Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I’ve been following this thread for a while. Come on people. What’s with all the straw man psuedo-arguments and ad hominem beat downs? The perpetrators span both sides of the issue:
If you don’t believe the Truthers than you are a brainwashed sheep on your way to the slaughterhouse. If you don’t believe the official story than you are a bat **** crazy moron gone off of your meds.
What is this High School? Meet me in the parking lot at 3:15 for an ass whoopin’. You better be there *****! Really, this is seriously juvenile madness that just goes round and round ad nauseam. The problem is that neither argument can be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. There is quite a bit of ambiguity and many questions that cannot be definitively answered.
As I watched the events of that horrible day unfold I was dumbstruck. When the buildings began to crumble something just didn’t look right, especially building 7. I had a strange feeling in my gut. Many of the Police and Fireman first responders heard secondary explosions, but who knows for sure? This was an unprecedented event. Never before have jumbo jets been flown into buildings. Maybe it did cause enough damage to bring the towers down. Maybe there was enough structural damage inflicted to building 7 to cause its eventual collapse. I just don’t know.
I think a 757 really did hit the Pentagon. There were just too many everyday people like you and me who saw it. They can’t all be mistaken or intentionally lying as part of a cover up. I do however believe that UAL flight 93 was most likely shot down over Shanksville because of the large debris field said to span 7 or 8 miles, but so what? Given the foreknowledge of the ultimate intentions of the previous hijackings this is exactly what should have happened.
For conspiracy believers I think you are all concentrating your focus and energy in the wrong places. To me the most damning evidence lies in all the war games that were taking place on that very day. The majority of the fighter interceptors that would normally be there to protect the Northeast were on training exercises in Canada and Alaska. There was also an exercise concerning a plane into building scenario. Norad and the FAA were conducting a joint exercise involving live flight aircraft mimicking the behavior of hijacked airplanes. They turned off their transponders and became only unidentifiable blips on a radar screen. When the hijackers then turned off their transponders there was no way to tell friend from foe, real world from exercise. All of these “coincidences” came together to produce the necessary “Fog of War” or confusion needed to pull something like this off.
The conspiracy deniers or debunkers often claim that there would have to be hundreds if not thousands of conspirators involved. They don’t know how compartmentalized the military and intelligence agencies are. I know, I had a high-level security clearance in the Army. Most of the time the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing. The vast majority of the military men involved in the above scenarios didn’t have to know squat. There was no necessary media complicity. All it would take is a handful (maybe a couple dozen) of high level, highly skilled, and highly Machiavellian men to pull this off. All they had to do is set it up and watch it happen. And these kinds of people know how to keep secrets.
The London subway bombings are also highly suspect for the same reasons. British police and security forces were conducting an exercise concerning a terrorist plot to blow up subway trains and again, in the middle of the exercise this is exactly what happened and in the same exact stations where the exercises were taking place providing the necessary cover and confusion. This incident was used to justify and implement legislation that further eroded the personal rights and civil liberties of UK citizens in much the same way that The Homeland Security and Patriot Acts have curtailed ours.
There is an interesting phenomenon dealing with the human mind and how it handles challenges to its belief system. Basically, any idea or information incongruent with an individual’s core beliefs will usually be rejected especially if it threatens the very foundation those beliefs are built upon. Everybody is subject to this filtering process including me. I don’t think that I’m special.
Do I believe the 9/11 inside job theory? Not necessarily, but my worldview allows for the possibility.
Three heavily reinforced steel frame buildings collapsed at free fall speed on 9-11. One of which was not even touched by an airplane, the other 2 had relatively minor damage and fires burning, and were built to withstand multiple air crashes. No steel framed skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire before in history.
There were molten pools of steel found at the bottom of all 3 buildings that burned for months. Fires produced by the jet fuel did not come close to that required to produce those pools.
The buildings were relatively bare of flammable materials, and were designed to isolate fires.
Who planted the explosives? Well, a security company with ties to Marvin Bush presided over the building for months before 9-11. Occupants reported banks of elevators being made unavailable for use for days at a time, and loud rumbling noises were heard on supposedly vacant floors.
What?! Yes, I, of course, believe the 911 "story" was contrived and accomplished by real terrorists. Do people hate Pres. Bush that much that they would actually believe he would be responsible? That is ridiculous.
Exactly what I meant when I said something is shady. I don't know who's behind 9/11 but I don't think it's Osama. There's a reason he's been overlooked in this whole occupation in Iraq.
When I watched it on TV I thought I was watching a planned implosion - the kind you see in Vegas (I've seen a few). I've wondered about Bin Laden. After 8 year - is anyone looking I came across this article - even though you can't believe everything you read I found it interesting, just the same.
By Muriel Kane
Published: July 31, 2009
In an interview last month with blogger Brad Friedman, whistle blower Sibel Edmonds dropped a bombshell when a caller asked a question about 9/11.
The former FBI translator carefully replied, “I have information about things that our government has lied to us about. I know. For example, to say that since the fall of the Soviet Union we ceased all of our intimate relationship with Bin Laden and the Taliban - those things can be proven as lies, very easily, based on the information they classified in my case, because we did carry very intimate relationship with these people, and it involves Central Asia, all the way up to September 11.”
Australian blogger Luke Ryland has now filled in more details of the Central Asian operations to which Edmonds was referring, quoting Edmonds as saying on other occasions that al Qaeda and the Taliban were used by the US as proxies in “a decade-long illegal, covert operation in Central Asia by a small group in the US intent on furthering the oil industry and the Military Industrial Complex.”
Turkey acted as the primary intermediary in this operation, with assistance from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The intention was, on one hand, to avoid creating a direct confrontation with China and Russia and, on the other, to prevent popular resistance to US influence by appealing to Central Asian aspirations for an Islamic and Turkic resurgence.
Ryland also points out that Uighurs from the western Chinese province of Xinjiang were receiving training from al Qaeda in Afghanistan before 2001, with the expectation that they might serve as guerrilla forces in the event of US conflict with China. Edmonds has recently stated that “our fingerprint is all over” recent Uighur unrest within China.
There are certain factors, touched on lightly by Ryland in this article, which provide further support for Edmonds’ shocking allegations. One is what is sometimes known as the “Bernard Lewis Project,” an effort first espoused thirty years ago by Middle East scholar and Neocon guru Bernard Lewis to pursue “the fragmentation and balkanization of Iran along regional, ethnic and linguistic lines.”
Although this plan involves several different ethnic groups within Iran, including Arabs, Kurds, and Baluchis, its most ambitious component involves the use of pan-Turkic (or pan-Turanian) nationalism to shift power in the Middle East away from both Iran and the Arab states and towards Turkey, a US ally which is linguistically and ethnically close to the oil-rich states of Central Asia. Pan-Turanism often has fascist affinities, which makes its encouragement particularly problematic.
Another anomaly of US policy in the region has to do with its support for terrorist groups, many of them engaged in the heroin trade, that are also strongly suspected of having ties to al Qaeda. This was the case in the 1990’s with groups in Chechnya, Bosnia, and Kosovo, and there is some evidence that it continued to be the case in Central Asia even after 9/11.
For example, a profile of the Kosovo Liberation Army at HistoryCommons.org includes numerous mainstream citations from 1998-99 indicating that the KLA, working together with the Albanian Mafia, had taken control of Balkan heroin trafficking routes and was funneling the profits into its political activities. The United States continued supporting the KLA during this period and even removed it from the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations, despite statements from US officials that it was a terrorist group with strong evidence of links to al Qaeda.
The extent to which al Qaeda may itself have played a role in the Afghan heroin trade is a matter of dispute, but there is no question that al Qaeda provided training and financial support to some of the same terrorist groups that were being supported by the US — a situation in sharp contrast with the usual assumption that the United States and al Qaeda were deadly enemies even prior to 9/11.
Edmonds’ latest remarks appear intended to draw fresh attention to these anomalies, as well as the role played by Enron and other Western oil companies and weapons suppliers in Central Asia in the 1990s.
This article was modified from an original version to provide additional background.
From the very day it happened, as I saw the first tower collapse, the first thought that came to my mind was, isn't it amazing how easily it fell straight down instead of toppling.
Too many unanswered questions. Instead of dealing with questions the believers in the government's official story merely label all doubters as conspiracy theorists. Or try to side-track by mentioning conspiracy theories about events not related to 9/11.
From the very day it happened, as I saw the first tower collapse, the first thought that came to my mind was, isn't it amazing how easily it fell straight down instead of toppling.
Too many unanswered questions. Instead of dealing with questions the believers in the government's official story merely label all doubters as conspiracy theorists. Or try to side-track by mentioning conspiracy theories about events not related to 9/11.
It's not always the government's official story that is believed. It is the word of the professional engineers and other people who didn't work for the government who did the actually work of examining the steel and sifting through the debris. There was no evidence of explosives in the debris, and just because someone watching it on TV thinks it should have toppled over, that doesn't change the fact that the design of the building was what made it fall the way it did.
Entire engineering forums are held on the collapse and building design methods for life safety have changed because of lessons learned on that collapse. The American Society of Civil Engineers has 25,000 members. I don't see how people really believe they are participating in some coverup for the federal government.
For some weird reason, there seems to be a perception out there that the government had a lot more control and/or involvement in those factors--the recovery operation, the examination of the debris, etc., than it did.
From the very day it happened, as I saw the first tower collapse, the first thought that came to my mind was, isn't it amazing how easily it fell straight down instead of toppling.
Too many unanswered questions. Instead of dealing with questions the believers in the government's official story merely label all doubters as conspiracy theorists. Or try to side-track by mentioning conspiracy theories about events not related to 9/11.
To be a good liar, one must first be a good "believer".
See: Adjustable Rate Lying (ARL)
The rate is usually consistent with credit card interest rates.
It's not always the government's official story that is believed. It is the word of the professional engineers and other people who didn't work for the government who did the actually work of examining the steel and sifting through the debris. There was no evidence of explosives in the debris, and just because someone watching it on TV thinks it should have toppled over, that doesn't change the fact that the design of the building was what made it fall the way it did.
Entire engineering forums are held on the collapse and building design methods for life safety have changed because of lessons learned on that collapse. The American Society of Civil Engineers has 25,000 members. I don't see how people really believe they are participating in some coverup for the federal government.
For some weird reason, there seems to be a perception out there that the government had a lot more control and/or involvement in those factors--the recovery operation, the examination of the debris, etc., than it did.
Science doesn't lie, but scientists DO. Lie, that is!
It's not always the government's official story that is believed. It is the word of the professional engineers and other people who didn't work for the government who did the actually work of examining the steel and sifting through the debris. There was no evidence of explosives in the debris, and just because someone watching it on TV thinks it should have toppled over, that doesn't change the fact that the design of the building was what made it fall the way it did.
Entire engineering forums are held on the collapse and building design methods for life safety have changed because of lessons learned on that collapse. The American Society of Civil Engineers has 25,000 members. I don't see how people really believe they are participating in some coverup for the federal government.
For some weird reason, there seems to be a perception out there that the government had a lot more control and/or involvement in those factors--the recovery operation, the examination of the debris, etc., than it did.
I had read somewhere that if it had been the Sears Tower - because of the way it was designed - a building like that would never have gone down like the Towers did.
The "how the buildings went down" is important. But I am more interested in the why and by who did it in regards to 9/11. I just don't buy the "Al Queda/Bin Laden did it because they hate us". I never thought it was that simple
Only the small secrets need protecting, the big ones are kept secret by public incredulity.
-Marshall McCluhan
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I came across this article - even though you can't believe everything you read I found it interesting, just the same.
