just because they have a job that others don't agree with.  The judgment written about here against KB is ignorant and cruel!  How about some body pay his bills then and support his family?  Sometimes life isn't as easy as you make it out to be Russell.

Hello?
Is anybody in there!?!
(and I quote)
"Everyone needs a job it doesn't make them evil just because they have a job that others don't agree with"
(end qote)

Hey Rainey...
My "job" is to hunt you down, kidnap you, and hold you until either you or Brian Severance tells the judge where David is... and if you resist I'll just have to use "superior force"(beat, spray, shock, stab, and/or shoot) to bring you in...dead or alive...

But...I'm not evil...hey...it's just my job...right!?!

So...
When you assist the "government" in it's evil activities...

You become evil by association!

Go Russell Go!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on April 07, 2007, 06:31 PM NHFT
I don't think it's fair to call Kevin evil.

That's not an approval of his line of work.  But if it is wrong to do something, that doesn't mean that someone who does that wrong thing is *evil*.  If only evil people work the positions of power and violence, then we are hopelessly doomed.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: powerchuter on April 07, 2007, 07:34 PM NHFT
I don't think it's fair to call Kevin evil.

That's not an approval of his line of work.  But if it is wrong to do something, that doesn't mean that someone who does that wrong thing is *evil*.  If only evil people work the positions of power and violence, then we are hopelessly doomed.

It's my personal opinion...and I can't be the only one...

That to work within an evil system makes you either...

Evil...

or

Ignorant...

and I don't think anyone on this forum can be called ignorant...
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on April 07, 2007, 08:03 PM NHFT
Quote
Hello?
Is anybody in there!?!
(and I quote)
"Everyone needs a job it doesn't make them evil just because they have a job that others don't agree with"
(end qote)
First of all Powerchuter, your comments above are rude and demeaning so I won't waste my time commenting, live with your rude self, I don't care.

Quote
Hey Rainey...
My "job" is to hunt you down, kidnap you, and hold you until either you or Brian Severance tells the judge where David is... and if you resist I'll just have to use "superior force"(beat, spray, shock, stab, and/or shoot) to bring you in...dead or alive...

But...I'm not evil...hey...it's just my job...right!?!

What a stupid comparison, KB doesn't hunt people down, kidnap them, ect.   If your job was to hunt me down and kidnap me for no reason whatsoever your job would be considered evil.  Let me put it this way, maybe you'll understand ::), if someone broke into your home and tortured and murdered your family, would you want that someone out on the street free and clear?  What you and Russell are saying is, open the prison doors and let these scumbags back on the street to hurt more people?
I'm well aware that the overall government sucks, does evil things, supresses people; but it does not mean KB does them, does it?  I don't know the particulars of KB's life but let's just say this is the only job he could get to support his family, who are you to tell him he should not work where he does?  When did you become the same judge and jury that you imply is so wrong?  Doesn't that make you an equal suppressor of someone elses life?  
If your even going to respond to my post, show some class and don't be nasty to me for having my own opinion.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 07, 2007, 08:50 PM NHFT
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5224963246223576086&hl=en (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5224963246223576086&hl=en). This video was excellent and it makes some points that you don't really hear that much.

Wow; that's a really interesting video. It's only 20 minutes, too which is nice. There are very few videos on the subject of 9/11 that I will promote or endorse, and that is one.

The best one that I have found is "The Truth and Lies of 9/11" with Mike Ruppert http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8797525979024486145&q=The+Truth+and+Lies+of+9%2F11&hl=en

and "Improbable Collapse" by Michael Berger, media directer of 911truth.org
He is going on a New England tour, showing the film and answering questions afterwards. This is a great opportunity to bring a skeptic and come away with some great info. http://improbablecollapse.com/
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 08, 2007, 07:01 AM NHFT
If only evil people work the positions of power and violence, then we are hopelessly doomed.
Evil people are attracted to those positions .... or invent them.
The people that planned and executed the 9/11 killings need to turn from their evil ways.
We all do bad stuff, but we can choose to fix it and make better choices in the future.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 08, 2007, 07:06 AM NHFT
Let me put it this way, maybe you'll understand ::), if someone broke into your home and tortured and murdered your family, would you want that someone out on the street free and clear?  What you and Russell are saying is, open the prison doors and let these scumbags back on the street to hurt more people?
Yes
I do not believe that powerchuter shares my thoughts on imprisoning torturers and killers.
But I do agree with him that some jobs are not right to perform.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 08, 2007, 07:21 AM NHFT
... but let's just say this is the only job he could get to support his family...
There has to be another way. If the job includes using force against others, then it must not be the right thing to do.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on April 08, 2007, 08:23 AM NHFT
Kevin had a lot of time in his employment track before he discovered liberty. Giving up his present employment would probably effect the pension he has worked for for years. Unless you have worked 30 years towards a goal and are willing to give it up, I don't think you should be too hard on him.  I'm guessing that is everyone one this page.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on April 08, 2007, 08:48 AM NHFT
Kevin had a lot of time in his employment track before he discovered liberty. Giving up his present employment would probably effect the pension he has worked for for years. Unless you have worked 30 years towards a goal and are willing to give it up, I don't think you should be too hard on him.  I'm guessing that is everyone one this page.

Lloyd that makes perfect sense. It's nice to see some non-judgmental, intelligent thought process here! :D

... but let's just say this is the only job he could get to support his family...
There has to be another way. If the job includes using force against others, then it must not be the right thing to do.

Russell of course you know that your entitled to your opinion as is everyone else on this board.  Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?  In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you and he has been nothing but a positive contributor to this forum. 
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on April 08, 2007, 08:57 AM NHFT
Kevin is almost completely a positive contributer to the forum.  His sole liability is that he seems to have a burden in his heart to challenge everyone who doubts the official government story on 9/11.  Ironically, he admits that he doesn't believe the government story.  But he only seems to want people to go down certain paths or certain lines of inquiry.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Lloyd Danforth on April 08, 2007, 08:59 AM NHFT

 In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you and he has been nothing but a positive contributor to this forum. 

I wouldn't go that easy on him, he is, after all, a federal employee.  He doesn't have a right to live at the expense of  (net) taxpayers.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on April 08, 2007, 09:02 AM NHFT
Kevin is almost completely a positive contributer to the forum.  His sole liability is that he seems to have a burden in his heart to challenge everyone who doubts the official government story on 9/11.  Ironically, he admits that he doesn't believe the government story.  But he only seems to want people to go down certain paths or certain lines of inquiry.

If that is so then why can't those be the points being made here, instead of his employment?   :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on April 08, 2007, 09:06 AM NHFT

 In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you and he has been nothing but a positive contributor to this forum. 

I wouldn't go that easy on him, he is, after all, a federal employee.  He doesn't have a right to live at the expense of  (net) taxpayers.

I'm not trying to go easy or hard on anyone.  I'm just trying to say that even if he makes a living off of the taxpayers it's his choice and we're not the all mighty jury on KB's life.   :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: powerchuter on April 08, 2007, 09:40 AM NHFT
Kevin had a lot of time in his employment track before he discovered liberty. Giving up his present employment would probably effect the pension he has worked for for years. Unless you have worked 30 years towards a goal and are willing to give it up, I don't think you should be too hard on him.  I'm guessing that is everyone one this page.

Lloyd that makes perfect sense. It's nice to see some non-judgmental, intelligent thought process here! :D

... but let's just say this is the only job he could get to support his family...
There has to be another way. If the job includes using force against others, then it must not be the right thing to do.

Russell of course you know that your entitled to your opinion as is everyone else on this board.  Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?  In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you and he has been nothing but a positive contributor to this forum. 

This thread has so much crap in it, how can anyone stand it!?!

Rainey states "In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you"!?!?!

So, what I get from that is...

Kevin can continue to assist in the continued incarceration of both the innocent and the not so innocent...at the direct and indirect expense of those who pay taxes under threat of being incarcerated by the very system that keeps Kevin employed...

I'm with Russell and others in feeling that "the jailers" not only keep plenty of innocent political prisoners incarcerated, but also use aggression, incarceration, and lethal force to tax(steal) from the people to get their share of the loot.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: powerchuter on April 08, 2007, 09:45 AM NHFT
Let me put it this way, maybe you'll understand ::), if someone broke into your home and tortured and murdered your family, would you want that someone out on the street free and clear?  What you and Russell are saying is, open the prison doors and let these scumbags back on the street to hurt more people?
Yes
I do not believe that powerchuter shares my thoughts on imprisoning torturers and killers.
But I do agree with him that some jobs are not right to perform.

Russell,
I'm interested in clarifying the "yes" in your previous post and also desire to inquire about your thoughts on imprisoning torturers and killers(you know, both the currently incarcerated and those still at large like Bush and Cheney to name just a few).

Thanks
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on April 08, 2007, 01:35 PM NHFT
I do not believe "the government's story"; I believe what I saw. I do not attack anyone who questions the government's story, but I do question the integrity of those who propagate made-up theories as "truth" -- no matter whether those theories are the government's or those opposing the government.

So what do you believe happened on 9/11?  I think that's the crucial point here.  You can say, "I don't believe the government's story, and I don't believe the conspiracy theorists.  I only believe what I saw with my eyes." 

Fair enough. I believe that four airplanes were seized in flight on 9/11. Two airplanes were deliberately flown into the WTC towers. A third hit the Pentagon. The fourth crashed near Shanksville, PA.

I have read, or attempted to read, many of the "9/11 Truth" documents and watched the videos. I say "attempted", because some are just so obviously wrong that there's no point continuing to read. (That is actually a common technique for recruiting into religious cults and seminar sales: present something so outrageous that potential doubters are driven away, and anyone who remains is "pre-qualified" as manipulable.)

I believe it's entirely possible that those who seized the planes and flew them into their targets were either working for, or manipulated by, some unknown element in the U.S. government. I also believe it's entirely possible that they were not connected to the government in any way. Neither possibility constitutes evidence, much less proof.

I do not believe the towers were pre-wired with explosives. Not only would that require months of invasive work, it would be completely unreliable, because the aircraft impact alone would have too great a chance of destroying the wiring. It's also implausible; why do both?

I believe most of the "9/11 Truth" movement is driven by dislike and distrust of government. And that's fair: we have every reason to dislike and distrust the government, because the government itself has shown plenty of contempt for the public.

What is not fair is to use that dislike and distrust to believe that the government must have done this, and then search for supporting evidence while ignoring all contrary evidence. The same standard applies to the government apologists. Scientific evidence is politically neutral, and doesn't seek a pre-determined conclusion.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on April 08, 2007, 01:46 PM NHFT
Kevin is almost completely a positive contributer to the forum.  His sole liability is that he seems to have a burden in his heart to challenge everyone who doubts the official government story on 9/11.

That's not quite correct. My challenge is to people who present nonsensical fairy tales as "truth".

Why do I keep challenging? Because I want it to be obvious to casual onlookers that not everyone in the Freedom movement believes 9/11 was an inside job.


Quote
  Ironically, he admits that he doesn't believe the government story.  But he only seems to want people to go down certain paths or certain lines of inquiry.

I don't want to limit lines of inquiry. I only want people going down those paths to recognize giant gaping chasm across the path when they see them, instead of making that leap of logic across the gap and continuing on as if it wasn't there.

Kevin
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 08, 2007, 08:21 PM NHFT
Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?
For good or bad I have been hassling KB for a long time on this forum. :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 08, 2007, 08:27 PM NHFT
Russell,
I'm interested in clarifying the "yes" in your previous post and also desire to inquire about your thoughts on imprisoning torturers and killers ...
Time to set the prisoners free. :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 08, 2007, 08:29 PM NHFT
psst..... did you know that 9/11 was an inside job?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on April 08, 2007, 11:25 PM NHFT
Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?
For good or bad I have been hassling KB for a long time on this forum. :)

It's mutual.  ;D
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on April 09, 2007, 01:44 AM NHFT
Kevin had a lot of time in his employment track before he discovered liberty. Giving up his present employment would probably effect the pension he has worked for for years. Unless you have worked 30 years towards a goal and are willing to give it up, I don't think you should be too hard on him.  I'm guessing that is everyone one this page.

Almost everyone has to deal with this issue at one point or another: the desire to get rid of everything the government does, except for our one pet issue. This is even harder when your pet issue also happens to be your retirement.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on April 09, 2007, 07:38 AM NHFT

author=raineyrocks link=topic=1747.msg143047#msg143047 date=1175990607]... but let's just say this is the only job he could get to support his family...
There has to be another way. If the job includes using force against others, then it must not be the right thing to do.


Russell of course you know that your entitled to your opinion as is everyone else on this board.  Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?  In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you and he has been nothing but a positive contributor to this forum. 


This thread has so much crap in it, how can anyone stand it!?!

Rainey states "In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you"!?!?!

So, what I get from that is...

Kevin can continue to assist in the continued incarceration of both the innocent and the not so innocent...at the direct and indirect expense of those who pay taxes under threat of being incarcerated by the very system that keeps Kevin employed...

I'm with Russell and others in feeling that "the jailers" not only keep plenty of innocent political prisoners incarcerated, but also use aggression, incarceration, and lethal force to tax(steal) from the people to get their share of the loot.


If this thread has so much crap in it which by the way some is your very own then don't read it anymore.  I wasn't aware Kevin needed my permission to do anything or yours.  "The jailers" also keep murderers, rapists and other criminals away from other people and as I stated before I'm well aware there are innocent people locked up but was Kevin their jury and judge?  So let's see you can't stand people that steal, (get their income from taxes), but rapists and murderers belong free? 
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on April 09, 2007, 07:47 AM NHFT
Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?
For good or bad I have been hassling KB for a long time on this forum. :)

I did not know this, sorry! :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 09, 2007, 03:12 PM NHFT
What is not fair is to use that dislike and distrust to believe that the government must have done this, and then search for supporting evidence while ignoring all contrary evidence. The same standard applies to the government apologists. Scientific evidence is politically neutral, and doesn't seek a pre-determined conclusion.

Exactly.

I have no trouble swallowing the notion that certain elements of the US Government could fake a terrorist attack for political gain.  What I do have trouble swallowing is the notion that they used complex and wholly un-necessary methods to do that, when the obvious method could easily accomplish the task, and would only require a tiny conspiracy to pull off.  Heck, the actual folks who flew the planes didn't even need to be in on it.  One person in the right place could have convinced them to do it, and gave the order.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 09, 2007, 03:20 PM NHFT
Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?
For good or bad I have been hassling KB for a long time on this forum. :)

I did not know this, sorry! :)
It involves many people over many years ... It's a conspiracy!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 09, 2007, 03:24 PM NHFT
What is not fair is to use that dislike and distrust to believe that the government must have done this, and then search for supporting evidence while ignoring all contrary evidence. The same standard applies to the government apologists. Scientific evidence is politically neutral, and doesn't seek a pre-determined conclusion.

Exactly.

I have no trouble swallowing the notion that certain elements of the US Government could fake a terrorist attack for political gain.  What I do have trouble swallowing is the notion that they used complex and wholly un-necessary methods to do that, when the obvious method could easily accomplish the task, and would only require a tiny conspiracy to pull off.
That's what I used to think.
I didn't start looking into 9/11 until a year or so ago. But after a couple books and a bunch of videos, I am convinced that many people in/outside the government conspired to destroy those buildings and cover it up later ..... mostly to further their goals for a bigger US government empire.

New Pearl Harbor by David Ray Griffin is a good resource.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 09, 2007, 03:59 PM NHFT
That's what I used to think.
I didn't start looking into 9/11 until a year or so ago. But after a couple books and a bunch of videos, I am convinced that many people in/outside the government conspired to destroy those buildings and cover it up later ..... mostly to further their goals for a bigger US government empire.

New Pearl Harbor by David Ray Griffin is a good resource.

I guess I'm just cynical... I started looking into it before it happened.  The notion of taking down tall buildings with jetliners was not a new concept, and the structural engineering said it could be done, long before it actually happened.

Like I said, I have no problem accepting the notion that folks within the government could (maybe did) pull off a stunt like that, but the methods proposed by the "9/11 Truth" groups don't add up.  And it's just plain silly... why make such a fuss trying to "prove" that fire can't melt steel (and other such claims), when it's irellevant to who holds the blame?  If some group within the government can pull off a complex demolitions job, why can't the just do the easier thing, and actually crash planes into buildings?  And how are the magically "more guilty" if they do the former instead of the latter?

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on April 09, 2007, 04:43 PM NHFT
There are just too many questions raised by the theories for them to hold true... after all why would they have used planes in NY, another in a field in PA then used a missile at the pentagon?

Why take down the two towers in NY then knock down WTC-7?

And the biggest question I have is how does anyone expect to believe that a government that can't accomplish anything without screwing up somehow pulled off one of the greatest cons of all time?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 09, 2007, 05:13 PM NHFT
New Pearl Harbor by David Ray Griffin is a good resource.

This is a link to a video of a real controlled demolition, (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/08/real-controlled-demolition.html) and the deafening cracks of the explosive charges set throughout the building drowned out the sound of the helicopter from which the demo was being filmed, and echoed around downtown Forth Worth.

Here's video of a series of electrical transformer explosions. (http://www.stupidcollege.com/items/Electric-Transformer-Explosion) 

Here's a photo of WTC7 before its collapse:

(http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/db_images/db_Magnum11.jpg)

The problem with those couple of books and bunch of videos, Russell, is that they're leading you along to exactly where they want you to go, with a trail of carefully-chosen little breadcrumbs of fact and assumptions, sometimes ripped forcibly out of context - like the quote of the fellow, Mike Walter, who used a metaphor to describe the sight of an airliner going hundreds of miles per hour a few hundred feet off the deck to a "cruise missile with wings" - to use you as a tool in their self-promoting machine.

Quote from: Mike Walter
But I do remember using a metaphor to describe what happened. I indicated to Jamie that the jet had become a weapon that day. I said it was like a cruise missile with wings. I never imagined for a moment that a statement like that would come back to haunt me over and over again. A French author would come out with a book describing in detail the conspiracy theory and he would use that quote out of context to help promote his conclusions. I was very angry about all of this, and I remain angry about it today.

That's just one example of a blatantly obvious misdirection and deception.

Look at Griffin's own words:

Quote
The official theory is rendered implausible by two major problems. The first is the simple fact that fire has never---prior to or after 9/11---caused steel-frame high-rise buildings to collapse.

How many other buildings damaged by severe, fuel-laden fires following the high-speed impact of a jetliner were constructed in just the same way as the WTC towers, with 110 acres of concrete stacked atop one another supported at their perimeters?  He cites a FEMA report describing beams and girders sagging and twisting, but assumes that such sagging and twisting has exactly the same implications in the impact-damaged frame of WTC 1 and 2 as it did in One Meridian Plaza, in spite of radically different designs.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 09, 2007, 05:41 PM NHFT
.. to use you as a tool in their self-promoting machine.
That is a funny phrase. If you watched a presentation by Griffin .... he doesn't have much of a self-promoting machine. :)

Quote
How many other buildings damaged by severe, fuel-laden fires following the high-speed impact of a jetliner were constructed in just the same way as the WTC towers, with 110 acres of concrete stacked atop one another supported at their perimeters?
None that I know of .... not even wtc7 :)

I actually think that wtc1 and 2 were built better than the average building in the world to withstand airliners and fires.

Most people I know who have decided the government is to blame for 9/11 .... came to that position because of the evidence.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on April 09, 2007, 05:43 PM NHFT
This is a link to a video of a real controlled demolition, (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/08/real-controlled-demolition.html) and the deafening cracks of the explosive charges set throughout the building drowned out the sound of the helicopter from which the demo was being filmed, and echoed around downtown Forth Worth.
I thought many people in NYC used the term "explosions" when they describe the 9/11 collapses. Am I wrong?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on April 09, 2007, 05:50 PM NHFT
Only because they've never heard an earthquake, which is what they really sounded like. :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on April 09, 2007, 05:56 PM NHFT
The guy who designed the WTC towers seemed surprised they lasted as long as they did with a big gaping hole in the external support structure.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 09, 2007, 06:40 PM NHFT
Griffin points out that the buildings were designed to withstand the impact of an airplane as a point of suspicion.

But the fact that only 3,000 people died, instead of the 35,000 people at their desks at 9:00am on a given weekday and a portion of the 200,000 daily visitors, bears out that the towers did, in fact, withstand the impact of an airplane.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 09, 2007, 09:15 PM NHFT
The trouble with all this arm-chair theorizing is that the arguments are based upon physical evidence; evidence which was quickly and deliberately destroyed soon after 9/11. That action in and of itself is felonious.

It's pointless to argue about what really hit the Pentagon, what really crashed in PA (leaving no wreckage) or what really brought down the towers because all the evidence is gone. There is nothing for a detective to present to a prosecutor for a trial.

The murderers committed the crime and got away with it, pure and simple. The whitewash commission issued their report and the case is now closed. There will never be an official independent investigation, and the guilty will never be brought to justice. We need to accept that fact, and move on. I believe that it's important to understand the motives behind 9/11, though for us to move on.

The best resource I have found that talks about 9/11 is a book written by Michael C Ruppert, a former LAPD officer, called "Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil"
http://www.amazon.com/Crossing-Rubicon-Decline-American-Empire/dp/0865715408/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-3130915-8678565?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176167118&sr=8-1

The book description: "Crossing the Rubicon is unique not only for its case-breaking examination of 9/11, but for the breadth and depth of its world picture-an interdisciplinary analysis of petroleum, geopolitics, narcotraffic, intelligence and militarism-without which 9/11 cannot be understood.

The US manufacturing sector has been mostly replaced by speculation on financial data whose underlying economic reality is a dark secret. Hundreds of billions of dollars in laundered drug money flow through Wall Street each year from opium and coca fields maintained by CIA-sponsored warlords and US-backed covert paramilitary violence. America's global dominance depends on a continually turning mill of guns, drugs, oil and money. Oil and natural gas-the fuels that make economic growth possible-are subsidized by American military force and foreign lending.

In reality, 9/11 and the resulting "war on terror" are parts of a massive authoritarian response to an emerging economic crisis of unprecedented scale. Peak Oil-the beginning of the end for our industrial civilization-is driving the elites of American power to implement unthinkably draconian measures of repression, warfare and population control. Crossing the Rubicon is more than a story. It is a map of the perilous terrain through which, together and alone, we are all now making our way."



The 600+ page book is summed up in the words of the author:

"This is a detective story that gets to the innermost core of the 9/11 attacks. It places 9/11 at the center of a desperate new America, created by specific, named individuals in preparation for Peak Oil: an economic crisis like nothing the world has ever seen. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 were accomplished through an amazing orchestration of logistics and personnel. Crossing the Rubicon discovers and identifies the key suspects and persons of interest - finding some of them in the highest echelons of American government - by showing how they acted in concert to guarantee that the attacks occurred and produced the desired result.

"In this book the author makes several key points:
1. I name Vice President Richard Cheney as the prime suspect in the mass murders of 9/11 and will establish that, not only was he a planner in the attacks, but also that on the day of the attacks he was running a completely separate Command, Control and Communications system which was superceding any orders being issued by the FAA, the Pentagon, or the White House Situation Room;

2. I establish conclusively that in May of 2001, by presidential order, Richard Cheney was put in direct command and control of all wargame and field exercise training and scheduling through several agencies, especially FEMA. This also extended to all of the conflicting and overlapping NORAD drills -- some involving hijack simulations -- taking place on that day.

3. I demonstrate that the TRIPOD II exercise being set up on Sept. 10th in Manhattan was directly connected to Cheney's role in the above.

4. I also prove conclusively that a number of public officials, at the national and New York City levels, including then-Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, were aware that flight 175 was en route to lower Manhattan for 20 minutes and did nothing to order the evacuation of, or warn the occupants of the South Tower. One military officer was forced to leave his post in the middle of the attacks and place a private call to his brother - who worked at the WTC - warning him to get out. That was because no other part of the system was taking action.

5. I also show that the Israeli and British governments acted as partners with the highest levels of the American government to help in the preparation and, very possibly, the actual execution of the attacks."

"There is more reason to be afraid of not facing the evidence in this book than of facing what is in it.""

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 10, 2007, 01:06 PM NHFT
It's pointless to argue about what really hit the Pentagon,

We have an eyewitness who states that it was an American Airlines jet, and a list of 64 passengers and crew from American flight 77 and first-person accounts of two phone calls made from the plane, and we have people postulating that the video camera footage and photos of the scene were faked.  Which explanation is more credible and likely?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on April 10, 2007, 01:25 PM NHFT
Don't forget the hundreds of rescue workers who pulled airplane parts out of the Pentagon. I suppose they're ALL fake rescue workers?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on April 10, 2007, 06:28 PM NHFT
It's pointless to argue about what really hit the Pentagon,

We have an eyewitness who states that it was an American Airlines jet, and a list of 64 passengers and crew from American flight 77 and first-person accounts of two phone calls made from the plane, and we have people postulating that the video camera footage and photos of the scene were faked.  Which explanation is more credible and likely?

<cough> STRAWMAN! <cough>
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 10, 2007, 10:18 PM NHFT
I think that my point has been dismissed. Oh well  ::)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 11, 2007, 10:10 AM NHFT
I think that my point has been dismissed. Oh well  ::)

(http://www.antiquark.com/entropyzone/wallpaper/no_bullshit_tn.jpg)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 11, 2007, 09:37 PM NHFT
That is a completely inappropriate response to a serious posting. Since you apparently can't factually contradict anything I said, though I will interpret it as an immature and amateurish lashing out against an idea which causes cognitive dissonance in your psyche.

The events preceding, including and after 9/11 are far too serious to be relegated to this phony moonbat conspiracy theory-vs-mainstream media showdown.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/02_11_02_lucy.html details a time-line of events; the veracity of which the author backed a $1,000 reward to anyone who could disprove any part of it. Get to work, skeptics!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Atlas on April 12, 2007, 12:04 AM NHFT
That is a completely inappropriate response to a serious posting. Since you apparently can't factually contradict anything I said, though I will interpret it as an immature and amateurish lashing out against an idea which causes cognitive dissonance in your psyche.

The events preceding, including and after 9/11 are far too serious to be relegated to this phony moonbat conspiracy theory-vs-mainstream media showdown.

Ouch!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 12, 2007, 11:09 AM NHFT
The events preceding, including and after 9/11 are far too serious to be relegated to this phony moonbat conspiracy theory-vs-mainstream media showdown.

You're right.  So it's time to set aside the moonbat conspiracy theories, such as the one expressed in the title of this thread.

Quote from: Chicago Fire Chief D.J. Swenie, [b]1858[/b]
No ... building of any kind in which inflammable goods are stored should ever exceed 125 feet in height, and might with advantage be much less. This is not because we cannot throw water high enough. But suppose such goods are stored in a twelve-story building; a fire breaks out, say on the sixth floor, and gets to burning furiously. The heat ascends and causes the pillars and beams to expand.  The expansion first raises all that part of the building above where it takes place.  At the same time the whole weight above continues on the expanded metal. Before you know where you are something is going to give, and what will be the results? They will be too fearful to contemplate.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on April 12, 2007, 11:13 AM NHFT
(http://www.rense.com/general76/CNNphoto.jpg)

Well there you go, proof doesn't get more solid then that.   ::)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 12, 2007, 08:45 PM NHFT
As interesting as arguments can be, I simply don't have the time or energy to try and convince those who choose to be willfully ignorant of easily verifiable facts. I'm not referring to anyone in particular, but in a general sense. My energies are best spent working with those who are already on the same page, or working to become so.

I've put out some good tools and maps for us to use; take them or leave them. Another great opportunity is happening with the NE tour of Michael Berger, media director of 911truth.org and his film "Improbable Collapse: The Demolition of Our Republic"
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=7647.0

We're trying to promote the heck out of it and would welcome any support. Sincere skeptics can come and watch the film, and have the opportunity to ask questions of a real expert on 9/11. Hope to see you there!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on April 12, 2007, 09:18 PM NHFT
(http://www.rense.com/general76/CNNphoto.jpg)

Well there you go, proof doesn't get more solid then that.   ::)

Look! It's a bird, it's a plane, it's Superman!  (sorry I couldn't help myself).
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 13, 2007, 10:19 AM NHFT
As interesting as arguments can be, I simply don't have the time or energy to try and convince those who choose to be willfully ignorant of easily verifiable facts. I'm not referring to anyone in particular, but in a general sense.

How fascinating, because I feel exactly the same way about the Truthers.

I'd appreciate it if you name one easily-verifiable fact that you have in mind.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 13, 2007, 11:25 AM NHFT
mvpel, the best way to get to a real authority to have the discussion or disagreements with is to come see Michael Berger, media coordinator of 911Truth.org. He's touring New England to show his video "Improbable Collapse; The Demolition of Our Republic" with stops still to come in Concord on the 18th, Dover on the 19th and Wilton on the 22nd. I believe all these appearances are free of charge (donations for costs appreciated).

The sites describing the tour are: http://911truth.org/article.php?story=2007041075216573, http://improbablecollapse.com. The site for the Concord event and future local events is: http://MerrimackValley911Truth.org and a regional one for all Northeast organizations is: http://NE911Truth.org.

Again, if you are "911 curious" and want to hear some info from one of the most studied people in the country on the subject, come see Michael Berger in Concord at the Best Western Motel next Wednesday the 18th and ask all the questions you want after the film.

It should be really interesting. Here's a comment from someone after the first appearance on the tour:
Quote
"Mike Berger's program at U of Hartford, Holyoke, Northampton has been quite impressive.. in depth.. I expected MB to be one decent person, but hadn't expected the depth of his research and knowledge in connecting many of the dots around the events of 9/11."

So, again, this is the opportunity to find out the information independent investigators have been able to dig up in the "information war" against the propaganda barrage from the state-sponsored packaged solution to what really happened on 9/11. Get your info from the experts - come to the April 18th event with Michael Berger in Concord. Then if you still have questions, see him again in Dover on the 19th and in Wilton on the 22nd.

Hope to see you in Concord, mvpel, and hear what Michael Berger has to say in answer to your questions - you never know, you might learn something that would change your mind.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 13, 2007, 01:05 PM NHFT
How about you, can you name one of the easily-verifiable facts that Insurgent referred to?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on April 13, 2007, 02:06 PM NHFT
Wow, that was a nicely done sales pitch. But it hardly answered the question.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on April 13, 2007, 02:20 PM NHFT
I think we can all agree, no matter who was behind 9-11, what the government has done in reaction to it is unconscionable.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 13, 2007, 02:47 PM NHFT
I think we can all agree, no matter who was behind 9-11, what the government has done in reaction to it is unconscionable.

Is there anything the government does that isn'? :o

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on April 13, 2007, 10:15 PM NHFT
As interesting as arguments can be, I simply don't have the time or energy to try and convince those who choose to be willfully ignorant of easily verifiable facts. I'm not referring to anyone in particular, but in a general sense.

How fascinating, because I feel exactly the same way about the Truthers.

I'd appreciate it if you name one easily-verifiable fact that you have in mind.

OK, I'll bite:  Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan's ISI (intelligence service) arranged for $100,000 to be wired to Mohammed Atta in the days preceding the 9/11 attacks.  After this was brought to the attention of the Bush Administration, the Bush Administration failed to request Mr. Ahmad's extradition.

Instead, we attacked Saddam Hussein.

Right now, Mr. Ahmad is living free as a bird in Pakistan, despite being clearly implicated in the events of 9/11.  On the day of 9/11, Mr. Ahmad was in America, meeting with the head of the Senate and House intelligence committees.  Earlier in that week he had met with Bush Administration officials.

Interesting company Mr. Bush keeps.

Whatever happened to seeking out all known terrorists and bringing them to justice?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 14, 2007, 02:52 AM NHFT
Just got back from an evening over in Brattleboro and got to be involved in the discussion after dinner with Mike Berger. If you question the 9-11 conventional story or totally buy it, you've got to hear this guy - he really knows his stuff.

Concord on Wednesday night - be there to be in the dialog.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 14, 2007, 02:57 AM NHFT
One of the most damning pieces of evidence is the inside trading that happened with many stocks, particularly on United and American Airlines stocks, in the days immediately preceding 9/11.

Some good reports that line up the dots:

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/10_09_01_krongard.html

http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/stockputs.html

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/12_06_01_death_profits_pt1.html
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 14, 2007, 08:36 PM NHFT
Caleb & Insurgent...

I believe mvpel was referring to "facts" regarding the theory that the various buildings fell due to some factor other the aircraft impacts.

I don't think either he or I were questioning the possibility that the government could be responsible, but rather the methodology they might have used...

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 14, 2007, 10:37 PM NHFT
Insurgent often makes the point that it's very difficult or almost pointless to argue about how the collapse occurred, since the physical evidence was spirited away (and hence nothing to use as evidence in court) and there's hardly anything to go on but video evidence.

In Improbable Collapse, (this Wednesday in Concord you'll be able to cross-examine the researcher and filmmaker behind it), Steven Jones (physics prof. at BYU) details his findings on one piece of physical evidence that did get out of the collapse site. Michael Berger (the filmmaker) told us Friday night that he was instrumental in getting that physical sample to Jones. It's little to go on, again since the physical evidence was sequestered from forensic examiners and taken off and melted down offshore (That's one item that raises suspicion, of course - why would "they" make darn sure no one COULD examine the physical evidence?)

So, this is the fascination with the collapses - can researchers solve the mystery given only the  remaining documentary evidence (and one tiny physical specimen that Jones got his hands on)? One other remaining documentary piece is the seismological reports. They eyewitness reports of sounds (of explosions?) is also very interesting and one of the most powerful eyewitnesses is William Rodriquez, who was a maintenance man in the WTCs 1 & 2. He reports many interesting observations (eg: explosions in the basement) - I'm sure Mike Berger can be questioned on that Wednesday night.

I can't emphasize enough how valuable an appearance this is for those in our area who are "9-11 curious" - Wednesday night in Concord at the Best Western. Come at 6PM to help set up, movie starts at 7PM, Q&A with Mike Berger afterwards. If you're truly a knowledge-seeker, this is a HUGE opportunity. Even if you are a skeptic and arguer, it's still an opportunity - to prove "9-11 Truthers" wrong by the force of your information and strong arguments, or to become better informed in your opinions by gleaning information from a top researcher. Methinks this forum (the movie showing / Q&A) would be THE place to become better informed to argue, if that is your choice of methods to deal with one of the greatest horrors and mysteries that we have ever seen and has shaped our world in the most profound way ("...the Demolition of Our Republic" as Michael Berger says).

On top of all this, it's free (donations appreciated to cover costs) and is a way to outreach to the larger community that is concerned about justice and loss of liberties in America. Be there or be (taken less seriously in this discussion) square!

Info on the Wednesday night showing in Concord (Best Western): Merrimack Valley 911 Truth: http://MerrimackValley911Truth.org - still have more questions for Mike Berger? ---

Info on the Thursday night showing in Dover (Friends Meeting House): Northern New England 9/11 Truth: http://9-11.meetup.com/284/ - still more questions? ---

Info on the Sunday afternoon showing in Wilton (Wilton Town Hall Theater - big screen): http://www.wiltontownhalltheatre.com/

There are other area showings if you have scheduling issues or want to meet and network with other folks. Cambridge at the Democracy Center is always a good time. We could meet up and carpool down for that Saturday evening. Info: http://boston911truth.org/ [Note: libertarians afraid of the word "democracy" - stay away!  ;) ] - also check out the films the Boston Sons of Liberty are showing there on the 29th of April - another good chance to carpool down together and have a good time networking with the Boston group.

Don't be square and just sit at the tube and argue - go to the vid, meet the filmmaker, ask questions, become better informed and aware.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 14, 2007, 10:42 PM NHFT
BTW, there is talk of a big 9-11 Truth conference in Manchester this year on September 11th. Mike Berger may know more about it to share with us - I think it's still in the planning stages, though. The idea would be to be in town and bird-dog presidential candidates about re-opening the investigation.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 14, 2007, 10:48 PM NHFT
Insurgent often makes the point that it's very difficult or almost pointless to argue about how the collapse occurred, since the physical evidence was spirited away (and hence nothing to use as evidence in court) and there's hardly anything to go on but video evidence.

People sure seem to have filled that void with a lot of notions of what happened...

I can't emphasize enough how valuable an appearance this is for those in our area who are "9-11 curious" - Wednesday night in Concord at the Best Western. Come at 6PM to help set up, movie starts at 7PM, Q&A with Mike Berger afterwards. If you're truly a knowledge-seeker, this is a HUGE opportunity. Even if you are a skeptic and arguer, it's still an opportunity - to prove "9-11 Truthers" wrong by the force of your information and strong arguments, or to become better informed in your opinions by gleaning information from a top researcher. Methinks this forum (the movie showing / Q&A) would be THE place to become better informed to argue, if that is your choice of methods to deal with one of the greatest horrors and mysteries that we have ever seen and has shaped our world in the most profound way ("...the Demolition of Our Republic" as Michael Berger says).

I think I would be a lot more inclined to attend something like this if I thought there would be anything new to hear.  I wouldn't want to spend my time, just to listen to arguments that were old when they were new.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 15, 2007, 12:59 AM NHFT
Insurgent often makes the point that it's very difficult or almost pointless to argue about how the collapse occurred, since the physical evidence was spirited away (and hence nothing to use as evidence in court) and there's hardly anything to go on but video evidence.

People sure seem to have filled that void with a lot of notions of what happened...

I think it's pretty natural to speculate on what did happen, if one is not inclined for some reason or other to accept the standard story. I believe it's a bit of postulating a theory to explain observations, then following that with research to determine if that theory can be supported. There are some who are unscientific in their approach due to lack of training, but the movie coming up Wed. night, IC, interviews scientists, some involved with Scholars for 911 Truth (http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/), and doesn't venture into any wild-eyed speculation.

Some of the video evidence leads to some interesting speculation, for example, the appearance of reddish-orange hot molten metal pouring from the side of the building (WTC2, I believe) at a high level (Jones and others believe it to be molten metal from thermite/thermate cutter charges) or the explosive puffs jetting out of windows progressively from floors way below the collapse zone. Makes you wonder, eh?

I can't emphasize enough how valuable an appearance this is for those in our area who are "9-11 curious" - Wednesday night in Concord at the Best Western. Come at 6PM to help set up, movie starts at 7PM, Q&A with Mike Berger afterwards. If you're truly a knowledge-seeker, this is a HUGE opportunity. Even if you are a skeptic and arguer, it's still an opportunity - to prove "9-11 Truthers" wrong by the force of your information and strong arguments, or to become better informed in your opinions by gleaning information from a top researcher. Methinks this forum (the movie showing / Q&A) would be THE place to become better informed to argue, if that is your choice of methods to deal with one of the greatest horrors and mysteries that we have ever seen and has shaped our world in the most profound way ("...the Demolition of Our Republic" as Michael Berger says).

I think I would be a lot more inclined to attend something like this if I thought there would be anything new to hear.  I wouldn't want to spend my time, just to listen to arguments that were old when they were new.

Joe

I believe what Mike Berger offers is very up-to-date research, so not a lot of "old" at this upcoming event. You'll probably be hearing a lot of stuff that is "hot off the press." Given that the 9-11 attacks are the nexus of the huge attacks on our liberties ("after 9/11, everything is different"), it's one of the most important things for libertarians to come to grips with. If it was an inside job, for example, it would be important to find out who were the insiders and bring them to justice. This would, of course, shake a lot of trees - as the possibility of it being an inside job shakes a lot of peoples' psyches. I'm still with the philosophy of "Ye shall know the truth and the truth will set you free." It will be worth your time, trust me.

Jack
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 15, 2007, 01:11 AM NHFT
How about you, can you name one of the easily-verifiable facts that Insurgent referred to?

I guess I'm not really involved in the dialog that you and insurgent are having. I'm trying to promote the "Ye shall know the truth..." thing by helping make the connection between the curious (us) and the well-informed (Mike Berger). I look at his upcoming visit as a tremendous opportunity for the curious. I haven't read a lot of the back messages on this thread, so not sure what you and insurgent's beefs are.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 15, 2007, 09:49 AM NHFT
People sure seem to have filled that void with a lot of notions of what happened...
I think it's pretty natural to speculate on what did happen, if one is not inclined for some reason or other to accept the standard story. I believe it's a bit of postulating a theory to explain observations, then following that with research to determine if that theory can be supported. There are some who are unscientific in their approach due to lack of training, but the movie coming up Wed. night, IC, interviews scientists, some involved with Scholars for 911 Truth (http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/), and doesn't venture into any wild-eyed speculation.

It's a large leap from distrusting the government, to saying that "fire has never melted steel, in the history of the world" and such nonsense.

Isn't "Scholars for 911 Truth" the group that claims that they are right and sctructural engineers are wrong, because every structural engineer in the country is secretly working for the government?  Hardly scientific...

I think I would be a lot more inclined to attend something like this if I thought there would be anything new to hear.  I wouldn't want to spend my time, just to listen to arguments that were old when they were new.
I believe what Mike Berger offers is very up-to-date research, so not a lot of "old" at this upcoming event. You'll probably be hearing a lot of stuff that is "hot off the press." Given that the 9-11 attacks are the nexus of the huge attacks on our liberties ("after 9/11, everything is different"), it's one of the most important things for libertarians to come to grips with. If it was an inside job, for example, it would be important to find out who were the insiders and bring them to justice. This would, of course, shake a lot of trees - as the possibility of it being an inside job shakes a lot of peoples' psyches. I'm still with the philosophy of "Ye shall know the truth and the truth will set you free." It will be worth your time, trust me.

I already know that they're using the September 11th attacks to justify oppression, so why should I attend this?

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on April 15, 2007, 09:53 AM NHFT
It's the latest in a long, long line of excuses by which the government justifies its oppression of people. It wasn't necessary for the government to cause, enable, or look the other way. They get the same benefit, the oppression of We the People, regardless of whether they caused 9/11 or were entirely blindsided by it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 15, 2007, 11:36 AM NHFT
"I already know that they're using the September 11th attacks to justify oppression, so why should I attend this?"

Joe


You should come to this because there will be new information presented by experts that you likely haven't considered before.

I believe in this enough that I'll even offer a money-back guarantee. Since I booked the conference room and paid for it, I can do this! If you attend and feel it was a complete waste of time, I'll give you your $5 back  Same goes for everyone else :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 15, 2007, 12:36 PM NHFT
You should come to this because there will be new information presented by experts that you likely haven't considered before.

Why is that "likely"?

I believe in this enough that I'll even offer a money-back guarantee. Since I booked the conference room and paid for it, I can do this! If you attend and feel it was a complete waste of time, I'll give you your $5 back  Same goes for everyone else :)

My time is worth more than $5.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 15, 2007, 03:38 PM NHFT
I learned a lot from the film, and I've been following information related to 9/11 since day 1. The scientists in the film present their findings in an approachable manner. Michael Berger, the film maker is also a wealth of knowledge about 9/11 and world events. I had the chance to finally meet him last week and was very impressed with him. So many people who talk about 9/11 come off as moonbats, but his credibility is impeccable.

Anyway, I'm not going to argue the point. I regret having got into the argument with mvpel because it ultimately only caused us to become angry with each other. I'm presenting this event as a wonderful time to perhaps learn something and interact with other people who have questions about 9/11  :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 15, 2007, 10:30 PM NHFT
Anyway, I'm not going to argue the point.

You suck because you won't play the arguing game anymore!!!

What do you think you're trying to do? be effective, or something?  ;D

Seriously, now... I've heard recommendations from 2 or 3 people in the last week to watch Oil, Smoke and Mirrors - they've all said it ties a lot of things together: home page: http://www.oilsmokeandmirrors.com/, google video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8677389869548020370. I'd watch it right now, but I have to sleep sometime!

Maybe MV911T can show that next to the assembled crowds (no arguers invited this time). Wonder if this filmmaker will go on tour?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 15, 2007, 10:45 PM NHFT
OK, I'll bite:  Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan's ISI (intelligence service) arranged for $100,000 to be wired to Mohammed Atta in the days preceding the 9/11 attacks.  After this was brought to the attention of the Bush Administration, the Bush Administration failed to request Mr. Ahmad's extradition.

Instead, we attacked Saddam Hussein.

Right now, Mr. Ahmad is living free as a bird in Pakistan, despite being clearly implicated in the events of 9/11.  On the day of 9/11, Mr. Ahmad was in America, meeting with the head of the Senate and House intelligence committees.  Earlier in that week he had met with Bush Administration officials.

Okay, so how does that set of facts prove that the towers were deliberately demolished by government operatives as suggested in the title and content of "Improbable Collapse," or any kind of Bush Administration complicity in the 9/11 attack, instead of just being an example of craven political expediency in the face of the extremely thorny prospect of criminally extraditing the chief of intelligence of a nominally-allied (SEATO, CENTO), nuclear-armed nation while we're trying to cultivate and repair post-Cold-War relations in the wake of a 40-year partnership in containing Soviet expansionism?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 15, 2007, 11:12 PM NHFT
OK, I'll bite:  Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan's ISI (intelligence service) arranged for $100,000 to be wired to Mohammed Atta in the days preceding the 9/11 attacks.  After this was brought to the attention of the Bush Administration, the Bush Administration failed to request Mr. Ahmad's extradition.

Instead, we attacked Saddam Hussein.

Right now, Mr. Ahmad is living free as a bird in Pakistan, despite being clearly implicated in the events of 9/11.  On the day of 9/11, Mr. Ahmad was in America, meeting with the head of the Senate and House intelligence committees.  Earlier in that week he had met with Bush Administration officials.

Okay, so how does that set of facts prove that the towers were deliberately demolished by government operatives as suggested in the title and content of "Improbable Collapse," or any kind of Bush Administration complicity in the 9/11 attack, instead of just being an example of craven political expediency in the face of the extremely thorny prospect of criminally extraditing the chief of intelligence of a nominally-allied (SEATO, CENTO), nuclear-armed nation while we're trying to cultivate and repair post-Cold-War relations in the wake of a 40-year partnership in containing Soviet expansionism?

Why don't you tell us what's really bothering you?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 16, 2007, 05:55 AM NHFT
Former Bush Speechwriter Hints at 9/11 Inside Job
Says Neo-Cons would have created a false flag to justify war had it not been for WTC attack, questions official story

by Paul Joseph Watson

Global Research, April 13, 2007

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=WAT20070413&articleId=5381
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 16, 2007, 06:08 AM NHFT
Thermite And A Controlled Demolition Of The World Trade Center.

Good short video into to the suspicion surrounding a possible method of demolition of WTC buildings: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3873474711036143711&hl=en
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 16, 2007, 09:48 AM NHFT
Why don't you tell us what's really bothering you?

The fact that you won't set forth one of the "easily verifiable facts" that you say I'm willfully ignoring, Insurgent.

As for "thermite," Jaque, do you know what happens when aluminum from an airplane and gypsum interact chemically?  Do you know whether the reaction between steam and steel is endothermic or exothermic, and what its byproducts are?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on April 16, 2007, 11:28 AM NHFT
OK, I'll bite:  Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan's ISI (intelligence service) arranged for $100,000 to be wired to Mohammed Atta in the days preceding the 9/11 attacks.  After this was brought to the attention of the Bush Administration, the Bush Administration failed to request Mr. Ahmad's extradition.

Instead, we attacked Saddam Hussein.

Right now, Mr. Ahmad is living free as a bird in Pakistan, despite being clearly implicated in the events of 9/11.  On the day of 9/11, Mr. Ahmad was in America, meeting with the head of the Senate and House intelligence committees.  Earlier in that week he had met with Bush Administration officials.

Okay, so how does that set of facts prove that the towers were deliberately demolished by government operatives as suggested in the title and content of "Improbable Collapse," or any kind of Bush Administration complicity in the 9/11 attack, instead of just being an example of craven political expediency in the face of the extremely thorny prospect of criminally extraditing the chief of intelligence of a nominally-allied (SEATO, CENTO), nuclear-armed nation while we're trying to cultivate and repair post-Cold-War relations in the wake of a 40-year partnership in containing Soviet expansionism?

Exactly!  I can't understand how people can look at the same government that evicts Katrina survivors out of their trailers then turns around and has problems on how to deal with all the empty trailers they have which they are trying to give away ( http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=8186.0 ) and suddenly think that in the case of 9-11 they suddenly gained competency.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 16, 2007, 07:12 PM NHFT
OK, I'll bite:  Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan's ISI (intelligence service) arranged for $100,000 to be wired to Mohammed Atta in the days preceding the 9/11 attacks.  After this was brought to the attention of the Bush Administration, the Bush Administration failed to request Mr. Ahmad's extradition.

Instead, we attacked Saddam Hussein.

Right now, Mr. Ahmad is living free as a bird in Pakistan, despite being clearly implicated in the events of 9/11.  On the day of 9/11, Mr. Ahmad was in America, meeting with the head of the Senate and House intelligence committees.  Earlier in that week he had met with Bush Administration officials.

Okay, so how does that set of facts prove that the towers were deliberately demolished by government operatives as suggested in the title and content of "Improbable Collapse," or any kind of Bush Administration complicity in the 9/11 attack, instead of just being an example of craven political expediency in the face of the extremely thorny prospect of criminally extraditing the chief of intelligence of a nominally-allied (SEATO, CENTO), nuclear-armed nation while we're trying to cultivate and repair post-Cold-War relations in the wake of a 40-year partnership in containing Soviet expansionism?

Exactly!  I can't understand how people can look at the same government that evicts Katrina survivors out of their trailers then turns around and has problems on how to deal with all the empty trailers they have which they are trying to give away ( http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=8186.0 ) and suddenly think that in the case of 9-11 they suddenly gained competency.


It's a common error to point out the incompetence of government and conclude that therefore covert operations and conspiracies can't happen. It is important to define, too what we mean by "an inside job". It's not as though Congress passed a law to make it happen, or that it was an official CIA operation. We'll probably never know exactly who was involved, suffice to say that rogue elements within government and the military industrial complex were responsible.

It would not have required very many people to be in the know in order to pull this off, and some people with smaller, specific roles may not have even known the bigger picture of what was to take place.

These issues, along with issues surrounding the collapse of the three buildings on 9/11 will all be addressed Wednesday at the film showing and Q&A. I'm really looking forward to it  :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 16, 2007, 09:35 PM NHFT
It's a common error to point out the incompetence of government and conclude that therefore covert operations and conspiracies can't happen.

It doesn't mean they can't happen, but it does mean we shouldn't automatically leap to that conclusion.  And we certainly shouldn't then extend that assumed conspiracy to be mroe complex than needed to accomplish the supposed goal.

It is important to define, too what we mean by "an inside job".

Indeed.  Do we mean that some elements within the government paid, convinced, brainwashed, or otherwise led a few individuals to hijack planes and crash them into buildings?  Or do we mean that a vast conspiracy planted demolitions charges in buildings days ahead of time, even though the buildings would have collapsed anyway, just to "frame the guilty" or somesuch, and detonated them with no apparent explosions?

One of those is reasonable to infer, given the hard evidence that is available, physics, and the record the government has.  The other is not.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on April 17, 2007, 10:05 AM NHFT
And we certainly shouldn't then extend that assumed conspiracy to be mroe complex than needed to accomplish the supposed goal.

See that's the key problem with the conspiracy theories they are SOOOOO complex.

We have planes hitting buildings, which were also wired with explosives, then other unrelated buildings also wired with explosives (motivation for which is who know?), the missile supposedly used in Washington etc...  I mean seriously, which is more likely... 19 guys hijack planes and fly them into buildings or this HUGE government conspiracy which would have needed hundreds if not thousands of people to pull off involving misery white planes, missiles, pre-planted explosives, remote control planes etc etc etc etc.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on April 17, 2007, 10:54 AM NHFT
I liked South Park's take on the 9-11 conspiracy myself.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 17, 2007, 02:02 PM NHFT

As for "thermite," Jaque, do you know what happens when aluminum from an airplane and gypsum interact chemically?  Do you know whether the reaction between steam and steel is endothermic or exothermic, and what its byproducts are?

These seem like interesting questions you may want to pose to Michael Berger tomorrow.

There will be an additional opportunity to meet him and grill him:

3PM - 5PM
Grand Buffet
South Willow Street
(across from the Mall of New-Hampshire)
Manchester
Buffet lunch is $6.99 til 3:30, so come on time for the best price
The gathering will be in the party room off to the left of the lobby.

Hope to see you there and/or at the film showing later in Concord
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 17, 2007, 02:16 PM NHFT
It is important to define, too what we mean by "an inside job".

Indeed.  Do we mean that some elements within the government paid, convinced, brainwashed, or otherwise led a few individuals to hijack planes and crash them into buildings?

Webster Tarpley, in his book "9-11 Synthetic Terror" details how previous state-terror false flag ops have gone down and he postulates how the 9-11 op most likely went down. His book will be on sale at the Best Western, Concord, 7PM Wed. nite.

Or do we mean that a vast conspiracy planted demolitions charges in buildings days ahead of time, even though the buildings would have collapsed anyway, just to "frame the guilty" or somesuch, and detonated them with no apparent explosions?

It looks like William Rodriquez will be coming to New-Hampshire 19 May to talk about this. He was the maintenance supervisor for the WTC 1-2 buildings and was the "last man out." He was recognized by George Bush for his bravery and his life saving. He was pulling injured people out of the buildings - injured by explosions in the basement! He also reports hearing some mysterious construction sounds going on certain floors (see this report in "911 Mysteries", probably on Google video).
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 17, 2007, 02:23 PM NHFT
And we certainly shouldn't then extend that assumed conspiracy to be more complex than needed to accomplish the supposed goal.

See that's the key problem with the conspiracy theories they are SOOOOO complex.

We have planes hitting buildings, which were also wired with explosives, then other unrelated buildings also wired with explosives (motivation for which is who know?), the missile supposedly used in Washington etc...  I mean seriously, which is more likely... 19 guys hijack planes and fly them into buildings or this HUGE government conspiracy which would have needed hundreds if not thousands of people to pull off involving misery white planes, missiles, pre-planted explosives, remote control planes etc etc etc etc.

Webster Tarpley, as mentioned below, is probably one of the best to weave together what is known surrounding 9-11 into the most likely scenario. The book will be $15 at the event.

Tarpley has committed to come to Manchester for an event to be put together for September 11th of this year. He was here a couple of months back in Dover and was a very compelling presenter. He also does a radio show every Saturday on a short-wave station. I think you can find archived shows by Googling.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on April 17, 2007, 02:28 PM NHFT
Webster Tarpley, as mentioned below, is probably one of the best to weave together what is known surrounding 9-11 into the most likely scenario. The book will be $15 at the event.

That's the other problem I have with many of the people coming up with these theories, they use them to sell books etc.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 17, 2007, 02:35 PM NHFT
Webster Tarpley, as mentioned below, is probably one of the best to weave together what is known surrounding 9-11 into the most likely scenario. The book will be $15 at the event.

That's the other problem I have with many of the people coming up with these theories, they use them to sell books etc.

How about I not hold a copy for you then?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 17, 2007, 09:58 PM NHFT
Slight correction:

It looks like William Rodriquez will be coming to New-Hampshire 19 May [date not definite, but around this timeframe] to talk about this. He was the maintenance supervisor for the WTC 1-2 buildings and was the "last man out." He was recognized by George Bush for his bravery and his life saving. He was pulling injured people out of the buildings - injured by explosions in the basement! He also reports hearing some mysterious construction sounds going on certain floors [in the weeks before September 11th] (see this report in "911 Mysteries", probably on Google video).
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 17, 2007, 10:06 PM NHFT
Webster Tarpley, as mentioned below, is probably one of the best to weave together what is known surrounding 9-11 into the most likely scenario. The book will be $15 at the event.

That's the other problem I have with many of the people coming up with these theories, they use them to sell books etc.

Yeah, darn free market! Ya know, if someone does a lot of research and spends a lot of money on his academic training and has some knowledge to impart to other people, we shouldn't let him crassly commercialize on that and make money off us poor saps - why, that would be exploitation! If we could only control which people could write and publish books, we could stop all this foolish nonsense! Yeah, these pesky "theory people" - they're causing a lot of problems for us people who already know the real truth!  ;)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 18, 2007, 12:52 AM NHFT
Webster Tarpley, as mentioned below, is probably one of the best to weave together what is known surrounding 9-11 into the most likely scenario. The book will be $15 at the event.

That's the other problem I have with many of the people coming up with these theories, they use them to sell books etc.

Yeah, darn free market! Ya know, if someone does a lot of research and spends a lot of money on his academic training and has some knowledge to impart to other people, we shouldn't let him crassly commercialize on that and make money off us poor saps - why, that would be exploitation! If we could only control which people could write and publish books, we could stop all this foolish nonsense! Yeah, these pesky "theory people" - they're causing a lot of problems for us people who already know the real truth!  ;)

lol pwned!!!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on April 18, 2007, 11:15 AM NHFT
Webster Tarpley, as mentioned below, is probably one of the best to weave together what is known surrounding 9-11 into the most likely scenario. The book will be $15 at the event.

That's the other problem I have with many of the people coming up with these theories, they use them to sell books etc.

Yeah, darn free market! Ya know, if someone does a lot of research and spends a lot of money on his academic training and has some knowledge to impart to other people, we shouldn't let him crassly commercialize on that and make money off us poor saps - why, that would be exploitation! If we could only control which people could write and publish books, we could stop all this foolish nonsense! Yeah, these pesky "theory people" - they're causing a lot of problems for us people who already know the real truth!  ;)

See that's just it, you uncover evidence of the crime of the century and instead of trying to start a revolution against a government willing to kill its own people the first thing these people do is look for book deals.

Maybe it's just me but if I seriously though the government was killing people I wouldn't be sitting back writing books about it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on April 18, 2007, 11:46 AM NHFT
Oh the government is definately killing people.  The Drug War can account for a ton of that all on its own.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on April 18, 2007, 05:01 PM NHFT
Oh the government is definately killing people.  The Drug War can account for a ton of that all on its own.

You raise an interesting philosophical question here.  Is the out right murder of thousands of innocent people the same as creating victimless crime laws which lead to countless deaths?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on April 18, 2007, 05:45 PM NHFT
I think that issue was addressed at the Nuremberg trials.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 18, 2007, 06:00 PM NHFT
That's the other problem I have with many of the people coming up with these theories, they use them to sell books etc.
Yeah, darn free market! Ya know, if someone does a lot of research and spends a lot of money on his academic training and has some knowledge to impart to other people, we shouldn't let him crassly commercialize on that and make money off us poor saps - why, that would be exploitation! If we could only control which people could write and publish books, we could stop all this foolish nonsense! Yeah, these pesky "theory people" - they're causing a lot of problems for us people who already know the real truth!  ;)

I'm going to back lildog up on this one.  It's not that they can't sell the story, but it's a matter of credibility.

I don't take what a used-car salesman says without a grain of salt.  He has a vested interest in selling me a car.  I have to weigh the likelyhood that he will misrepresent things against the likelyhood that he will avoid doing so in order to protect his good name.  If he works for a well-established company that has a reputation at stake, he may be less likely to risk lying to me just to make a sale (or sell at a higher price).

Similarly, if someone asks me to quote a new heating system, he has to understand that my reputation is at stake, and that is why he should trust what I tell him.  But I still don't expect someone to just blindly believe what I say, without doing any research of his own.  I don't blidnly trust manufacturers of equipment, either (eg, one of the reasons I deal with Greenwod Boilers for wood boilers is because they have an extensive listing of their competitors with links to websites and everything, right on their own page; they are the best I've seen, and they know it and aren't afraid of a little competition).

What interests do the folks selling conspiracy theories in books have?  Selling conspiracy theories in books.  If they don't do that, they don't get paid.  I can't see that the authors of these books have any risk if they tell outright lies on every single page.

Oh the government is definately killing people.  The Drug War can account for a ton of that all on its own.
You raise an interesting philosophical question here.  Is the out right murder of thousands of innocent people the same as creating victimless crime laws which lead to countless deaths?

Yes.  Absolutely and unequivocally.  Anything else would be like someone eating meat, but opposing the killing of animals.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 18, 2007, 11:59 PM NHFT
(posted from the Improbable Collapse thread)

Wow, what a great day! About a dozen people turned out for the lunch meeting and good discussion was had. The Grand Buffet is a good place to have a meeting, too. I think it would seat around 40 people, and the food isn't bad either.

About 26 people turned out for the film showing, which packed the meeting room at the Best Western. A good mix of people were there; seven porcupines, some students from the Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth http://www.sst911.org four people from NHPeaceAction and even a guy from off the street.

Reception to the film was great, as it should be. The arguments in it are airtight and it's as credible as can be. Afterwards the film make, Michael Berger, had us on the edge of or seats as he spoke on a number of topics, including: how the three towers collapsed on 9/11, the financial gains that occurred from the record put options just before 9/11, Deep Politics, Peak Oil, the CIA and illegal drug money, the impossible cell-phone calls on 9/11 and much more.

The man is just a wealth of information; he spoke for over an hour, citing dates and people's name without even referring to any notes. He has dedicated the last three years of his life researching all of this and making the film, cashing in his life savings to make the film. We owe him a great debt of gratitude.

Again, his website for the film is http://improbablecollapse.com watch the trailer and see for yourself. There are still a couple more screenings of the film where he will be appearing and dates and times are listed there as well. I encourage everyone to make it to one; you won't be disappointed!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 19, 2007, 12:02 AM NHFT
That's the other problem I have with many of the people coming up with these theories, they use them to sell books etc.
Yeah, darn free market!...these pesky "theory people" - they're causing a lot of problems for us people who already know the real truth!  ;)

I'm going to back lildog up on this one.
...
Joe

I'm going to have to say that I guess my point was lost.

Happy to report though that the events on the "Improbable Collapse" tour with Michael Berger went well today. Good turn out at both the luncheon in Manchester and at the video showing in Concord - 1/4 of the attendees at the showing were Porcs, so the coalitioning strategy is working well and we're overlapping our networks with others to spread our influence in the greater community, including the colleges, through our hook-up with Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth: sst911.org. Student Scholars are the ones bringing Wm. Rodriquez to Franklin Peirce College on 18 May. They also have an article about their meeting with Ron Paul on their site here: http://sst911.org/articles/candidateskucinichandpaul.html.

There are still a few chances to catch Michael Berger on his Northeast "Improbable Collapse" tour:
19Apr-Friends Meeting House, Dover, N.H.
21Apr-Democracy Center, Cambridge, Mass. (a carload of Porcs are going down to this - could arrange a meeting place for any carpooler interest, or caravanning if there'll be more than 1 car)
22Apr-Wilton, N.H. (Route 101 is still blocked, but traffic is diverted down Main Street in Wilton, right past the Town Hall Theater where the showing will be)
23Apr-Hampshire College, Amherst, Mass.
(full tour schedule details at http://flybynews.com/ or http://911truth.org/ or http://improbablecollapse.com/)

Lot's of good info out there for those who are curious. MV911T acquired more materials, including some more copies of the Tarpley book, Synthetic Terror mentioned below. Be sure to join the MeetUp group accessible through MerrimackValley911Truth.org to get further announcements of events in the area.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on April 19, 2007, 09:27 AM NHFT
Oh the government is definately killing people.  The Drug War can account for a ton of that all on its own.
You raise an interesting philosophical question here.  Is the out right murder of thousands of innocent people the same as creating victimless crime laws which lead to countless deaths?

Yes.  Absolutely and unequivocally.  Anything else would be like someone eating meat, but opposing the killing of animals.

I'm not a big fan of victimless crimes here but let me play the devils advocate on this one for a moment.

Don't you think intention has a lot to do with it?  After all in the case of 9-11 regardless of who you think actually pulled it off the intent was to murder.  That was the goal.

In the case of drug laws, the intent is to save lives.  Now we know in reality it doesn't but I would say this would be more like someone trying to disarm a bomb in the middle of a room full of people and having it go off early by mistake.  If you just left the bomb alone the people most likely could have left the room in time to be ok.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 19, 2007, 09:38 AM NHFT
Don't you think intention has a lot to do with it?  After all in the case of 9-11 regardless of who you think actually pulled it off the intent was to murder.  That was the goal.

In the case of drug laws, the intent is to save lives.  Now we know in reality it doesn't but I would say this would be more like someone trying to disarm a bomb in the middle of a room full of people and having it go off early by mistake.  If you just left the bomb alone the people most likely could have left the room in time to be ok.

The intent of the Drug War is to destroy the last vestiges of the Bill of Rights and to raise the level of violence on the streets in order to justify a larger police presence.  That is it.  The people who push these laws have no interest in saving lives.  Drops in crime rates give them ulcers.  They want high crime and the ability to suspend the last restrictions that exist on the power of government.

There was no "drug problem" before they started prohibition.  You could buy drugs at any pharmacy, without a prescription.  Just walk in and ask for some heroin, cocaine, etc.  The original laws were passed to target immigrants who used different drugs than the White majority, because the politicians knew they could get those laws to pass by claiming that marijuana makes Mexicans violent, and similar nonsense.  The majority didn't much care for the rights of immigrants at that time, and they didn't know the drugs that the immigrants were using, so they couldn't refute the claims.  The laws gradually encroached onto other things.

The purpose of the drug war is no different than the purpose of the September 11th attcks (regardless of who perpetrated them): to use violence against civilians in order to instill fear in people as a political tool.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: lildog on April 19, 2007, 10:31 AM NHFT
Maineshark, I think you give the government far too much credit.  I don't think the government as a whole is that smart in the least.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 19, 2007, 01:51 PM NHFT
Maineshark, I think you give the government far too much credit.  I don't think the government as a whole is that smart in the least.

We're not talking anything complex.  And the evidence is all there, for anyone who bothers to look.  This isn't some big secret.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 19, 2007, 10:05 PM NHFT
Don't you think intention has a lot to do with it?  After all in the case of 9-11 regardless of who you think actually pulled it off the intent was to murder.  That was the goal.

In the case of drug laws, the intent is to save lives.  Now we know in reality it doesn't but I would say this would be more like someone trying to disarm a bomb in the middle of a room full of people and having it go off early by mistake.  If you just left the bomb alone the people most likely could have left the room in time to be ok.

The intent of the Drug War is to destroy the last vestiges of the Bill of Rights and to raise the level of violence on the streets in order to justify a larger police presence.  That is it.  The people who push these laws have no interest in saving lives.  Drops in crime rates give them ulcers.  They want high crime and the ability to suspend the last restrictions that exist on the power of government.

There was no "drug problem" before they started prohibition.  You could buy drugs at any pharmacy, without a prescription.  Just walk in and ask for some heroin, cocaine, etc.  The original laws were passed to target immigrants who used different drugs than the White majority, because the politicians knew they could get those laws to pass by claiming that marijuana makes Mexicans violent, and similar nonsense.  The majority didn't much care for the rights of immigrants at that time, and they didn't know the drugs that the immigrants were using, so they couldn't refute the claims.  The laws gradually encroached onto other things.

The purpose of the drug war is no different than the purpose of the September 11th attcks (regardless of who perpetrated them): to use violence against civilians in order to instill fear in people as a political tool.

Joe

Heh--this is what the Libertarian Party has taught us what is behind the war on drugs. That is surface politics, what is easily seen and discernable. Not that it isn't true, but it doesn't begin to scratch the surface.

One of the points that I tried to make earlier is how this is all ties together. Without going in to lengthy dissertations here, I would encourage interested people to make the time and watch this stunning speech in order to connect the dots:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8797525979024486145&q=michael+ruppert
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 20, 2007, 01:22 PM NHFT
There will be a caravan/carpool down to the Saturday night, Cambridge showing of Improbable Collapse, with a mini tour of Cambridge (OK, one eatery featured in Good Will Hunting).

We could do a more thorough tour of Cambridge if people wanted to leave more like noon-time, rather than the scheduled 4:45PM departure. It's a very cool place, especially in springtime with all the buskers around Harvard Square, where Bob Dylan and other notables used to perform for change.

Details at the thread about the movie: http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=7647.0
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 20, 2007, 01:52 PM NHFT
We're not talking anything complex.  And the evidence is all there, for anyone who bothers to look.  This isn't some big secret.

I think I'm still waiting for someone to post one of those easily-verifiable facts that they say I'm ignoring.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 20, 2007, 09:50 PM NHFT
There will be a caravan/carpool down to the Saturday night, Cambridge showing of Improbable Collapse, with a mini tour of Cambridge (OK, one eatery featured in Good Will Hunting).

We could do a more thorough tour of Cambridge if people wanted to leave more like noon-time, rather than the scheduled 4:45PM departure. It's a very cool place, especially in springtime with all the buskers around Harvard Square, where Bob Dylan and other notables used to perform for change.

Details at the thread about the movie: http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=7647.0

Cancel the idea about a more thorough tour - I've got work pressures that don't allow me to take off any earlier - maybe soon, though, because the street music scene (and magic and puppets and fire-eaters, etc.) starts really hopping when the weather turns good.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: powerchuter on April 20, 2007, 10:13 PM NHFT
We're not talking anything complex.  And the evidence is all there, for anyone who bothers to look.  This isn't some big secret.

I think I'm still waiting for someone to post one of those easily-verifiable facts that they say I'm ignoring.

www.improbablecollapse.com

Improbable Collapse is definitely the most convincing documentary that I have seen to date.

Although...

As I watched the events of 911 in "real time" there was no doubt in my mind whatsoever...
All three structures crumbled and were reduced to rubble at gravitational free-fall speed...
Buildings do not do this except during precision controlled demolitions...
There has never been a similarly constructed building that has done this "naturally"...

I don't say this to convince those who are still in shock. disbelief, and/or denial...

I only say it for those who have matured in their wisdom of these and similar events...
And who are willing to read, hear, and/or view the evidence and discussions with an open mind, common sense, and a healthy appetite for the truth...

"And by their Exercised and Well Regulated Sovereignty...or lack thereof...ye shall know them as Masters or slaves"
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 21, 2007, 10:44 AM NHFT
We're not talking anything complex.  And the evidence is all there, for anyone who bothers to look.  This isn't some big secret.

I think I'm still waiting for someone to post one of those easily-verifiable facts that they say I'm ignoring.

There are 2 remaining showings of Improbable Collapse in the area (Cambridge, Mass. today and Wilton, N.H. Sunday) where you can view a film presentation and question Michael Berger, the filmmaker about his research. Everything in his film is public record stuff, with the exception of some footage shot surreptitiously at the WTC7 site by someone with a hidden camera.

Berger admits that there is a lot that we do not know about these collapses, but from his information, claims that the standard story is "Improbable." From his website:

"The film closely examines one of the world?s worst catastrophes from a civil engineering perspective.  Using photo and video footage as well as expert scientific testimony, the film thoroughly examines the official reports, offering varied criticisms of the official findings, while raising a more plausible hypothesis.  The findings from these scientific experts  have been quietly ignored by both government investigations and the mainstream media. "

He stated at the showing in Concord that we (the non-professionals) won't know and can't possibly know what really happened, but should push for a re-opening of the investigation by professionals (and by a commision not lead by insiders like Henry Kissinger or Phillip Zelikow).

Your answer to getting your questions answered could start with attending tonight's showing (carpool meetup just one exit down from you), or tomorrow's showing in Wilton. All are welcome. Viewing this vid. should be a pre-requisite to being in this discussion, in order to be operating on some common ground.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 22, 2007, 01:55 AM NHFT
(reposted from Improbable Collapse thread)

What a great time today! Jack, Mark and I drove down to Cambridge and Jack gave tour guide tidbits along the way. We ate at a popular burger place then headed over to the venue for the film.

About 40 people showed up to watch it, and they seemed like a pretty good mix of people. The film went over well with them and people were receptive during Michael's talk and q&a afterwards. They kept asking good questions right up to the time when we had to leave the building to make room for the next group.

We had the privilege of giving Michael a ride up to Manchester and I grilled him with questions the whole way up. He is a veritable wealth of information about 9/11 and related events.

Still two more showings and chances to meet him:

Sunday, April 22, 2007
4:00 PM
WILTON TOWN HALL THEATRE
40 Main Street
Wilton, NH

Monday, April 23, 2007
8:00 PM
HAMPSHIRE COLLEGE - Franklin Patterson Main Lecture Hall
893 West St.
Amherst, MA
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 23, 2007, 12:07 PM NHFT
As I watched the events of 911 in "real time" there was no doubt in my mind whatsoever...
All three structures crumbled and were reduced to rubble at gravitational free-fall speed...
Buildings do not do this except during precision controlled demolitions...
There has never been a similarly constructed building that has done this "naturally"...

Okay, can you name any building, anywhere in the world that was constructed similarly to the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, which has collapsed?  I have a healthy appetite for the truth, so feed me.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 23, 2007, 09:09 PM NHFT
You claim to have such a healthy appetite, yet you've had plenty of opportunities to come up to the trough in the last two weeks. I guess someone's on a diet, after all.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 23, 2007, 10:20 PM NHFT
You claim to have such a healthy appetite, yet you've had plenty of opportunities to come up to the trough in the last two weeks. I guess someone's on a diet, after all.

The folks who made Improbable Collapse are actually paid by the government to promote the notion that hijackers couldn't pull off such an attack, because people would demand to be armed while flying if they knew how simple it was for hijackers to take over planes and use them to destroy buildings.  Guns in the hands of passengers would stop those sort of attacks, and the government doesn't want to allow that.  So, they secretly pay people to make these movies that claim that only explosive charges could demolish buildings, to convince fence-sitters not to support arming passengers.

Really.  I have all the documents, as well as experts who I've paid to testify that they personally talked to a hot dog vendor who knows this guy whose cousin once found a napkin in a bar that had strange writing on it which he translated using methods only he knows, and it said all that.  Of course, he's not a linguist, but all the linguists are in a conspiracy to support Improbably Collapse, so they all say it was a ring from spilled beer, but we know they're just covering for the Improbable Collapse people.

Oh, and I can prove it.  You just have to pay to attend my movie, which is 27 hours long, and the evidence is at the end, but it won't make any sense unless you watch from the beginning.  If I have to pause it so you can go to the bathroom, I charge $9 per second, so go quickly.

C'mon, Insurgent.  He asked a simple question,  Consider it a teaser for the film.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 23, 2007, 10:47 PM NHFT
You claim to have such a healthy appetite, yet you've had plenty of opportunities to come up to the trough in the last two weeks. I guess someone's on a diet, after all.

The folks who made Improbable Collapse are actually paid by the government to promote the notion that hijackers couldn't pull off such an attack, because people would demand to be armed while flying if they knew how simple it was for hijackers to take over planes and use them to destroy buildings.  Guns in the hands of passengers would stop those sort of attacks, and the government doesn't want to allow that.  So, they secretly pay people to make these movies that claim that only explosive charges could demolish buildings, to convince fence-sitters not to support arming passengers.

Really.  I have all the documents, as well as experts who I've paid to testify that they personally talked to a hot dog vendor who knows this guy whose cousin once found a napkin in a bar that had strange writing on it which he translated using methods only he knows, and it said all that.  Of course, he's not a linguist, but all the linguists are in a conspiracy to support Improbably Collapse, so they all say it was a ring from spilled beer, but we know they're just covering for the Improbable Collapse people.

Oh, and I can prove it.  You just have to pay to attend my movie, which is 27 hours long, and the evidence is at the end, but it won't make any sense unless you watch from the beginning.  If I have to pause it so you can go to the bathroom, I charge $9 per second, so go quickly.

C'mon, Insurgent.  He asked a simple question,  Consider it a teaser for the film.

Joe

Heh--I'll take that in good spirit. My main point was this has been an extraordinary point in time to see this film and afterwards interview the film maker. How often do you get to do that? According to Michael, this will be the last tour before he tries to revisit some semblance of day-to-day business. It has nothing to do with making money, by the way--he spent his life savings making this film plus three years of his life. I guess he has a lot to gain by selling 3-5 DVD's per showing  ::)

The fact that none of the vocal skeptics on this board even expressed interest, never mind visited a viewing, shows something, I think. I won't mention names but some other people, otherwise known on this NHFREE forum, visited and took part in discussion afterwards.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 23, 2007, 11:02 PM NHFT
Heh--I'll take that in good spirit.

Good.

My main point was this has been an extraordinary point in time to see this film and afterwards interview the film maker. How often do you get to do that? According to Michael, this will be the last tour before he tries to revisit some semblance of day-to-day business. It has nothing to do with making money, by the way--he spent his life savings making this film plus three years of his life. I guess he has a lot to gain by selling 3-5 DVD's per showing  ::)

The fact that none of the vocal skeptics on this board even expressed interest, never mind visited a viewing, shows something, I think. I won't mention names but some other people, otherwise known on this NHFREE forum, visited and took part in discussion afterwards.

Well, why should we?  He's telling us that "it couldn't have happened that way," when basic physics says it could.  Heck, I knew those buildings were coming down the minute I saw the video footage on the news.  And even if we were to say, "well, maybe even though it could, it still might not have," no one seems willing to provide any evidence to support that.  You told mvpel that there were numerous easily-verifiable facts to support your claims, but you haven't been willing to share them.  Saying "people benefitted from this" could be evidence that those people caused it, but it isn't evidence that they used some particular method to cause it.

As I said before, my time is valuable.  If this film actually contains meaningful facts on the subject of the physical failure that people claim was caused by demolition charges, I'd be interested in seeing it.  But I'm not interested in the rest.  It's like framing the guilty.  It's like someone announcing that they have proof that Hilter kicked a dog.  The evidence might or might not hold up, and it's easy enough to believe that he did, but would it actually matter, with everything else he did?

The United States government burned men, women, and children to death on American soil on national television, admitted doing it, and blamed the victims for forcing them to do it.  And what came of that?  They put the survivors in prison and called it a day.  A Federal sniper murdered a woman holding a child, and they gave him a medal for it.  How many people do they kill and otherwise harm every year?  Right here in America, and right in the public spotlight?

I have no desire to discuss the possibility that they are behind the September 11th attacks.  It is plausible, but it wouldn't lower my opinion of them even if you could prove it.  It's well within character.

What I take issue with is the claim that they did it by using demolitions charges or somesuch, rather than simply hiring people to fly the planes into the buildings, which would be more keeping with their typical methods.  If you have evidence to support that claim, post it.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on April 24, 2007, 12:35 AM NHFT
I didn't go to the World Trade Center on 9/11. I must be in on it!!!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 24, 2007, 09:26 PM NHFT
Heh--I'll take that in good spirit.

Good.

My main point was this has been an extraordinary point in time to see this film and afterwards interview the film maker. How often do you get to do that? According to Michael, this will be the last tour before he tries to revisit some semblance of day-to-day business. It has nothing to do with making money, by the way--he spent his life savings making this film plus three years of his life. I guess he has a lot to gain by selling 3-5 DVD's per showing  ::)

The fact that none of the vocal skeptics on this board even expressed interest, never mind visited a viewing, shows something, I think. I won't mention names but some other people, otherwise known on this NHFREE forum, visited and took part in discussion afterwards.

Well, why should we?  He's telling us that "it couldn't have happened that way," when basic physics says it could.  Heck, I knew those buildings were coming down the minute I saw the video footage on the news.  And even if we were to say, "well, maybe even though it could, it still might not have," no one seems willing to provide any evidence to support that.  You told mvpel that there were numerous easily-verifiable facts to support your claims, but you haven't been willing to share them.  Saying "people benefitted from this" could be evidence that those people caused it, but it isn't evidence that they used some particular method to cause it.

As I said before, my time is valuable.  If this film actually contains meaningful facts on the subject of the physical failure that people claim was caused by demolition charges, I'd be interested in seeing it.  But I'm not interested in the rest.  It's like framing the guilty.  It's like someone announcing that they have proof that Hilter kicked a dog.  The evidence might or might not hold up, and it's easy enough to believe that he did, but would it actually matter, with everything else he did?

The United States government burned men, women, and children to death on American soil on national television, admitted doing it, and blamed the victims for forcing them to do it.  And what came of that?  They put the survivors in prison and called it a day.  A Federal sniper murdered a woman holding a child, and they gave him a medal for it.  How many people do they kill and otherwise harm every year?  Right here in America, and right in the public spotlight?

I have no desire to discuss the possibility that they are behind the September 11th attacks.  It is plausible, but it wouldn't lower my opinion of them even if you could prove it.  It's well within character.

What I take issue with is the claim that they did it by using demolitions charges or somesuch, rather than simply hiring people to fly the planes into the buildings, which would be more keeping with their typical methods.  If you have evidence to support that claim, post it.

Joe

Basic Physics says that it could, what? That buildings specifically built to withstand the crash of a comparable aircraft and associated fires would collapse at free-fall speed? Which law of Physics is that?

The statement that I made about verifiable facts was in reference to all of the events pertaining to 9/11, not just the building collapses. That being said, the one aspect that no skeptic will be able to explain is the speed at which the buildings fell--including Building 7 which wasn't even hit by a plane. If one buys in to the "pancake theory" then explain why there was no resistance from the lower floors during the collapse.

Again, I need to point out that "the government" murdered the people at Waco and Ruby Ridge, as you referenced. "The government" did not orchestrate 9/11. This is what confuses many people and causes them to cast aside any "conspiracy theories". While we will likely never be able to finger every individual who was involved in the attacks, we can certainly point to rogue figures within the government and intelligence agencies.

The film does go in to great detail about the collapse of the buildings, shredding the "official story". It was a perfect opportunity to view it and take part in a q&a with the film maker afterwards. While that window has closed, the opportunity to watch the video still exists and I strongly encourage everyone to see it. There are few 9/11 "conspiracy videos" that I will recommend, but this is one that I will.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on April 24, 2007, 09:28 PM NHFT
How about verifiable falsehoods?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 24, 2007, 09:36 PM NHFT
How about verifiable falsehoods?

I'm interested in verifiable falsehoods as well as verifiable truths. The film maker is, too which is why he steers clear of all the moonbat stuff and only discusses facts which are on the public record. You guys wouldn't know that, though since you haven't seen the film or listened to Michael's presentation afterwards. Easier to just smite me, instead  :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on April 24, 2007, 09:45 PM NHFT
The WTC was, according to the guy who designed it, built to withstand being hit by a 707 with low fuel, off course during a landing attempt, not going at full speed.  What did hit it was bigger, had a full fuel load, and was going at a much higher speed.  That wasn't part of the design.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dreepa on April 24, 2007, 09:58 PM NHFT
[You guys wouldn't know that, though since you haven't seen the film or listened to Michael's presentation afterwards.
He does have a good point... how to talk about the movie if you haven't seen it?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on April 24, 2007, 10:03 PM NHFT
I wasn't talking about the movie.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 24, 2007, 10:27 PM NHFT
[You guys wouldn't know that, though since you haven't seen the film or listened to Michael's presentation afterwards.
He does have a good point... how to talk about the movie if you haven't seen it?

Thank you, Chris for helping to point out the painfully obvious!  :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 24, 2007, 10:28 PM NHFT
The WTC was, according to the guy who designed it, built to withstand being hit by a 707 with low fuel, off course during a landing attempt, not going at full speed.  What did hit it was bigger, had a full fuel load, and was going at a much higher speed.  That wasn't part of the design.

These details are specifically discussed in the film. I'd be curious to see what your sources are for this statement.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 24, 2007, 10:29 PM NHFT
I wasn't talking about the movie.

OK, Michael--what are you talking about?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 25, 2007, 10:11 AM NHFT
Basic Physics says that it could, what? That buildings specifically built to withstand the crash of a comparable aircraft and associated fires would collapse at free-fall speed? Which law of Physics is that?

Have you ever studied engineering?

First of all, just because something is "designed" to withstand a given event, doesn't mean that it will.

Secondly, I described the mode of failure in a thread on the FSP forum.  If you like, I can try to find it and re-post here.

The statement that I made about verifiable facts was in reference to all of the events pertaining to 9/11, not just the building collapses. That being said, the one aspect that no skeptic will be able to explain is the speed at which the buildings fell--including Building 7 which wasn't even hit by a plane. If one buys in to the "pancake theory" then explain why there was no resistance from the lower floors during the collapse.

And by what method was the speed determined?  The resistance of the lower floors would have been small, but present.  Remember also that there was an impressive basement under the WTC complex.  The lower floors were pushed downward into it.  In other words, the "lower" floors that are visible are actually mid-level floors, and their behavior is consistent with such.

Again, I need to point out that "the government" murdered the people at Waco and Ruby Ridge, as you referenced. "The government" did not orchestrate 9/11. This is what confuses many people and causes them to cast aside any "conspiracy theories". While we will likely never be able to finger every individual who was involved in the attacks, we can certainly point to rogue figures within the government and intelligence agencies.

I cast aside "conspiracy theories" because they are based on falsehoods.  And, for the demolition that is claimed to have been orchestrated, it would take a huge chunk of the government, not just a few rogues.  That would be a massive operation.

The film does go in to great detail about the collapse of the buildings, shredding the "official story". It was a perfect opportunity to view it and take part in a q&a with the film maker afterwards. While that window has closed, the opportunity to watch the video still exists and I strongly encourage everyone to see it. There are few 9/11 "conspiracy videos" that I will recommend, but this is one that I will.

Oh?  Please share...

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: JonM on April 25, 2007, 10:40 AM NHFT
The WTC was, according to the guy who designed it, built to withstand being hit by a 707 with low fuel, off course during a landing attempt, not going at full speed.  What did hit it was bigger, had a full fuel load, and was going at a much higher speed.  That wasn't part of the design.

These details are specifically discussed in the film. I'd be curious to see what your sources are for this statement.
I was watching Modern Marvels about engineering disasters and buildings that collapsed, they interviewed the architect of the WTC.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 26, 2007, 11:38 AM NHFT
The WTC was, according to the guy who designed it, built to withstand being hit by a 707 with low fuel, off course during a landing attempt, not going at full speed.  What did hit it was bigger, had a full fuel load, and was going at a much higher speed.  That wasn't part of the design.

These details are specifically discussed in the film. I'd be curious to see what your sources are for this statement.
I was watching Modern Marvels about engineering disasters and buildings that collapsed, they interviewed the architect of the WTC.

That was probably the Leslie Robertson (chief engineer) interview - I think I saw the Modern Marvels one. He has conducted several interviews, and he is often shown in 9-11 Truth videos. A friend of mine has spoken with him before and after the collapses - I'll have to ask him to review what he learned from him.

The architect, Minoru Yamasaki, died in 1986. Good Wikipedia article on WTC at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 26, 2007, 12:01 PM NHFT
What's probably good to keep in mind is, as Insurgent has said before, is that it's almost impossible to determine the cause of the collapses, since the forensic evidence has been hauled off and destroyed. What most people are basing their conclusions on are videos, though there are so many interesting ones still coming out of the woodwork, esp. the one showing the molten metal flowing out of the side of one of the towers (shown in Improbable Collapse). I have to say that one was a stunner to me.

Steven Jones (featured in IC) was able to obtain a few fragments of steel from the towers from a monument (obtained by someone else and transported to him for analysis).

Michael Berger revealed while he was on his North East tour that some material has been retained and not destroyed - it's being held in a hangar at JFK in case it's needed in one of the pending lawsuits. It would be interesting to see what an independent analysis of that material yielded!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 26, 2007, 12:07 PM NHFT

Okay, can you name any building, anywhere in the world that was constructed similarly to the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, which has collapsed?  I have a healthy appetite for the truth, so feed me.

Were you the guy up in the balcony with his hand up waving it back and forth with your question in mind - and you never got called on?

Darn.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 26, 2007, 09:55 PM NHFT
John Kerry: WTC Building 7 Was Controlled Demolition

http://youtube.com/watch?v=KLnaogsm60A
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on April 26, 2007, 11:47 PM NHFT

Okay, can you name any building, anywhere in the world that was constructed similarly to the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, which has collapsed?  I have a healthy appetite for the truth, so feed me.

Were you the guy up in the balcony with his hand up waving it back and forth with your question in mind - and you never got called on?

Darn.

::crickets chirping:: Nope, I don't think that was him :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 27, 2007, 08:01 AM NHFT
What's probably good to keep in mind is, as Insurgent has said before, is that it's almost impossible to determine the cause of the collapses, since the forensic evidence has been hauled off and destroyed.

For something that's impossible to do, the conspiracy theorists certainly seem certain of the cause, despite physics.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: powerchuter on April 27, 2007, 08:22 AM NHFT
It's important to respect each individuals right to believe as they so choose...

Some believe certain things...and some don't...
It's not that big of a deal in the overall scheme of things...

What is a bigger deal, in my honest, humble opinion...is that we can let this petty BS come between us and our common efforts and goals...

The buildings are down and gone...the people are dead and buried...and the mourning will continue for many years to come...

We have a greater duty and mission and that is to cause and affect a peaceful transition from the illegitimate "power" that the criminal elite "hold" over us...to a society and world based on the Non-Aggression Principle and the Golden Rule...

And...with all that said...
In my honest, humble, personal opinion...

I viewed the buildings as they came down(via all the video footage) on Sept. 11, 2001...
And from the first time I viewed these(as the events were actually unfolding)...
I formulated an opinion that I have not altered since that day...

Controlled Demolition.

Thank you for respecting my honest, humble, heart-felt opinion...
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 27, 2007, 12:07 PM NHFT
What's probably good to keep in mind is, as Insurgent has said before, is that it's almost impossible to determine the cause of the collapses, since the forensic evidence has been hauled off and destroyed.

For something that's impossible to do, the conspiracy theorists certainly seem certain of the cause, despite physics.

Joe

To refer to a bunch of individual people as "the conspiracy theorists" (as a class - as if they were of one opinion) is to collectivize, hence "fails to identify" anything - just fogs all individual opinions together. That adds no value to the discussion of the cause of the collapses.

To determine the facts would involve identifying and analyzing individual pieces of evidence, etc. The evidence (re the collapse) available so far (correct me if I miss anything) would include video and audio footage, seismographic records, eyewitness testimony (includes firefighters on the scene), air samples (not sure about these), some few metal samples obtained surreptitiously. What is encouraging is that, per M Berger, there are some metal samples retained over in a hangar at JFK, whereas most had thought that all the metal was removed and destroyed.

Only 3 government reports were issued. The NIST report, I believe, would be the one that spends the most effort on the technical analysis. What most have called for is a re-opening of the investigation, by professionals. The grass roots discontent with the 911 Commission report is understandable, given that they do not answer many basic questions. You would favor a re-opening of the investigation by professionals, wouldn't you? - to put to rest wild theories and get to the truth. The 911 Truth Squads, pose the simple question to presidential candidates that they bird-dog: "Will you re-open the investigation of 911?"
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 27, 2007, 01:26 PM NHFT
As I (and others) have said, I want to see the evidence.  The claim is made by numerous individuals and groups that this was a demolition, and I want to see the proof of that.  Saying "there isn't evidence" isn't proof of that.  It's proof that people are making a lot of claims based on nothing.

Physics and engineering say that the buildings could have fallen due to the impact, or due to demolition.  Either is an option.  I've seen no evidence to indicate the latter.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 27, 2007, 02:41 PM NHFT
As I (and others) have said, I want to see the evidence.

You may have to go to JFK to the hangar where the materials are to view all the evidence, but I'll bet it's guarded by FBI. Good luck getting in  ;)

The claim is made by numerous individuals and groups that this was a demolition, and I want to see the proof of that.

Again, good luck getting in at JFK!

Saying "there isn't evidence" isn't proof of that.

Obviously, no one is saying there isn't evidence. This poster listed evidence that he knew of, some publicly available, some not. Much video, audio and seismological evidence is available to the public.

It's proof that people are making a lot of claims based on nothing.

Nothing other than the evidence that is available to them. As mentioned, many want a re-investigation to pull together the evidence and have it examined by professionals.

Physics and engineering say that the buildings could have fallen due to the impact

Obviously, Physics and engineering don't "say" anything, but physical science should be used in the analysis of the evidence. As far as I know, and I'm no expert on this, no one is saying that WTC 1 & 2 fell due to impact of the airplanes, but due to the weakening caused by the combination of the structural breakage caused by the collision and by the ensuing fires. See FEMA and NIST reports, though they only weakly claim this.

For example, the FEMA report concludes that, "The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. The best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue." [emphasis added - this is what most seem to want!]

Then, I don't believe anyone is claiming that WTC7 fell "due to the impact" (of an airliner!)

, or due to demolition.  Either is an option.

Thanks for that clarification.

I've seen no evidence to indicate the latter. [demolition theory]

Joe

Most of us won't get to see the evidence, other than the video evidence that is already all over the net. As I read it, your beef is with people who make exaggerated claims of knowledge. If you can identify those people, let's all get together, have a few beers and jointly vilify them (and then move on...please?). Hopefully, this can be taken as positive suggestion - but criticism for criticism sake grates and doesn't advance the dialog. Repetition that something has not been proven to you doesn't improve the message, and besides, I don't really think you're claiming that someone has an obligation to convince you, are you?

I may have missed the first few dozen pages of this thread and someone may have made some claims that have truly rankled you. I hope you can learn to move on from your ranklement if you are interested in this issue and its impact on our world, so that the real evidence can be reviewed as it is discovered by researchers like Michael Berger. It's unfortunate that you missed the opportunity to hear him and talk to him over lunch or dinner - he was very accessible and the New-Hampshire contingent (at the Cambridge showing) got a special audience with him.

If your interest continues, presentations of new findings continue online at 911Truth.org or 911blogger.com, and of course, at many other sites. Local events/presentations are held around New England and can (probably) be found at NE911Truth.org. Closest at hand to you is MerrimackValley911Truth.org. Upcoming events of interest include this weekend's Alternative Media Film Festival in Cambridge held by Boston Sons of Liberty (see separate thread), May 18th's appearance of William Rodriquez (Maint. Man at WTC towers) at Franklin Pierce College in Rindge and some TBA video showing at next MV911Truth meetup.

Enjoy!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on April 27, 2007, 08:35 PM NHFT
Physics and engineering say that the buildings could have fallen due to the impact
Obviously, Physics and engineering don't "say" anything, but physical science should be used in the analysis of the evidence. As far as I know, and I'm no expert on this, no one is saying that WTC 1 & 2 fell due to impact of the airplanes, but due to the weakening caused by the combination of the structural breakage caused by the collision and by the ensuing fires. See FEMA and NIST reports, though they only weakly claim this.

Figure of speech.  I meant "impact" in terms of everything ensuing as a result of that, not just the physical impact.

Most of us won't get to see the evidence, other than the video evidence that is already all over the net. As I read it, your beef is with people who make exaggerated claims of knowledge. If you can identify those people, let's all get together, have a few beers and jointly vilify them (and then move on...please?).

My beef is with people who exaggerate their knowledge, as well as those who make false claims for personal gain (or just to muddy the waters for the heck of it).  People claiming that there is no way the "obvious" (crashes, structural damage, fires, etc.) could have caused the buildings to fall are among them.  It doesn't take complex engineering to demonstrate that these causes would be sufficient to collapse the buildings.

If someone wants to claim that it would be possinle for demolitions to be used to collapse the buildings, that's fine.  But when he goes on to claim (as many/most do) that the crashes of the airplanes and the direct results of those crashes couldn't have done it, he's crossing the line into disinformation.

Hopefully, this can be taken as positive suggestion - but criticism for criticism sake grates and doesn't advance the dialog. Repetition that something has not been proven to you doesn't improve the message, and besides, I don't really think you're claiming that someone has an obligation to convince you, are you?

No one is obligated to do anything towards me, except for refraining from initiating force against me.  But if someone wants me to take him seriously, he has to back up his claims, and refrain from making false ones.

I may have missed the first few dozen pages of this thread and someone may have made some claims that have truly rankled you. I hope you can learn to move on from your ranklement if you are interested in this issue and its impact on our world, so that the real evidence can be reviewed as it is discovered by researchers like Michael Berger. It's unfortunate that you missed the opportunity to hear him and talk to him over lunch or dinner - he was very accessible and the New-Hampshire contingent (at the Cambridge showing) got a special audience with him.

Well, let me ask you this: does he claim that the buildings could not have fallen as a result of the aircraft crashing into them and the ensuing fires?

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on April 28, 2007, 12:30 AM NHFT

Well, let me ask you this: does he [Michael Berger] claim that the buildings could not have fallen as a result of the aircraft crashing into them and the ensuing fires?

Joe

You'll probably have to catch him on his next tour around, if there is one, to ask him detailed questions, though I know you could write him via improbablecollapse.com or 911truth.org. I do have his cell number, if you want that (let's cover that offline, tho) - he is very accessible. Per the title of the film, I can say pretty surely that he thinks it's "Improbable." From the quote in the post below, it appears the author of the FEMA report feels at least a bit puzzeled, if not the same way.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on April 30, 2007, 12:29 AM NHFT
News flash: gasoline melts concrete and steel! (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070429/D8OQG8600.html)

 >:D
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on April 30, 2007, 01:03 AM NHFT
News flash: gasoline melts concrete and steel! (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070429/D8OQG8600.html)

 >:D

What? That was clearly a controlled demolition! See how neat and clean the cuts were? And there's no trace of a tanker truck anyway. Plus, it was done while nobody was actually around to see it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 30, 2007, 10:35 AM NHFT
What most people are basing their conclusions on are videos, though there are so many interesting ones still coming out of the woodwork, esp. the one showing the molten metal flowing out of the side of one of the towers (shown in Improbable Collapse). I have to say that one was a stunner to me.

The reaction of steam and iron is exothermic at 400 degrees.  The gypsum in wallboard and aluminum react in a violently exothermic reaction under the right conditions.  The plane contained dozens of oxygen generators which burn rather spectacularly when ignited.

The molten metal could have been a pool of aluminum from the airplane and other sources within the building, collected in the visibly sagging floors, heated by reaction with gypsum wallboard or other chemical sources of heat.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on April 30, 2007, 10:48 AM NHFT
Quote from: San Francisco Chronicle (http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/04/30/MNGK8PI1CI1.DTL)
"It was massive," said Rodriguez, a 53-year-old sanitation supervisor at the East Bay Municipal Utility District wastewater treatment plant. "It looked like a big slab of plastic because it was melted."

But it was no big slab of plastic. The overpass was a critical component of one of the Bay Area's busiest highway interchanges, the MacArthur Maze. The network of connector ramps merges the East Bay's three major highways: Interstates 80, 580 and 880.

Maybe five years from now Rodriguez will be quoted to in a book trying to prove that the overpass was actually a big slab of plastic.

Quote
The driver escaped just before the overhead ramp collapsed -- the fire had melted its steel undergirders. When the smoke cleared around daybreak Sunday, one ramp was draped like a comforter over the lower connector.

...No sign of the truck remained by daybreak. A Caltrans worker held up his thumb and forefinger an inch apart to describe how big the tanker was by then.

Quote
Engineers estimate Sunday?s flames reached close to 3,000 degrees. Here?s a breakdown of heat?s effects.

Molten lava: 3,140?
Iron melts: 2,797?
Steel melts: 2,750?
Gold melts: 1,947?
Silver melts: 1,763?
Steel loses half its rigidity: 1,000?
Lead melts: 622?
Water boils: 212?

Source: "Comparisons" by the Diagram Group and Chronicle research

And that's just gasoline burning freely on a freeway overpass, instead of inside a big chimney.

(http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/04/30/ba_tanker.jpg)

(http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/04/30/mn_highway_collapse_caoak101.jpg)

Rosie O'Donnell on 9/11: "I do believe that it's the first time in history that fire has ever melted steel."

Does that mean this is the second time?

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 01, 2007, 10:10 AM NHFT
New site of interest: http://www.911truthgroups.org/

From the site:

This is a multi-portal gateway for groups of people who are advocating a complete, open and honest investigation of the events surrounding September 11, 2001.   This is the "Community Center"  portal and it contains information and resources common to all 9/11 Truth Advocates.

Before you dismiss this as being nothing more than a ?Conspiracy Theory?, please review this partial List of Prominent People who challenge the 9/11 Commission findings and who champion a new, full and impartial investigation into the events preceding, during and since September 11, 2001.

And to get a better idea of how many world citizens are actively working together to reveal the Truth surrounding 9/11 please review the

    * US Directory of 9/11 Truth Communities
    * International Directory of 9/11 Truth Websites

In general our goal is to provide teamwork tools to help local 9/11 Advocates in the same region areas to find each other, get organized and effective as quickly as possible.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 02, 2007, 01:31 AM NHFT
William Rodriguez, the "last man out" of the WTC North Tower is coming to New-Hampshire to speak at Franklin Pierce College on May 18th upcoming.

Details are on the Merrimack Valley 911 Truth website: http://MerrimackValley911Truth.org. Carpooling information can be found there, as well as invitation cards you can print out yourself for handing out at other meetings.

I'll start a separate thread for this for details and carpooling chatter.

The Student Scholars for 911 Truth are organizing the event: http://sst911.org - good going guys!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on May 02, 2007, 03:19 AM NHFT
And that's just gasoline burning freely on a freeway overpass, instead of inside a big chimney.

(http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/04/30/ba_tanker.jpg)

(http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/04/30/mn_highway_collapse_caoak101.jpg)

Rosie O'Donnell on 9/11: "I do believe that it's the first time in history that fire has ever melted steel."

Does that mean this is the second time?

Bay Area Roadway Collapse Was Actually Cyclist Terrorism, Sources Say (http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/05/bay_area_roadwa.html)

(http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/05/01/mazemeltdown_jef_poskanzer_2.jpg)

My secure phone has been buzzing with disturbing tips undermining the official story about the Sunday morning inferno that brought down a key Bay Area highway connection ramp near the Bay Bridge. In fact, the official story is a lie, something THREAT LEVEL wanted to break open on its own, but an intrepid blogger has already leaked some of the key info at 429Truth.com, where tough questions like "Did Arnold Know?" and "Were incendiary devices planted in the retaining walls?" are already being asked.

There is, however, disturbing misinformation at that site.  The destruction of the bridge is, in truth, clearly the work of rogue cyclists intent on destabilizing the Homeland and the Middle East by reducing demand for oil.  Just two days earlier, the San Francisco Chronicle gossip reporters got wind that a coalition of rogue cyclists known as Critical Mass was going to riot in the streets AGAIN.  Once the cyclists got wind their plan was foiled, they pretended to hold a peaceful parade, but were actually traveling around the city in a giant pack filling their little plastic water bottles with gasoline siphoned from cars using old bicycle tire tubes cut in half.

And Sunday morning, a horde of them stuck their Lycra shorts in the top of those bottles, sneaked onto the highway and used their cyclist Molotov cocktails to firebomb a gasoline truck, and then disappeared onto local roads. The goal?  To topple Saudi Arabia and install a puppet cyclist dictator who would jack up oil prices until all of us would be stuck riding Huffy mountain bikes to the mall for the rest of our lifetimes. That's what my sources tell me.

Unless of course global warming was at fault.

Posted by Ryan Singel 8:35:40 PM in Threats
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on May 03, 2007, 06:41 PM NHFT
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/010507ludicrousfreeway.htm

(I don't normally recommend articles published on PrisonPlanet.com but this one hits the nail on the head. I knew that it would be just a matter of hours before 9/11 debunkers gleefully announced that the bridge collapse "proves" the buildings fell because of fire)


Debunkers Use Ludicrous Freeway Comparison To Attack 9/11 Truth
Desperation evident as thin rebars impacted by gasoline firestorm compared to twin tower's thick steel beams and concrete core

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, May 1, 2007

Debunkers have again betrayed their desperation by citing the partial collapse of a freeway bridge in San Francisco to claim that the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center towers and Building 7 has been discredited. In reality, the comparison is ludicrous and wildly inaccurate.

Nationally syndicated radio host Neil Boortz and other Neo-Con talking heads immediately seized on the bridge collapse in unison as part of a coordinated attack on the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Even mainstream science and technology websites jumped on the bandwagon, "When the I-580 overpass buckled, it brought back memories of the World Trade Center," reported Wired News.

Such bold assertions were notably absent when the 32-story Windsor Building in Madrid was gutted by intense fires for 28 hours but did not collapse in February 2005.

The frenzy was particularly evident at Fark.com, with posters reveling in the notion that the freeway accident had made "WTC conspiracy theories collapse as quickly as that highway did." Farkers, who judging from the website spend most of their time discussing hookers, obese lesbians and lauding a "semi-hot female coach getting it on with an underage female student," attacked 9/11 truthers for their lack of scientific credentials.

So in response to the numerous naysayers desperately clamoring for anything to stop the wild runaway popularity and growing credibility of the 9/11 Truth Movement, we talked to a physicist and a steel welding expert about the freeway collapse and why it is completely outlandish to compare it with the fall of Building 7 and the towers.

Professor Steven Jones, a Ph.D. physicist and cold fusion expert, joined Alex Jones on the air yesterday to talk about the monumental differences between the two collapses.

Jones said that the notion that steel supporting columns completely melted from fire is impossible and that what actually happened was that thin supporting bolts were warped, resulting in the collapse of the bridge section. In comparison, the south tower of the World Trade Center imploded at almost free fall speed, proving that even if the "truss failure" theory was accurate, the building would not have collapsed in 10 seconds with no resistance and would not have aerosolized, turning concrete support pillars into dust.

If the building had pancaked, the collapse would have taken around 40 seconds according to recent studies undertaken by Steven Jones' colleagues, almost four times longer than what was witnessed. In addition, the "pancake" collapse of the freeway did not even manage to collapse the section of road below it, whereas the collapse of the south tower pulverized over 10 floors a second.

The freeway section was made of highly flammable asphalt and took the brunt of a gigantic gasoline explosion with open air fires shooting 200 feet in the air. In comparison, the twin towers were impacted by aluminum planes filled with significantly less flammable kerosene and suffered limited fires that were oxygen-starved and almost out before the collapses occurred.

Building 7 was not hit by anything save a small amount of debris from the towers and suffered limited fires across just eight floors. In addition, explosions were being reported by occupants within WTC 7 before the towers had even collapsed.

The columns supporting the freeway were not pulverized into dust as in the case of the towers, but are clearly still standing as can be seen in all the photographs.

Halfway through the discussion with Steven Jones, a steel welding expert joined the conversation to express his incredulity at the fact that Fox News was comparing the collapse of the highway with the World Trade Center buildings.

"You can't even begin to compare 5 inch thick steel plate core columns, approximately 2 foot by 5 foot rectangle 5 inch thick boxes to quarter inch and 3 quarter inch dowels that connect the steel to the support members," said the steel expert.

"The logical deduction is that the rebar steel was exposed horizontally, that whole bridge surface and it was exposed intention, not like the fires that were lapping up fire-proofed 5 inch thick plate columns in the World Trade Center - these little bars had no heat sink and after two hours with all that weight on them they fell."

Debunkers have also failed to acknowledge the fact that freeways in the San Francisco area have already been weakened by multiple earthquakes and regularly collapse entirely of their own accord by accident.

Highway sections across the country have collapsed with no fire damage whatsoever being involved, including a case in Oklahoma in 2002 when a 500-foot section of an Interstate-40 bridge collapsed after barge collided with a bridge support.

The website Stop The Lie also compiled an excellent analysis debunking claims that the freeway collapse in any way mirrors what happened at the World Trade Center and that article is reproduced below.

*********

I can already hear defenders of the official account screaming "See, fire can cause a steel structure to collapse-the bridge collapsed!"

Comparing the circumstances surrounding the fire and subsequent partial collapse of this bridge to the circumstances surrounding the fires and subsequent complete collapse of the towers and WTC 7 is flawed from end to end. This fact should be obvious to most people; but let's point out a few things just in case they weren't already noticed.

1. This was an open air environment where flames were able to reach their absolute maximum temperature; white-hot and shooting upwards of 200 feet in the air.

2. Those 200 foot flames were acting on a single support truss that was fastened to the two columns pictured here. That truss (and the connectors that fastened it to the columns) represents a small fraction of the steel that would have been found on a single floor of the towers or WTC 7. So again, far more heat focused on a single truss and no way to redistribute the load once that truss was weakened.

3. You'll notice that despite the intense fires ability to weaken the truss and connectors that there is NO mention of molten metal in the debris. Also, unlike the debris of the towers and WTC 7, it's not likely we're going to hear anything about thermate (specifically used to destroy steel columns) in the bridge debris.

4. You'll notice that the concrete roadway that "pancaked down" on the roadway below did not cause the lower freeway to collapse. Nor has the concrete disintegrated into a fine powder.

5. You'll notice the columns were not torn down by the collapse, nor did they evaporate into thin air, rather they are still standing (having only lost the the truss and connectors that held the roadway to them.)

So to quickly recap:

White-hot 200 foot flames acting on a single truss (and no ability to redistribute the load once weakened.)

No molten metal and certainly no thermate found
No column failure
No evaporation / pulverization of concrete
No "pancake collapse"

-Ending with a paragraph from The 1-hour Guide to 9/11.

For the record, few in the scientific community doubt that it's theoretically possible for a building to experience failure if it is subjected to devastating heat for a sufficient period of time. And additional factors like no fire-proofing, no sprinkler systems, insufficient steel to "bleed off" heat or inferior construction greatly increase the possibility. However, what is "doubted" (or more accurately; considered downright impossible) is that such a failure would resemble anything like what was witnessed on 9/11. -Gradual, isolated, asymmetrical failures spread out over time; perhaps -simultaneous disintegration of all load bearing columns (leaving a pile of neatly folded rubble a few stories high) -no way.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 03, 2007, 11:15 PM NHFT
This is probably old hat to readers of this list, but has anyone seen this site?:

250+ 9/11 'Smoking Guns' Found in the Mainstream Media: http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/911smokingguns.html

Lot's o' links to just the Mainstream Media articles on each issue.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on May 04, 2007, 07:26 AM NHFT
Professor Steven Jones, a Ph.D. physicist and cold fusion expert...

Um, that's really all you need to know that he's a loon.

I'll go through the thing point-by-point if you guys like...

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on May 04, 2007, 10:24 AM NHFT
Quote
Jones said that the notion that steel supporting columns completely melted from fire is impossible and that what actually happened was that thin supporting bolts were warped, resulting in the collapse of the bridge section.

Who said anything about the steel supporting columns "completely melting" either in the WTC or in the bridge?

The WTC had an acre's worth of concrete per floor supported by steel trusses attached to the perimeter columns.  If the warping and weakening of the bridge trusses in a serious fire is enough to detach its supporting means, then why is that not sufficient to detach the supporting means of a given acre-sized concrete floor of the WTC tower?  There's clear photographic evidence that this is exactly what happened, floors can be seen draping down onto floors below them through the narrow windows.

And "controlled" demolition, yeah right:

(http://www.poems2u.com/911/wtc1-3.jpg)

Quote
In addition, the "pancake" collapse of the freeway did not even manage to collapse the section of road below it, whereas the collapse of the south tower pulverized over 10 floors a second.

If only the top floor of the WTC had collapsed onto the floor below it, and that's all, then the WTC would still be standing today.  Likewise, if twenty overpasses had all dropped onto the lower overpass at once, it wouldn't still be standing.  Has Jones never heard of "momentum?"

Quote
Building 7 was not hit by anything save a small amount of debris from the towers and suffered limited fires across just eight floors.

A "small" amount of debris?  Are they witholding evidence and photographs?

Oblique view of WTC7 involvement in WTC1 collapse. (http://photos1.blogger.com/photoInclude/blogger/2116/144/1600/WTC7AerialObliqueWTC1Collapse.jpg)

WTC southwest corner damage:
(http://www.rense.com/general65/WTC7_sw_after_1.jpg)

The collapse of WTC-1 generated a 0.6 magnitude earthquake, and sent thousands of tons of steel flying through the air, and nobody has any photos of the side facing the site of the collapse, and the buildings were only 300 feet apart, and they're definitively claiming a "small amount of debris?"

Limited fires?

(http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/WTC7_Smoke.jpg)

Quote
In addition, explosions were being reported by occupants within WTC 7 before the towers had even collapsed.

Video of electrical transformers exploding. (http://media1.break.com/dnet/media/content/transblow.wmv)

Quote
The freeway section was made of highly flammable asphalt

Wrong again. I've driven on those freeway sections many times, and they're made of concrete, not asphalt.

Quote
Debunkers have also failed to acknowledge the fact that freeways in the San Francisco area have already been weakened by multiple earthquakes and regularly collapse entirely of their own accord by accident.

Okay, now "regularly collapse???"  I lived there for five years and I think if a freeway section had collapsed of its own accord, I would have heard about it.

Quote
So again, far more heat focused on a single truss and no way to redistribute the load once that truss was weakened.

That's why it fell in a matter of minutes, instead of hours.  At least they've made the conceptual leap that fire can weaken steel to the point where there is structural failure.

Quote
"You can't even begin to compare 5 inch thick steel plate core columns, approximately 2 foot by 5 foot rectangle 5 inch thick boxes to quarter inch and 3 quarter inch dowels that connect the steel to the support members," said the steel expert.

The steel was only five inches thick near the bottom of the structure, where it had to withstand the most force, it tapered down to perhaps 2" thick near the middle of the building, down to perhaps as little as a quarter inch thick near the top.

This technique of tapered columns is common in all steel structures, as there's no point in using five inches of steel where you only need two, it's just a waste of money.

So what was this so-called and self-proclaimed "steel expert's" name?  They don't say.

Quote
However, what is "doubted" (or more accurately; considered downright impossible) is that such a failure would resemble anything like what was witnessed on 9/11. -Gradual, isolated, asymmetrical failures spread out over time; perhaps -simultaneous disintegration of all load bearing columns (leaving a pile of neatly folded rubble a few stories high) -no way.

"Neatly folded?" "A few stories?"  Give me a f---ing break.

There were "gradual, isolated, asymmetrical failures" spread out over 62 minutes and 104 minutes, respectively, saving the lives of thousands and thousands of people.

The WTC complex sub-basement "bathtub" was about seven stories deep.

(http://www.newsday.com/media/photo/2002-05/3137393.jpg)

(http://www.mdtextreme.com/wtc/rubble.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/2/8/7/2878a8ab6f8a68e3266920579cfc1fb3.png)

Think about it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on May 04, 2007, 03:23 PM NHFT
Give up. Truth is irrelevant to "truthers."
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 04, 2007, 06:02 PM NHFT
It wasn't necessary for the government to cause, enable, or look the other way.
They thought it was necessary .... to have a pearl harbor type event .... as explained in their necon paper. So they did it.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 04, 2007, 06:05 PM NHFT
I believe in this enough that I'll even offer a money-back guarantee. Since I booked the conference room and paid for it, I can do this! If you attend and feel it was a complete waste of time, I'll give you your $5 back  Same goes for everyone else :)

My time is worth more than $5.

Joe
So why do you spend time on this thread? You don't even think this topic is important enough to learn more about .... but you will argue with those that do.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Insurgent on May 04, 2007, 08:57 PM NHFT
Give up. Truth is irrelevant to "truthers."

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you were in a negative frame of mind when you made this comment, and also give you the opportunity to retract it in order to save face.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on May 04, 2007, 09:14 PM NHFT
My time is worth more than $5.
So why do you spend time on this thread? You don't even think this topic is important enough to learn more about .... but you will argue with those that do.

Sitting through a video which is likely (from the ads I've seen) "more of the same" made by someone I don't know is not my idea of a good opportunity to get a return on my time investment.  Maybe it has new information, but I've asked for examples of that and so far no one has named any, so my "Vegas odds" on it are pretty long against it actually containing anything I haven't seen before.

On the other hand, many people here are my friends, and I enjoy discussing this with them, so I am getting value in return for my time.  I don't need to have everyone I talk to agree with me, just to enjoy myself.  Actually, that often gets boring.

Like I said, I agree that certain individuals within the government could have caused this event.  My only issue is with the claims that some make with regards to the particular method.  While I joked about it earlier, I do believe that there is a high probability that the "hijackers couldn't have done it" theory was started by members of the government to head off calls for arming passengers.  Look how many of the proponents are government-employed professors...

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 04, 2007, 09:32 PM NHFT
Like I said, I agree that certain individuals within the government could have caused this event.

You will probably be interested in hearing William Rodriguez speak on May 18th then (see other thread or http://MerrimackValley911Truth.org for more info). He was a janitor in the WTC North Tower and heard explosions in the basement BEFORE he heard the plane hit above. He went on to rescue a lot of people and assist the firefighters in getting access to various floors. He is often referred to as "the last man out" of the North Tower and was honored by George Bush, among others, for his heroic bravery.

He testified to the Keane-Hamilton commission and it was not reported out. He has grown so concerned that he became the lead plaintiff in a RICO suit against George Bush. See his presentation at the LA Scholars Conference of 2006 here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4380137365762802294

He's coming to Franklin Pierce College in just 2 weeks, thanks to the Student Scholars for 911 Truth, so for those interested in getting to the truth about the 9-11 tragedies, this would be a "must see" event and it's local! As with any of these things, the opportunity to speak directly to an eyewitness trumps any written account or folk legend/rumors.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on May 04, 2007, 10:56 PM NHFT
Give up. Truth is irrelevant to "truthers."

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you were in a negative frame of mind when you made this comment, and also give you the opportunity to retract it in order to save face.

There's nothing to retract. And my face doesn't need saving.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 05, 2007, 06:42 AM NHFT
Okay, can you name any building, anywhere in the world that was constructed similarly to the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, which has collapsed?
No
I hope that helps. :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 05, 2007, 06:44 AM NHFT

I have no desire to discuss the possibility that they are behind the September 11th attacks.
ok then ..... do you mind if the rest of us do?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 05, 2007, 06:45 AM NHFT
I didn't go to the World Trade Center on 9/11. I must be in on it!!!
that is a possibility .... you do work for homeland stupidity :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 05, 2007, 06:50 AM NHFT
As I (and others) have said, I want to see the evidence. 
I don't think the government will give it to you .... and you are paying them. :(
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 05, 2007, 07:22 AM NHFT
And "controlled" demolition, yeah right:

(http://www.poems2u.com/911/wtc1-3.jpg)
that is what a controlled demo would look like if you busted a plane into the side of the building first ..... it would come down .... just not quite as planned. :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 05, 2007, 10:11 AM NHFT
Loose Change Final Cut teaser, posted by Dylan Avery: http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8646
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 05, 2007, 10:34 AM NHFT
More archive video footage has been unearthed that re-emphasizes the fact that President Bush lied about how he first came to know about the events of September 11, 2001.

[YouTube video here http://youtube.com/watch?v=N4rkfgHTK-M]

ABC News reporter John Cochran told ABC's Peter Jennings [9:17AM], "He got out of his hotel suite this morning, was about to leave, reporters saw the White House chief of staff Andy Card whisper into his ear, then reporters said to the President 'do you know what's going on in New York'? - he said he did and would have something to say about it later."

This contradicts Bush's statement that he made on two separate occasions, that he first learned of what was going on in New York from watching a television outside of the classroom as he prepared to talk about education with a group of Florida schoolchildren.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 05, 2007, 10:37 AM NHFT
Posted on 911blogger:
"A fine paper by Prof. David Ray Griffin has been published in the May 2007 issue of the Journal of 9/11 Studies.

The American Empire and 9/11 (PDF: http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/DavidRayGriffin911Empire.pdf)

We appreciate the interest and rapid growth of informative peer-reviewed papers in this Journal.

Sincerely,

Steven Jones "
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 05, 2007, 11:48 AM NHFT
...paper by Prof. David Ray Griffin, May 2007 issue of the Journal of 9/11 Studies, The American Empire and 9/11 (PDF: http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/DavidRayGriffin911Empire.pdf)

Conclusion on p.29 (excerpted in part):

Conclusion: The Preeminent Importance of 9/11

The above evidence, plus the fact that all the ?evidence?
that seems to implicate the alleged hijackers, such as
cellphone calls, airport photos, and discovered luggaqe and
passports, appears to have been fabricated, leads to the
conclusion that 9/11 was a false-flag operation orchestrated
by the Bush administration for primarily imperial reasons.

If this conclusion is correct, then exposing the
falsity of the official account of 9/11 should be high on
the agenda of all people committed to reversing the present
policies of the U.S. government, for at least four reasons.

First, 9/11 has provided the pretext for at least most
of the malevolent and destructive policies carried out by
the Bush-Cheney administration since that day. When any
objection is raised to this administration?s illicit
policies---from illegal invasions to torture to illegal
spying to weaponizing space to talk of a nuclear first
strike---the answer is always the same: ?The critics fail to
understand that the world changed on 9/11.? Until the truth
about 9/11 is exposed, it will remain a blank check for
virtually anything desired by this administration.

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

This well-footnoted paper is a good summary of findings over the past 5 years, with references to everything germane. Could be a good starting point for those just coming to question the truth of the official story and trying to come to grips with the "why" of it all.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 07, 2007, 09:01 AM NHFT
Tower Blueprints - http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/blueprints.html
...
Whistleblower Releases Blueprints

In March of 2007, an extensive set of detailed architectural drawings of the World Trade Center became public through the actions of a whistleblower. The 261 drawings included detailed plans for the North Tower (WTC 1), the World Trade Center foundation and basement, and the TV mast atop the North Tower. The set of drawings does not include plans for the other six buildings in the World Trade Center complex. However, since the Twin Towers were of almost identical construction, it is safe to assume that the structural details that the drawings shown for the North Tower are largely applicable to the South Tower.

The drawings contain a wealth of detail about the buildings, including the dimensions of structural members such as the core columns.

------

This site should be of interest to those wanting to see evidence (joe) - there's a listing of the known evidence down the left column of the above page: including destroyed, missing and surviving evidence.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: MaineShark on May 09, 2007, 08:58 AM NHFT
I have no desire to discuss the possibility that they are behind the September 11th attacks.
ok then ..... do you mind if the rest of us do?

Nope.  Like I said, I think it's "framing the guilty," but you can do that if you like.

As I (and others) have said, I want to see the evidence.
I don't think the government will give it to you .... and you are paying them. :(

I am?  Only at gunpoint...  And as little as possible.

Joe
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on May 09, 2007, 09:30 AM NHFT
Thanks for posting that link to the blueprints, that has the potential to bring a lot of insight to the discussion, and expose the misrepresentations flying around.

It makes me wistful, looking at them.  They were remarkable structures, and I still remember the last time I was there.  What's odd about it is that there was a fire department response at the time, I have the photos around somewhere of the team of firefighters going into the building.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 09, 2007, 11:09 PM NHFT
Yeah, I have a couple of stories about my visits there, too. I took my niece and nephew there once - man is that high up on top of the observation walkway.

Here's a link to a poster about the upcoming William Rodriquez talk on May 18th at Franklin Pierce College. It ought to be interesting to talk to a real eyewitness/survivor.

poster: http://www.sst911.org/willieposter.gif
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 11, 2007, 10:01 AM NHFT
Our friends over on the Seacoast write to Fosters:

Note: This letter, which is being published in Foster's today, has a few errors in the signatures: (1) It was signed by Betsy (not "Becky") Burton, (2) It should have listed the SEACOAST 9-11 QUESTIONS GROUP, (3) Not all of the signers were from Dover, and (4) There were a total of 10 signers, so at least the number should have been indicated. Dave
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buying the official story of Sept. 11

To the editor:

Last week we saw Bill Moyers on public television ("Buying the War,"April 26 on Channel 11) give an in-depth account of how the mainstream corporate media in this country passed on government propaganda and helped mislead the country into a disastrous war against Iraq.

We saw how it became unfashionable and risky for journalists to dissent from the official line. The few journalists who questioned administration lies were attacked as "anti-American" and "unpatriotic." But we know, now that administration reports of Iraqi WMD and ties to al-Qaeda have been proven false, that those few journalist were right after all.

If the press and the administration had listened to the journalistic dissenters (and the peace movement) over 3,000 Americans and maybe a million Iraqis now dead might still be alive.

Moyers noted that the key component in Bush's justification for the war against Iraq was Sept. 11. "At least a dozen times during this news conference (on March 6, 2003) he will invoke 9/11 and al- Qaeda to justify a preemptive attack on a country that has not attacked America."

While Bill Moyers didn't go on to question the official story of Sept. 11 he might well have, since Sept. 11 was and remains central to the administration's war propaganda.

Even more vehemently than other war dissenters, those who question the official story of Sept. 11 are vilified as "hating America," "kooks," and "conspiracy theorists." This despite numerous unanswered questions about the events of Sept 11, 2001, questions whose likely answers point to that tragedy having been an inside job with the purpose of justifying resource wars in the Middle East.

The "conspiracy theorist" accusation rings hollow when made by the administration with the worst record of all time for lies, secrecy and deception. In addition, the official story about the 19 hijackers is a conspiracy theory itself. It will take a real investigation to show which conspiracy theory is true.

For more information go to the website www.911truth.org or read any book on this subject by David Ray Griffin: "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11," "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions And Distortions," or "Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory."

Let's no longer buy the deceptions that led to the disastrous Iraq war. Let's also no longer buy the official story of Sept. 11, which is being used to justify a never-ending so-called "war on terror" and "preemptive" strikes against any country the Bush administration chooses to crush.

David Diamond
Jason Howard
Becky Burton
Marika Wilde
William Woodward
Pat Galloway
Dover
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 13, 2007, 12:15 AM NHFT
PNAC - Project for a New American Citizen con in Austin, Texas - 14 April 2007

Dr. Stephen Jones presents new evidence - analysis of dust from WTC towers' collapse:

video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4549750234983943323

Steven Jones discusses the NIST report, thermite, and his new analysis of “iron rich spheres” found in dust samples taken from an apartment across the street from Ground Zero. This analysis provides additional “smoking gun” evidence that thermite was used in the destruction of the WTC towers.

In what may be a partial answer to an earlier hinted question from mvpel, Jones answers (someone else):

"Gypsum is comprised of calcium sulfate, so that when sulfur is associated with gypsum as suggested by Eagar [Professor Thomas Eagar of MIT], then calcium will also be present. In my talk at UT-Austin one finds that sulfur is present in the Fe-Al-S-rich microspheres with an absence of calcium ­thus ruling out the gypsum-origin notion. I specifically looked for Ca, but it was absent in these iron-rich microspheres."

Answers to the provenance of the dust are apparently in the talk, as are some other answers. Looking for a full text of the talk so it will be searchable.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 13, 2007, 07:23 AM NHFT
boy ... some of these 9/11 researchers are going to great lengths and into great details to find out what happened ... the government's 9/11 commission stopped looking years ago.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on May 13, 2007, 10:14 AM NHFT
They dishonor the victims by trying to find out who killed them!  ;)
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!

Caleb
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 13, 2007, 11:00 PM NHFT
For upcoming interest, there will be an international 9-11 Truth conference in Hartford Connecticut in October - big name speakers will be there from all over. Details can probably be found on 911Truth.org when they are finalized.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on May 14, 2007, 11:32 AM NHFT
I've read a lot of these posts on this thread and I'm still not sure who believes what. :BangHead:  I'm not stupid I just have comprehension issues. :)

  I'll jump in and leave all of the steel beam and bomb stuff out of what I'm going to write.  I am not making a statement of what I believe happened on 9/11 because I'm not sure but the first thing my brother and I said to each other on the phone that day was, "why aren't fighter jets surrounding the planes?".  Also how can 3 or 4 airplanes just go anywhere they want on/off radar and no one was extremely alarmed until after the fact?   :dontknow:

I've read conspiracy theories about the Pentagon, that it wasn't a real plane that flew into the Pentagon but it was a hologram.  That kind of thing is hard to believe but who the heck knows?  Also how and why were the cell phone conversations taped on the plane that was supposedly taken over by the passengers and crashed in to the field?  I mean I didn't know it was common practice to do that.  My husband called me from a plane one time and it wasn't a clear, long conversation.

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 14, 2007, 12:03 PM NHFT
I've read a lot of these posts on this thread and I'm still not sure who believes what.
I don't think that is too important. :)

You can read several books on the subject or visit a few good websites and you will know as much as me .... and that has been enough for me to change my mind as to who is responsible.

David Ray Griffins stuff is all very logical and simple to follow.

I don't know anything about holograms. I don't see why the government would use holograms at the pentagon when they could just use a drone plane as a missile.

But then again I didn't see why the government thugs would use planes and bombs to blow up buildings to get their way .... until I read their plans and saw the evidence. :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on May 14, 2007, 12:10 PM NHFT
Thanks Russell, I will read David Ray Griffins stuff. :)

Yeah I thought the hologram theory was pretty lame too but really who the heck knows anymore.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Russell Kanning on May 14, 2007, 12:23 PM NHFT
If you read the books mentioned in this thread, you will know a lot more. Researchers from outside the government keep getting closer and closer to the truth.

BTW .... why do you want to know more about what happened on 9/11?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on May 14, 2007, 12:34 PM NHFT
If you read the books mentioned in this thread, you will know a lot more. Researchers from outside the government keep getting closer and closer to the truth.

BTW .... why do you want to know more about what happened on 9/11?

I like knowing what has or is really going on.  Also if the kids bring up the subject I'd like to be able to talk to them about the facts not the mass media's crap. 
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on May 14, 2007, 01:04 PM NHFT
I'll jump in and leave all of the steel beam and bomb stuff out of what I'm going to write.  I am not making a statement of what I believe happened on 9/11 because I'm not sure but the first thing my brother and I said to each other on the phone that day was, "why aren't fighter jets surrounding the planes?".  Also how can 3 or 4 airplanes just go anywhere they want on/off radar and no one was extremely alarmed until after the fact?   :dontknow:

Repeat after me: "GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATS."

(http://apollopony.net/images/air_traffic.jpg)

Nobody knew what the hell was really going on until it was too late.  The Eastern Seaboard is the busiest air traffic control region in the country, and the hijacked planes were not squawking the hijack transponder code which would have flagged the planes in the ATC system, probably because the takeover of the cockpit was sudden, violent, and bloody.

Quote
I've read conspiracy theories about the Pentagon, that it wasn't a real plane that flew into the Pentagon but it was a hologram.  That kind of thing is hard to believe but who the heck knows?

You do, assuming you have two brain cells to rub together.

Witnesses saw the plane flying low and fast towards the Pentagon.

Quote
Also how and why were the cell phone conversations taped on the plane that was supposedly taken over by the passengers and crashed in to the field?  I mean I didn't know it was common practice to do that.  My husband called me from a plane one time and it wasn't a clear, long conversation.

A friend of mine knew Todd Beamer.  There's no "supposedly" about Todd Beamer's unborn child losing her father.

The planes altitude was low, so the range to the cell towers was within the parameters of the cellphone system.  Normal airline altitude is around 6-7 miles, but Flight 77 was at 7,000 feet thirty five miles out from the Pentagon, then at 2,000 feet about four miles out.  And the calls weren't clear and long - they cut out on a number of occasions.  In addition, there were GTE AirPhones on the planes.

What's bizarre is that this conspiracy theorist: http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/08-23-04/discussion.cgi.42.html

... posts a quote saying that cell calls were possible made by an industry expert, "From high altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and most callers will experience drops," but then apparently takes that to mean that calls from high altitudes are NOT possible.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on May 14, 2007, 01:26 PM NHFT
I appreciate you taking the time to answer some of my questions but could have done without the sarcastic jabs such as:

Quote
You do, assuming you have two brain cells to rub together.
Quote
Repeat after me: "GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATS."

I though you were nicer than that going from some of your posts. 

Anyways I never said that I believed it was a hologram plane, I said it was something I read about.  I also never said that there wasn't an actual plane crash in the field.   I said ,"the plane that was supposedly taken over by the passengers and crashed in to the field?"  Which brings up the question of, was this plane shot down by missiles or was it taken over by the passengers?

Have you read David Ray Griffins info?  I just did and it's very interesting.  My point is that there are more questions than just about melting steel beams.  I don't know exactly what happened so stop being so defensive. 
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on May 14, 2007, 01:32 PM NHFT
You said "who knows whether or not it was a hologram."  I said, YOU know it.

I find it very hard to be nice when such patent absurdity is flying about, such as the absurdity of questioning the reality of the death of Barbara Olson or Todd Beamer by postulating alien-technology holograms.  I can put up with repeated pointless questions from my three year old, since I know he'll grow out of it, but nearly six years of it from full grown adults gets under my skin.

Did you know that steam and iron will burn at about 400 degrees?  It's called pyrophoric oxidation.  Gypsum in wallboard has a chemical composition of CaSO, about 17.6% sulfur, which would have become a source of sulfur for hydrogen-sulfide-driven pyrophoric oxidation of the steel.

Indeed, by pumping water for weeks into the rubble pile at Ground Zero, the NYFD was probably adding fuel to the fire as the steam reacted with the steel and released hydrogen to either combine with the sulfur in gypsum to burn violently with the steel or to burn with oxygen in the air.

As for United 93 and the missile theory, close your eyes and think about what you would do if you were fighting with knife-wielding people trying to prevent you from unbuckling their harnesses and pulling them out of their seat at the controls taking over the plane.  Think about what they would do.  Think about the tight space between the head and the galley near the cockpit of a typical plane.  Think about the width of the door.  Think about the cramped quarters of the cockpit.  Think about a dead body in that space.  Think about how slippery great gouts of blood are.   And watch "United 93" if you want to see one possible answer to whether the plane crashed or not.  The final instants of that movie are overwhelming.

Plausible?  Yes or no.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on May 14, 2007, 02:11 PM NHFT
You said "who knows whether or not it was a hologram."  I said, YOU know it.

I find it very hard to be nice when such patent absurdity is flying about, such as the absurdity of questioning the reality of the death of Barbara Olson or Todd Beamer by postulating alien-technology holograms.  I can put up with repeated pointless questions from my three year old, since I know he'll grow out of it, but nearly six years of it from full grown adults gets under my skin.

As for United 93 and the missile theory, close your eyes and think about what you would do if you were fighting with knife-wielding people trying to prevent you from unbuckling their harnesses and pulling them out of their seat at the controls taking over the plane.  Think about what they would do.  Think about the tight space between the head and the galley near the cockpit of a typical plane.  Think about the width of the door.  Think about the cramped quarters of the cockpit.  Think about a dead body in that space.  Think about how slippery great gouts of blood are.   And watch "United 93" if you want to see one possible answer to whether the plane crashed or not.  The final instants of that movie are overwhelming.

Plausible?  Yes or no.

Okay, your right I did say, who knows regarding the hologram.  I meant that in a way that anything is possible but I truly don't think it's probable.  I never said that Barbara Olson or Todd Beamer didn't die and I would never intentionally minimize someone's suffering.  I don't even have to close my eyes and think about the atrocities of 9/11.  I watched it on tv and was crying hysterically when I saw people jumping to their deaths out of the World Trade Center.
United 93 was a movie and I bet it was disturbing to watch that's why I don't want to see it, plausible?  Yes it is but you or I don't know exactly what happened on United 93, is that plausible?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on May 14, 2007, 02:16 PM NHFT
The United 93 movie wasn't nearly so disturbing as the news footage. Over and over. BTW, I saw what happened to those people after they hit the ground. That's something I'll never forget.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: mvpel on May 14, 2007, 02:24 PM NHFT
... but you or I don't know exactly what happened on United 93, is that plausible?

Yes, of course.

But in the field of diagnostics, there's a saying "when you hear hoofbeats, think 'horses,' not 'zebras.'"

And the 9/11 conspiracy theories involve not only zebras, but all too often unicorns, centaurs, and fauns.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on May 14, 2007, 02:26 PM NHFT
... but you or I don't know exactly what happened on United 93, is that plausible?

Yes, of course.

But in the field of diagnostics, there's a saying "when you hear hoofbeats, think 'horses,' not 'zebras.'"

And the 9/11 conspiracy theories involve not only zebras, but all too often unicorns, centaurs, and fauns.

Your right, that's why I was avoiding the subject of melting steel beams. :)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on May 14, 2007, 02:29 PM NHFT
The United 93 movie wasn't nearly so disturbing as the news footage. Over and over. BTW, I saw what happened to those people after they hit the ground. That's something I'll never forget.

I can't even imagine what that would be like, what I saw on tv was something I'll never forget.  Do you know the Alan Jackson song about 9/11?  I cry every time I hear that, it says almost everything that I felt that day and even now.  Were you there when it happened?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on May 14, 2007, 02:39 PM NHFT
I wasn't there. Was supposed to have been, being a tourist, but decided not to go. (My lizard friends in the NWO called and tipped me off.)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: cyberdoo78 on May 14, 2007, 03:18 PM NHFT
Here's a link that I got in one of my FFNN letters for all you 9/11 buffs.....

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20070512&articleId=5626 (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20070512&articleId=5626)
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Dreepa on May 14, 2007, 03:37 PM NHFT
I still think that the UA 93 flight was shot down... even if everything else turns out to be 'as reported'.... I think that the USAirforce said no way to a 4th flight and took that plane out.
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Raineyrocks on May 14, 2007, 03:40 PM NHFT
I wasn't there. Was supposed to have been, being a tourist, but decided not to go. (My lizard friends in the NWO called and tipped me off.)

Aahh, your lizard friends huh?  It's good to know reptiles in low places!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on May 14, 2007, 07:34 PM NHFT
You said "who knows whether or not it was a hologram."  I said, YOU know it.

I find it very hard to be nice when such patent absurdity is flying about, such as the absurdity of questioning the reality of the death of Barbara Olson or Todd Beamer by postulating alien-technology holograms.  I can put up with repeated pointless questions from my three year old, since I know he'll grow out of it, but nearly six years of it from full grown adults gets under my skin.

Did you know that steam and iron will burn at about 400 degrees?  It's called pyrophoric oxidation.  Gypsum in wallboard has a chemical composition of CaSO, about 17.6% sulfur, which would have become a source of sulfur for hydrogen-sulfide-driven pyrophoric oxidation of the steel.

Indeed, by pumping water for weeks into the rubble pile at Ground Zero, the NYFD was probably adding fuel to the fire as the steam reacted with the steel and released hydrogen to either combine with the sulfur in gypsum to burn violently with the steel or to burn with oxygen in the air.

As for United 93 and the missile theory, close your eyes and think about what you would do if you were fighting with knife-wielding people trying to prevent you from unbuckling their harnesses and pulling them out of their seat at the controls taking over the plane.  Think about what they would do.  Think about the tight space between the head and the galley near the cockpit of a typical plane.  Think about the width of the door.  Think about the cramped quarters of the cockpit.  Think about a dead body in that space.  Think about how slippery great gouts of blood are.   And watch "United 93" if you want to see one possible answer to whether the plane crashed or not.  The final instants of that movie are overwhelming.

Plausible?  Yes or no.

LOL.  You are the king of strawmen, mvpel.  You like to attack the craziest ideas proposed.  I for one believe that "hologram theories" are government disinformation designed to distract from the strong arguments of men like David Ray Griffin.  I have no problem believing that real planes hit real buildings.

What's funny is that by your own admission, the Pentagon plane was flying "fast and low" - the problem seems to be, from my perspective, that none of the pilots on board the plane were qualified to fly a plane in this fashion. I'm curious who the pilot was, aren't you?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: error on May 14, 2007, 07:47 PM NHFT
How about the guy who went to learn how to be a pilot, but didn't learn how to land?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: KBCraig on May 14, 2007, 08:11 PM NHFT
What's funny is that by your own admission, the Pentagon plane was flying "fast and low" - the problem seems to be, from my perspective, that none of the pilots on board the plane were qualified to fly a plane in this fashion. I'm curious who the pilot was, aren't you?

What is it about your perspective that makes it impossible, or implausible, or even unlikely, that one of the accused hijackers was flying "in this fashion"? Do you believe that fast and low is harder than fast and high?

Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: Caleb on May 14, 2007, 08:52 PM NHFT
Not my words, KB -- this is from the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A14365-2001Sep11&notFound=true
-------

Quote
"Controllers had time to warn the White House that the jet was aimed directly at the president's mansion and was traveling at a gut-wrenching speed -- full throttle.

But just as the plane seemed to be on a suicide mission into the White House, the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver. The plane circled 270 degrees to the right to approach the Pentagon from the west, whereupon Flight 77 fell below radar level, vanishing from controllers' screens, the sources said.

Less than an hour after two other jets demolished the World Trade Center in Manhattan, Flight 77 carved a hole in the nation's defense headquarters, a hole five stories high and 200 feet wide.

Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm, possibly one of the hijackers. Someone even knew how to turn off the transponder, a move that is considerably less than obvious."


The supposed hijacker, Hani Hanour, could barely fly a Cessna; he was so bad, his flight trainers recommended that he give up his training.... So ... who piloted flight 77?
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 14, 2007, 10:56 PM NHFT
United 93 was a movie

Thanks for reminding people of that Rainey!
Title: Re: 9-11 was an inside job
Post by: jaqeboy on May 15, 2007, 12:45 AM NHFT
on the front page of 911Truth.org now - looks like it would be a good read:

Sunday, May 13 2007
Debunker Buster

by Tod Fletcher
May 12, 2007

_Debunking 9/11 Debunking_ is a monumental accomplishment by David Ray Griffin. He exhaustively and definitively destroys the pretensions of four major "9/11 debunking" publications published in 2006, shortly before the fifth anniversary of the events. Although the book is organized into chapters dealing with each one of the four publications in turn, Griffin has such a broad knowledge of all the evidence pertaining to the events, and such command of logic and argument, that the book is thoroughly cohesive and progressively builds an integrated critique of all dimensions of the official theory. _Debunking 9/11 Debunking_ will effectively serve as a veritable encyclopedia of not just the facts of 9/11, but of the best arguments to debunk the official (and semi-official) lies about the facts. Griffin, as usual, avoids speculation and focuses on showing that the official story of what happened that day cannot be true. . . .

_Debunking 9/11 Debunking_ is a tr