9-11 was an inside job

[Kat Kanning]

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.

[mvpel]

Here's a little blast from the past - call it the "Pearl Harbor Truth Movement:"

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.

[lildog]

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.

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?

[mvpel]

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.

[error]

Then the landing gear and other pieces of the planes which fell to the ground several blocks from the WTC complex were also holograms?

[firsty]

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.

[mvpel]

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

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."

[lildog]

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?

[error]

The holes in the government's official story are, unfortunately for the "9-11 truth movement," few and far between.

[firsty]

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.

[firsty]

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?

[error]

OH, that again? Those four were later found to have been victims of identity theft. Try again.

[firsty]

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.

[error]

The no-fly list is definitely out of hand. But it has nothing to do with any of the above allegations re 9/11.

[firsty]

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).