Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by D_N Flay Table, Jul 13, 2010.
Do you believe the official story of 9/11?
What do you think?
Not at all
I don't buy the official story either.
I believe, but have no proof to back me up, nor do I claim to have any.
I believe the "attacks" were carried out with the approval and direction of the Bush Regime.
Perhaps the "president" does not have any dirt on his personal hands, I still believe he was complicit.
Our nation at the time was deeply split over the Bush Regime's status of being selected, not elected.
However, after our nation was attacked by "terrorists" we all came together and his approval ratings skyrocketed in the polls.
Hmm. This cynic cannot seperate these occurrences and I believe there is a very direct connection!
Why didn't the Regime bomb and invade Saudi Arabia instead of Iraq?
No, i don't!
I believe the official story more than I believe any of the un-official stories I've heard.
I realize that this is a very sensitive issue and that some people will lash out at anyone even daring to question the official story, but for anyone who has any doubt or curiosity about the events leading up to and occurring on that day...I highly recommend the book:
Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil
Please just browse over the amazon page description and reviews at least
Amazon.com: Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil (9780865715400):…
The author, Michael C. Ruppert, is a former L.A. narcotics investigator who exposed the huge CIA drug trafficking operation in the LA area in the late 70's, which was later linked to millions of dollars made from funneling the drugs into urban areas and used to support and supply weapons to the Contras. As you can imagine he wasn't the most popular guy in certain circles and left the force after death threats and attempted shootings. He went on to become an investigative journalist, and in 2004 he wrote "Crossing the Rubicon". He wrote it as if it was a courtroom trial. Stating facts, backing them up with varying degrees of evidence, exploring back stories and all related and involved parties. Then after all of this he breaks down every item as he presents his case and draws conclusions based on all the evidence.
I found it to be the most comprehensive and, as far as it's possible, propaganda free and neutral investigation of 9/11. A great and eye opening read. I can not recommend it highly enough.
Nope. I don't know what happened exactly, but I know the official story is full of shit. The 9/11 commission report was over 1000 pages long, and it dedicated less than 1/4 of a page to WTC 7.
Five of 11 members on the commission panel called the investigation an sham, commission member Max Cleland called it an outrage and a farce.
14 pages about Saudi Arabia were completely redacted.
Cheney would not let Bush testify unless both of them were allowed to be in the same room and both could testify to the commission not under oath.
Mohammad atta's passport magically floating down to the ground? Give me a break.
How about the United flight that crashed in PA.
I think, but may be wrong, that the survivors of those killed, were told by the govt that the famous "Let's Roll" call to arms was not on any of the recordings. There was a voice that said "roll it" and it was attributed to the hijackers, on the CVR. The voice had a "heavy Middle Eastern" accent.
In order to spare the survivors any additional grief the tapes would not be publicized by the media.
Was it also amazing how quickly John Ashcroft appeared on tv and had photos and the identities of all of the hijackers?
It sure was quick, especially for the Bush Regime.
Yes.... WTC7 is kinda fishy.
1) I am not an American Citizen
2) I have an inbuilt Bullshit detector, growing up in in of the most repressive countries of the time
3) I have watched countless conspiricy documentaries of 9/11, Rupert, etc.
4) Bush and his clique were/are patent liars and manipulators.
5) Sadam had f-all to do with it.
6) Dunno if it was an inside job, but do know(gut feeling, BS detector) official version is a pack of lies.
7) For an outsider, the American media seems like an orchestrated Hollywood directed propaganda machine spouting the party line.
30 years from now, when people look back at American media... they are just going to laugh at how it was such blatant propaganda, (all the while consuming their newer, more future-modernistic forms of propaganda by the bucketloads)
I've been asking this for years but still nobody has produced. We were told a jet airliner crashed into the pentagon. Can somebody please produce a photo of any debris strewn area at the site of impact. There seems to be not one single photo from any of the myriad cameras positioned on or around the building, we're talking about the PENTAGON. I remember one close up photo of a plane part sitting on some grass, which could have been from anywhere, that was published. Hardly the epic aftermath one would expect.
Even buying the line that the plane and everything in it was completely vaporized on impact, where is a video showing the incoming plane. Except for one very famous video from a camera stationed at a distance and to the side, with some type of of projectile crashing into the building there is not one video ever released that shows an incoming plane. Again, it's the Pentagon. Camera surveillance 24/7 from every possible angle one can imagine, and not one video showing a plane flying in. I've seen a couple of vids that look like they were taken from helicopters in the area, but it's far away and you see a flash for a second, crash into the building, but no discernible plane.
There was somebody here years ago who was offended that I would even suggest that there was something scandalous and provided a youtube link to a university students computer animation rendering of the crash as proof that it was exactly as they said. I found that quite an unbelievable piece of evidence actually. That's as close as anybody has ever gotten to producing anything. I'm not putting out any theory about what did happen, I'm just curious if anybody can provide any photo or video of the Pentagon crash.
First the 9/11 commission was not an "commissioned" to conduct an engineering investigation.
Did anyone calling WTC7 fishy read the NIST report?
NIST and the World Trade Center
The National Institute of Standards and Technology, was charged with investigating and providing a reason for the WTC7 collapse. There still has not been one engineer that can produce a peer reviewed paper refuting anything that was provided in this information.
Nothing about WTC7 was surprising. Firefighters were talking about it collapsing hours before it did because of the damage, the fires and the angle the building was leaning prior to collapse. I can source the quotes if you'd like.
In a word, no.
I think the average man on the street will never know the full truth, and I include myself in that group...but my intuition tells me it was likely an inside job.
I thought this was the 'official story'.
And yes, I believe it as much as any fairytale told to second graders.
p.s. i love you.
The government generated reports are very likely pure fiction. If the truth were told....IF......And that is a "BIG" if, the truth were ever told at best the Bush administration could look like a bunch of incompetent fools.
We do know that two aircraft were involved in the crashes into and destruction of the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center. We know that two more also crashed. One of these aircraft crashed into the Pentagon the second aircraft crashed into the PA countryside. That much we do know.
Early on, there was a great deal of footage of the jet going into the pentagon from both inside and outside the building. I remember this footage being shown in the early days and then that footage disappeared and has never re-appeared. There can be many reasons for this situation.
I will always question many aspects of what has been said, but, as I have no absolute and provable evidence that something different did happen, my only choice is to remain doubtful of writings and statements made by officials at the time.
I disagree Ken. I don't recall any footage ever of a jet going into the pentagon. (See my post from earlier re-quoted below) There were never any photos of debris nor any film. If there were, don't you think such footage would have been played over and over again ad nauseam, like the footage of the planes flying into the trade center have been? How could they have ever passed up using that as propaganda?
A prevailing thought is that it was actually a missile that was sent into the Pentagon and that's why there wasn't any of the debris one would expect to find from a plane crash, and why no film footage ever surfaced. I imagine, it being the Pentagon, there must have been quite a bit of film to account for. It would also explain why the hole left in the wall of the building never matched to that of a plane crashing into it.
This excerpt from the Pentagon Wikipedia page is interesting:
"At the time of the attacks the Pentagon was under renovation and several offices were unoccupied, resulting in fewer casualties. Only 800 of 4500 people who would have been in the area were there because of the work. But the area hit, on the side of the Heliport Entrance facade, was the section best prepared for such an attack. It was the only area of the Pentagon with a sprinkler system, and it had been reconstructed with a web of steel columns and bars to withstand bomb blasts. The steel reinforcement, bolted together to form a continuous structure through all of the Pentagon's five floors, kept that section of the building from collapsing for 30 minutesenough time for hundreds of people to crawl out to safety. The area struck by the plane also had blast-resistant windows2 inches thick and 2,500 pounds eachthat stayed intact during the crash and fire. It had fire doors that opened automatically and newly built exits that allowed people to get out."
None of this, of course, explains what did happen to the actual plane then, if indeed it was a missile.
HG is right when he says we will probably never know the whole story about what really happened that day, but the "official" story not only leaves so many questions unanswered, but it raises that many more.
Actually Max...if that photo could be isolated emotionally from it's context, it's great satire. Bush sitting in that setting, holding a kids book, sitting in front of a little sign that says..."reading makes a country great" :redface:
NIST has not released the numbers or data for their collapse progression model (although Architects and engineers for 9/11 truth requested it, then waited two months to be told they would have to pay $800 for it, payed the $800, and as of now, about 6 months later, no word back from the NIST)
Furthermore, a high school physics teacher, David Chandler showed how the draft before the final document had a glaring problem, when they calculated average velocity instead of temporal acceleration, to claim there was no free fall speed during the collapse. They were forced to make a change, after being embarrassed for making an 8th grade "mistake", and in the end, they just say, "2.25 seconds of freefall acceleration fits their model of collapse progression"