9-11 was an inside job

[Russell Kanning]

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!

[Russell Kanning]

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.

[MaineShark]

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

[lildog]

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?

[mvpel]

New Pearl Harbor by David Ray Griffin is a good resource.

This is a link to a video of a real controlled demolition, 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. 

Here's a photo of WTC7 before its collapse:



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.

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:

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.

[Russell Kanning]

.. 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.

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.

[Russell Kanning]

This is a link to a video of a real controlled demolition, 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?

[error]

Only because they've never heard an earthquake, which is what they really sounded like.

[JonM]

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.

[mvpel]

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.

[Insurgent]

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.""

[mvpel]

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?

[error]

Don't forget the hundreds of rescue workers who pulled airplane parts out of the Pentagon. I suppose they're ALL fake rescue workers?

[Caleb]

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>

[Insurgent]

I think that my point has been dismissed. Oh well