Conspiracy Theory Proof 9/11 was an Inside Job?

[Daytripper]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

What superhero? I'm just not blinded by all the bullshit that is spread out thought the government about how the government are the good guys.

I'm actually trying to get the real information out there unlike you. What are you doing to make it better, **** all probably.

Lets hear some specifics then Einstein.

Rather than just the white trash theory of 'the government' did it.

 

[madhawkboy]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

[youtube]fTdAkhd6Dcw[/youtube]

 

[TheBloods]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Wow, it's people like you that make things much worse. Clamining that the "Truthers" are just a bunch of ****ing idiots making the world worse because we want the answers and the truth, and are willing to stand up to the government and not be slaves to there propaganda?

You insult the families victims as well because a majority of the families feel that something was not told to them after the attacks. I believe that its fair and that they deserve some more answers or questions that have not been answers. What do you think Daytripper? Do you think that these crazy victims families of the 9/11 attacks deserve more answers? Or are they just a bunch of wack job idiots with an IQ of 5.

LOL - you hero!

 

[Kellythatsit]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Exactly my point. If you consider the actual threat that Manning and the information that he's leaked poses, the barbarity of his treatment has one purpose (or maybe 2, if you count the theory that the US govt is trying to get him to implicate Assange and Wikileaks as accomplices) and that is to send a clear message to anyone who considers "breaking ranks". I hate to imagine what anyone who has genuine conflicting information about 9/11 might go through if they chose to reveal it.

But as I explained in my previous post, the two issues are apples and oranges. Of course the military is coming down on him like a ton of bricks. Not only did he leak documents and videos such as “Collateral Murder” but he has also allegedly provided documents and correspondence which potentially reveals military strategy. Not only has he endangered fellow servicemen and women he has committed a serious breach of national security. All for what? Getting past the shock value of “Collateral Murder” all it really tells us is that war is bad??!! What a scoop!!

And in the end it would seem that Manning’s motivation is more to do with a grudge against “the system” than any deep need to tell the truth (a truth I might repeat we all knew any way). The US would be negligent if they didn’t severely punish Manning because make no mistake, what he has done is a serious and premeditated crime.

I contend however, if someone were to come forward, like Colleen Rowley, with evidence to show government complicity to any degree in the 9/11 attacks they would indeed be regarded as a hero. Of course their claims would initially be regarded with skepticism, however, if they could back it up it would indeed lead to a serious investigation. However, this is all pie in the sky because at this point in time, after almost a decade, not a single, creditable whistleblower has come forward!

I like the memo, but you're citing someone who seems a fair way down the food chain and seems to be objecting to claims that the FBI were less than competent in their investigations prior to 9/11 and therefore "going in to bat" for her fellow officers. And this:

Would seem to support my hypothesis more than refute it. She seems to be accusing high-level FBI personnel of skewing facts for "political" reasons. If she believes that is possible, then what might they be willing to do for "national security" reasons?

But lets make it clear, skewing facts to protect ones own arse is slightly different to planning and executing greatest hoax of all time. Then to cover up so thoroughly that no indictable evidence of government complicity remains!

As for expecting anything like early 70's integrity to be present in the 2000's, well ... call me a cynic. Bush and his cronies would have been brought up on war crimes charges in the 70's. The two eras are utterly incomparable.

Yes I know we all look back to the atrocities of Vietnam and the lies of the Nixon Administration with warm feelings and a sense of nostalgia! Ah those were the days hey!!

It took one man working with the mainstream media to expose a corrupt, arrogant and out of control government!! They are all today celebrated as true national heroes!

 

[EasternTiger]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

You do realise that when you espouse these theories, that everyone automatically thinks you have the IQ of a 5 year old. For your sake, I hope you don't do it publicly and this forum is about as far as you go. At least its anonymous that way.

I care not what people think of me, for it is none of my business.

They may think I have the IQ of a 5 yo when I discuss 9/11, but they're the people who I give none of my time to. In fact, I'm probably asking them to fetch me a cup of coffee.

On the other hand, whenever you open you mouth, on any possible subject, I'm sure people of all walks of life turn to each other, roll their eyes and say the exact same thing:

"What a douche"

 

[OldBlueFan]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

But as I explained in my previous post, the two issues are apples and oranges. Of course the military is coming down on him like a ton of bricks.

Before he has been found guilty of anything ... in fact, before he has even been charged with anything.

all it really tells us is that war is bad??!! What a scoop!!

And yet for this "non-scoop" he is being treated like the worst and most violent of the prisoners in the US detention system. In a manner that is widely recognised as a form of torture.

I say again, if this is how a "nuisance" is treated, I'd hate to see how any real threat might be treated!

Manning's motivation is completely irrelevant to the treatment he has received and the point I am making, so I won't address that.

I contend however, if someone were to come forward, like Colleen Rowley, with evidence to show government complicity to any degree in the 9/11 attacks they would indeed be regarded as a hero. Of course their claims would initially be regarded with skepticism, however, if they could back it up it would indeed lead to a serious investigation. However, this is all pie in the sky because at this point in time, after almost a decade, not a single, creditable whistleblower has come forward!

You seem to be straying from our argument here. I am referring to a cover-up of the controlled demolition of the towers, not government complicity in the act itself. Perhaps this misunderstanding explains your reactions.

But lets make it clear, skewing facts to protect ones own arse is slightly different to planning and executing greatest hoax of all time. Then to cover up so thoroughly that no indictable evidence of government complicity remains!

See my point above.

Yes I know we all look back to the atrocities of Vietnam and the lies of the Nixon Administration with warm feelings and a sense of nostalgia! Ah those were the days hey!!

It took one man working with the mainstream media to expose a corrupt, arrogant and out of control government!! They are all today celebrated as true national heroes!

Again you miss my point or choose to use a "Bloods" tactic of misrepresenting it for the purposes of ridicule.

I am saying that people of the ilk of Mark Felt are the ones that have gone missing. Scumbags like Nixon, Bush, Cheney etc have always existed. I thought my anecdote about my friend's regard for the integrity of Colin Powell would have made that clear.

So, just to spell out what I am saying.

I think the buildings were collapsed by controlled demolition (by whom is irrelevant) and I think the plane crashes were the ruse for that demolition.

I think that the people who have been complicit in denying this are either:
a) no closer to the actual facts or evidence than "truthers", or;
b) complying with requests from high-level government officials

Exactly how the government officials are convincing these folks (b) to help with the cover-up, I'm not sure, but given their justifications for other acts (many of which have been illegal - but still not "whistleblown") I suspect that the phrase "national security" has been liberally applied.

 

[Daytripper]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

I care not what people think of me, for it is none of my business.

They may think I have the IQ of a 5 yo when I discuss 9/11, but they're the people who I give none of my time to. In fact, I'm probably asking them to fetch me a cup of coffee.

Hilarious. And Santa Claus is real too.

 

[madhawkboy]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

[youtube]JUpq8idF1ow[/youtube]

 

[madhawkboy]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

[youtube]sQfoFzJUsb0[/youtube]

 

[Daytripper]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Is there a point to these youtube clips ?

I asked for some specific details as to how you think 911 happened. Can you please put it down in writing ?

 

[rayven]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

YThere have already been inquiries and investigations.

Who By? what were the terms of reference for these enquiries?

 

[Daytripper]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Who By? what were the terms of reference for these enquiries?

he National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, also known as the 9/11 Commission, was set up on November 27, 2002 "to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 attacks", including preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks.

The commission was also mandated to provide recommendations designed to guard against future attacks.

Chaired by former New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean, the commission consisted of five Democrats and five Republicans. The commission was created by Congressional legislation, with the bill signed into law by President George W. Bush.

The commission's final report was lengthy and based on extensive interviews and testimony. Its primary conclusion was that the failures of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation permitted the terrorist attacks to occur and that had these agencies acted more wisely and more aggressively, the attacks could potentially have been prevented.

After the publication of its final report, the commission closed on August 21, 2004.[1] The commission was the last investigation by the federal government into the events of 9/11, with the exception of the NIST report on the collapse of Building 7.

What more do you guys want ?

FFS - they even held the CIA and FBI accountable.

 

[EasternTiger]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

 

[Daytripper]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

ET is back.

School must have finished for the day.

 

[EasternTiger]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

You live in an internet fantasy world

 

[Kellythatsit]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

I think the buildings were collapsed by controlled demolition (by whom is irrelevant) and I think the plane crashes were the ruse for that demolition.

But where is the evidence for this? The only resemblance between the destruction of the towers and that of a controlled demolition is that they fell down not up!

 

[Freak Dodgeball Accident]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, also known as the 9/11 Commission, was set up on November 27, 2002

Oh, you mean these commissioners?

• 9/11 Commissioners:
• The 9/11 Commission’s co-chairs said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements (free subscription required)
• 9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says “I don’t believe for a minute we got everything right”, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue
• 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”
• 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”
• 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that “There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . .” He also said that the investigation depended too heavily on the accounts of Al Qaeda detainees who were physically coerced into talking
• And the Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) – who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry – recently said “At some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened”. He also said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.” And he said: “It’s almost a culture of concealment, for lack of a better word. There were interviews made at the FAA’s New York center the night of 9/11 and those tapes were destroyed. The CIA tapes of the interrogations were destroyed. The story of 9/11 itself, to put it mildly, was distorted and was completely different from the way things happened”

• John Farmer, senior counsel to the Commission stated that the Commission "discovered that...what government and military officials had told Congress, the Commission, the media, and the public about who knew what when — was almost entirely, and inexplicably, untrue." Farmer continues: "At some level of the government, at some point in time … there was a decision not to tell the truth about what happened...The (NORAD) tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public."[21] Thomas Kean, the head of the 9/11 Commission, concurred: "We to this day don’t know why NORAD told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth.

​

Edit, sorry about the bad format. Just a rushed cut and paste job.

 

[Daytripper]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

^^^^
I must have missed the statements from the commissioners above where they state that WTC7 was blown up and that the Pentagon was shot at with a missile.

Perhaps you can direct me to them ?

Doesn't it also make a mockery of the 911 ***** (and thats how I will refer to them from now on) theory that it was one giant cover up. Surely you would appoint commissioners who you would know would just go along and check all the boxes.

 

[vealesy]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Was WTC7 even in the commission report?

 

[OldBlueFan]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

But where is the evidence for this? The only resemblance between the destruction of the towers and that of a controlled demolition is that they fell down not up!

The only HARD evidence maybe. But I would have thought that was the whole point of a cover-up. Wouldn't be much of a cover-up if hard evidence was left lying around for folks to seize upon.

Indirect evidence however:

• Collapse at freefall speed
• No toppling of the structures above the impact sites
• Enormous buildings that collapsed into their own footprint
• Debris whisked away and shipped overseas without proper examination
• Reports of explosions heard at the scene prior to the collapse
• Reports of pools of molten metal at the scene following the collapse
• etc etc

Not to mention an entire building collapsing as a result of fire. A phenomenon completely unheard of before.

 

[rayven]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

What more do you guys want ?

FFS - they even held the CIA and FBI accountable.

So America investigated itself, okay thats objective, imagine if they had something to hide, do you think they would maybe manipulate the terms of reference of an inquiry they set up? That is why i asked you for the terms of reference so we could rule that out.
But we cant rule that at out as the inquiry you speak of, you havnt produced the terms of reference yet.
As I understand it Cheney and Bush were called before this commision and appeared together, not seperatly.....Why would they do that?
As I understand it irregulaties with that inquiry have been mentioned in this thread, As i understand it evidence given at that inquiry that contridcts the official story was left out of the commisions report, why would that be?
There has to be reasons (whatever they are)
I would like to see both sides, see those who believe the inquiry was fit and proper make there argument, can you do that?

 

[vealesy]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

no he can't, because of the "national security"

what a crock term, if ive ever heard one.

 

[Damp Squarie]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Surely you would appoint commissioners who you would know would just go along and check all the boxes.

Exactly...enter Philip Zelikow; the executive director of the 9 11 Commission who basically wrote the 9 11 Commission Report.

When you know his background is it any wonder pertinent questions were not allowed to be aired. The 911 Commission Report is laughable.

http://www.rense.com/general78/rapestory.htm

 

[Daytripper]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Exactly...enter Philip Zelikow; the executive director of the 9 11 Commission who basically wrote the 9 11 Commission Report.

When you know his background is it any wonder pertinent questions were not allowed to be aired. The 911 Commission Report is laughable.

http://www.rense.com/general78/rapestory.htm

I'm not quite sure I follow.

Freak Dodgeball has pointed me to some commissioners who raised questions yet you being a fellow truther are now saying its/they're laughable.

Also, when you say 'basically wrote' what do you mean ?
Would like some clarification please.

Had a look at his background too. Doesn't seem too afraid to take on government.

 

[Daytripper]

Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

So America investigated itself, okay thats objective, imagine if they had something to hide, do you think they would maybe manipulate the terms of reference of an inquiry they set up? That is why i asked you for the terms of reference so we could rule that out.

Well of course they investigated themselves. FFS, should they have asked the Ghanian police force to conduct it or something.

But we cant rule that at out as the inquiry you speak of, you havnt produced the terms of reference yet.

Well, what are the terms of reference then ?
If there isn't one then you could assume that it is to cover all material and events related to 911.

As I understand it Cheney and Bush were called before this commision and appeared together, not seperatly.....Why would they do that?

I fail to understand any relevance that has. Can you ?

As I understand it irregulaties with that inquiry have been mentioned in this thread, As i understand it evidence given at that inquiry that contridcts the official story was left out of the commisions report, why would that be?
There has to be reasons (whatever they are)
I would like to see both sides, see those who believe the inquiry was fit and proper make there argument, can you do that?

There are irregularities with any inquiry, any investigation. Detective work does not pan out like CSI Miami.