***9-11 TRUTH panel on C-SPAN NOW!!!***

[FORD]

Learn the reality, and begin to deal with it......

[DR CHIP]

Ford,

With all due respect, and I HAVE said many times I respect your apparent patriotism, there is PLENTY of evidence supporting the opposite of your opinion...

I think I have every right in the world to believe 9-11 is what it is....rationally and with research....

PEACE

[FORD]

Originally posted by DR CHIP
Ford,

With all due respect, and I HAVE said many times I respect your apparent patriotism, there is PLENTY of evidence supporting the opposite of your opinion...

I think I have every right in the world to believe 9-11 is what it is....rationally and with research....

PEACE

Then what would it hurt you to watch? ;)

[DR CHIP]

I have no disagreement with you brother....I will continue to look at the facts as they come in....

[DR CHIP]

BTW, still a big Seahawks fan?

I got second pick in my fantasy league and I may get Alexander!!

[DEMON CUNT]

http://www.internetweekly.org/images/saddam_wtc.jpg

[DLR'sCock]

So these physics professors proved there were trace amounts of thermite found?



Here is the video: You watch, you decide, you can think, you can hide, you may be wrong and you may be right but what is just is, and i don't give a shite.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5004704309041471296&q=alex+symposium

[DLR'sCock]

Oh they say that they found evidence of thermate and sulpher.

[DLR'sCock]

So what's the thought process here folks?

IF, and I say if the testing conducted by these Physics professors is valid and proves that they found thermate, used in professional demolisions, from pieces of the Trade Center wreckage, where does that leave us?

At the very least with more and more questions.

Of course it could all just be one big hallucination and we're all back in Kansas now.

[FORD]

Thermite and sulfur could only be present in the WTC rubble in the case of a controlled demolition.

The fact that the crime scene was so quickly cleaned up, and the evidence shipped off to China and India certainly doesn't help the BCE's case. Rather it makes it obvious that they feared exactly the results that Dr. Jones found. The presence of demolition compounds in the rubble that could not possibly be there otherwise.

[jhale667]

Originally posted by FORD
Thermite and sulfur could only be present in the WTC rubble in the case of a controlled demolition.

The fact that the crime scene was so quickly cleaned up, and the evidence shipped off to China and India certainly doesn't help the BCE's case. Rather it makes it obvious that they feared exactly the results that Dr. Jones found. The presence of demolition compounds in the rubble that could not possibly be there otherwise.

Something has smelled funny about this since day one. I for one am interested to watch this when I get home....

[DEMON CUNT]

Silly conspiracy theorists, it was nineteen brown guys with box knives!

[jhale667]

Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
Silly conspiracy theorists, it was nineteen brown guys with box knives!


"He said, quoting the 'official' version of events..." ;)

[Seshmeister]

It reminds me of Jimmy Swaggart to be honest. But then again FORD believes the Jesus myth with no evidence so there you go.

Here's my take.

1) The US government did some really dodgy shit in South America in the 1960s and 70s. It's cool that some people there are finally realising this.

2) A hell of a lot of the conspiracy about 9-11 is much more easily explained by government incompetance. My experiance of big government is that it is always incompetant.

3) Why do dozens of experts from all over the world who had no bias one way or the other agree and explain how the towers came down?

Maybe they weren't selling books?

4) The whole thing is totally illogical. It's nuts. Planes hit the towers, that's undeniable. They never mention that.

WHY WOULDN'T THAT BE ENOUGH?

Why would they have to blow up building 7? Why? Why? Why?

Who gives a cunt about Building 7? Noone cares. So it wasn't a justification for the draconian laws that followed. If the towers hadn't collapsed, WHO GIVES A CUNT?

WHY TAKE THE RISK?

IT MAKES NO SENSE.

None of this matters at all. It's fucking nonsense.

All it took to get the Patriot Act or the Iraqi war or whatever is the planes hitting the buildings.

It's that fucking simple.

Can you imagine the cuntspiracy theories if there was no irrefutable video evidence of the planes hitting the towers?

Why were the planes not intercepted?

Give me a break. In 40 minutes you can start shooting commercial down passenger planes? In case something that had never happened before happens?

3 big fucking planes hitting the highest profile buildings in the US killing hundreds wouldn't have been enough? No. It was absolutely essential that explosives were there which would be set off an hour later? It's just fucking ridiculous.

Madness.

Incompetance.

I fly weekly. The US security was a fucking joke. A disgrace. For some reason whether it was incompetance or just fucked up arogance the US government for some reason thought it was immune from terrorsim on home soil. Why? I have no idea.

My aunt was the head of airport security for Scotland pre 9-11 and we talked about it a few times pre 9-11 as frequent travellers. It was a fucking joke. A disgrace. There was no airport security in the US pre 9-11.

A week after 9-11 I was sitting at Heathrow airport and the Israeli flight to fucking Beruit left on time. We had to wait for hours for our UA flight to leave.

Back to the post.

Why oh why do they find it so amazing that if someone cuts the throat of an air hostess noone does anything given the history of hijacking. I think doing nothing is entirely the obvious reaction.

The stuff about people using cell phones on flight 93 is bullshit. They used air phones.

They said Allah was great instead of something else seconds before crashing. Gimme a break.

These are the cunts that went to a strip bar the night before.

I learned nothing from this at all except that like the fake Moon landings shit if you listen to stupid one sided crap for an hour if you don't know better it seems to be convincing.


Cheers!

:gulp:

[FORD]

Well, at least you watched it, and came to SOME conclusions, though I'm not about to agree with many of them.

The Busheep won't even do that much. They're afraid to.

[Seshmeister]

FORD there are a hundred things post 9-11 that I'm pissed off about that have happened in the US and the UK.

I am the most cynical mofo going but the Alex Jones arguments fall to bits under any sort of examination.

They have no concept of causation in this.

1 and 1 equals 3 stuff.

[FORD]

What about the presence of thermite & sulfur in the WTC rubble. Tell tale signs of a controlled demolition. Nothing that would be found in the building otherwise, and certainly not on a passenger airplane.

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by FORD
What about the presence of thermite & sulfur in the WTC rubble. Tell tale signs of a controlled demolition. Nothing that would be found in the building otherwise, and certainly not on a passenger airplane.

How about where it came from, and it wasn't collected at the site by credible sources, it was "a woman from the Northeast" who was an apparent neat freak at a memorial, and other un-named sources described as "private people" some time after the attack which was not elaborated on as to the date these people were there.

Let's also point out that between the clean up and the start of the memorials, there are controlled demolitions done to clear some areas, especially the areas under the towers.

My point is that the conspiracies began before that day ended, and there is NO PROOF that it came from the WTC sites.

Your asking us to trust total strangers here, well, i need proof to even consider this 'theory', can we call it a theory?

So, your assertion that it was in the rubble is subjective in my opinion.

Sorry, but that evidence is what we call 'tainted'.

[Cathedral]

By the way, can i have the 1 hour, 31 minutes and 46 seconds back that i wasted watching that tired worn out and unbelievable program?

Their 'theories' have more holes than the 'Official' story does.

[binnie]

Originally posted by Seshmeister
It reminds me of Jimmy Swaggart to be honest. But then again FORD believes the Jesus myth with no evidence so there you go.

Here's my take.

1) The US government did some really dodgy shit in South America in the 1960s and 70s. It's cool that some people there are finally realising this.

2) A hell of a lot of the conspiracy about 9-11 is much more easily explained by government incompetance. My experiance of big government is that it is always incompetant.

3) Why do dozens of experts from all over the world who had no bias one way or the other agree and explain how the towers came down?

Maybe they weren't selling books?

4) The whole thing is totally illogical. It's nuts. Planes hit the towers, that's undeniable. They never mention that.

WHY WOULDN'T THAT BE ENOUGH?

Why would they have to blow up building 7? Why? Why? Why?

Who gives a cunt about Building 7? Noone cares. So it wasn't a justification for the draconian laws that followed. If the towers hadn't collapsed, WHO GIVES A CUNT?

WHY TAKE THE RISK?

IT MAKES NO SENSE.

None of this matters at all. It's fucking nonsense.

All it took to get the Patriot Act or the Iraqi war or whatever is the planes hitting the buildings.

It's that fucking simple.

Can you imagine the cuntspiracy theories if there was no irrefutable video evidence of the planes hitting the towers?

Why were the planes not intercepted?

Give me a break. In 40 minutes you can start shooting commercial down passenger planes? In case something that had never happened before happens?

3 big fucking planes hitting the highest profile buildings in the US killing hundreds wouldn't have been enough? No. It was absolutely essential that explosives were there which would be set off an hour later? It's just fucking ridiculous.

Madness.

Incompetance.

I fly weekly. The US security was a fucking joke. A disgrace. For some reason whether it was incompetance or just fucked up arogance the US government for some reason thought it was immune from terrorsim on home soil. Why? I have no idea.

My aunt was the head of airport security for Scotland pre 9-11 and we talked about it a few times pre 9-11 as frequent travellers. It was a fucking joke. A disgrace. There was no airport security in the US pre 9-11.

A week after 9-11 I was sitting at Heathrow airport and the Israeli flight to fucking Beruit left on time. We had to wait for hours for our UA flight to leave.

Back to the post.

Why oh why do they find it so amazing that if someone cuts the throat of an air hostess noone does anything given the history of hijacking. I think doing nothing is entirely the obvious reaction.

The stuff about people using cell phones on flight 93 is bullshit. They used air phones.

They said Allah was great instead of something else seconds before crashing. Gimme a break.

These are the cunts that went to a strip bar the night before.

I learned nothing from this at all except that like the fake Moon landings shit if you listen to stupid one sided crap for an hour if you don't know better it seems to be convincing.


Cheers!

:gulp:


Yep, it is clearly the planes that did it, although I did find the video interesting.

The issue, as I see it, is how prior warning did the US governement have of this, and how did they act on this?

very interesting video though FORD, even if I don't necessarily buy the conclusions....

[diamondD]

Originally posted by FORD
Thermite and sulfur could only be present in the WTC rubble in the case of a controlled demolition.

The fact that the crime scene was so quickly cleaned up, and the evidence shipped off to China and India certainly doesn't help the BCE's case. Rather it makes it obvious that they feared exactly the results that Dr. Jones found. The presence of demolition compounds in the rubble that could not possibly be there otherwise.


How quick are you saying they cleaned it up? The main thing was to look for survivors and then it still took almost a year just to clean it up.

[Hardrock69]

Here it is on the web:

rtsp://video.c-span.org/60days/ap072906.rm

Copy and paste the above link into your RealPlayer.

It will be repeated on C-Span tonight (TWuesday 8/12/06) at
6:10PM EST, 5:10 CST

Here is an article about reaction to this show on the web:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/310706cspan.htm

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
Here it is on the web:

rtsp://video.c-span.org/60days/ap072906.rm

Copy and paste the above link into your RealPlayer.


I wouldn't bother.

[diamondD]

Nope, everytime I start watching one of those, it's blatantly obvious how biased and far-reaching it is.

[FORD]

Originally posted by diamondD
Nope, everytime I start watching one of those, it's blatantly obvious how biased and far-reaching it is.

It only seems "far reaching" because it IS a lot to take in at once. Of course it is.

But Alex Jones made a very important point in that seminar, and that's the fact that the naysayers always focus on the Pentagon, because even though the existence of a plane has yet to be proven at that scene, it's the easiest to spin against those who seek the Truth.

You can't argue with the presence of thermite and sulfur at Ground Zero, and that no explanation fits except for a controlled demolition.

You can't argue with the fact that WTC #7 was definitely "pulled" and Larry Silverstein himself admitted this.

And to answer Sesh's question of WHY.....

The entire purpose of the the WTC destruction was designed for psychological impact. The planes provided the initial shock, because nothing like this had happenned before.

But if it had just been the planes, it would have been a matter of rebuilding the towers, probably just on the floors hit by the planes themselves, or possibly a few above and below that, if they sufferred any structural damage.

The twin towers would still be standing today, and probably open for business, at least halfway up. They might still be renovating the floors.

But that wasn't enough for the PNAC plan. Remember that the objective was to provide a "new Pearl Harbor". The Japanese didn't just fire a couple rounds on those ships, they sank the motherfuckers. But you can't sink a 110 story concrete & steel building with an airplane.

So you blow it up. You maximize the psychological impact on those watching. And by that time, the entire world was watching. With media whores babbling about potential death tolls of up to 50,000, no less.

I always figured they actually timed the attacks for the lowest death count possible. Had the attacks happenned at 10:30 AM or 2:00 PM, they might have taken out two fully loaded towers, and then the media's numbers would have been far closer to the reality than the eventual 2700 + official death toll.

If you don't like the way Alex Jones presents his case, then there are plenty of other resources out there for info where he's not involved.

[diamondD]

You know that you're repeating the same crap to me you've said a 100 times. I think it's a bunch of bullshit and you ignore every reasonable explanation and just repeat it in another thread. Come up with some new ones. I know you've got it in you. ;)

[thome]

This is the wierdest crap i have ever read.


We don't need to --Fake-- Enemies, they are REAL!!!

Some of you are so gullible it scares me.

Stay away from the cult of anything you can't listen without believing.

It's like you let some news FUKK who makes money off of selling commercial time in between his show break,s is going to say anything to -MAKE- you watch.

I can dig the snake oil trick the news people pull (classic) but those who can't see that really freak me out.

[Hardrock69]

Originally posted by diamondD
You know that you're repeating the same crap to me you've said a 100 times. I think it's a bunch of bullshit and you ignore every reasonable explanation and just repeat it in another thread. Come up with some new ones. I know you've got it in you. ;)

The same can be said for you, Mr. Denial....

:D

[binnie]

Ford, you make some valid points here, however....


Why would blowing the building up help? If the planes had flown into the WTC then it would still have been a shocking event causing massive loss of life whether or not the buildings fell or not.

In this case it seems that the government didn't need to invent enemies, although the exent of the threat and the levels of fear generated as a result certianly were stirred up.

However, IMO, the invention comes in when we look at Iraq, who were not a threat to the West.

[FORD]

Originally posted by binnie
Ford, you make some valid points here, however....


Why would blowing the building up help? If the planes had flown into the WTC then it would still have been a shocking event causing massive loss of life whether or not the buildings fell or not.

In this case it seems that the government didn't need to invent enemies, although the exent of the threat and the levels of fear generated as a result certianly were stirred up.

However, IMO, the invention comes in when we look at Iraq, who were not a threat to the West.

The enemy was an "invented" one in any case. Al Qaeda, to what ever extent it actually exists, was created by the CIA, as a tool to distract the Russians in Afghanistan. Saddam Hussein was just bait and switch, once the pipeline operations and family heroin business were secured in Afghanistan.

[Nickdfresh]

To tell the truth
As the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attack on America approaches, members of Sacramento’s 9/11 Truth movement wonder why we still don’t know exactly what happened

By R.V. Scheide




Oklahoma redux: On June 8, the House of Representatives announced hearings to explore whether foreign nationals assisted Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols in the 1995 bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building.

Unlucky No. 7: World Trade Center Building 7 is the only steel-framed skyscraper in history to collapse because of fire alone. See why members of the 9/11 Truth movement question that assertion at www.wtc7.net.

Conspiracies R Us: What do Richard Armitage, Elliot Abrams, Michael Ledeen, John Negroponte and John Poindexter have in common? All five were involved in Iran-Contra in the 1980s and currently hold positions in or have ties to Dubya's administration.

20-20-20 Vision: What happens when three conspiracy-minded 20-somethings get together? Loose Change, the most influential documentary on 9/11 made to date. Download it for free at www.loosechange911.com.

Another Cheney shooting? Some members of the 9/11 Truth movement believe Flight 93 was shot down over Pennsylvania on Vice President Dick Cheney's order. Examine the evidence at www.Flight93crash.com.

On September 11, 2001, terrorists hijacked four jetliners, crashing two planes into the twin towers of the World Trade Center and one into the Pentagon. The fourth jet smashed into the ground in Pennsylvania after passengers overpowered the hijackers and the plane plunged out of control. By the end of the day, the twin towers, along with one other building in the WTC complex, had collapsed, the Pentagon was in flames, and more than 3,000 Americans had been killed in the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history.

Three days later, the FBI released the names and photographs of 19 Middle Eastern men, the alleged perpetrators of the attack. They were said to belong to Al Qaeda, a terrorist organization headed by Osama bin Laden that also has been accused of bombing two U.S. embassies in Africa and the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen.

That at least was the government’s official version of events, what most Americans have accepted as 9/11’s official story. However, an increasing number of skeptics now challenge the official story, including a group of 50 Sacramento activists who meet monthly to compare notes on the topic. They’re part of what’s become known as the 9/11 Truth movement, a nationwide collection of concerned citizens who, provoked by the government’s failure to mount any sort of meaningful investigation, have begun investigating on their own.The movement’s theories about what really happened range from alleged criminal incompetence on behalf of the Bush administration to the virtually unthinkable notion that rogue elements of the U.S. government planned and executed the attack, including blowing up the World Trade Center. Could it really be possible that a small cadre of neoconservatives conspired to murder more than 3,000 Americans in order to create a “new Pearl Harbor”?

That depends on how far you’re willing to go.

Sacramento’s David Kimball is willing to go all the way. He believes that the latter is not only possible, but also the most likely explanation for what happened on 9/11. Kimball, 62, a former hippie who still sports long hair tied back in a ponytail and a Fu Manchu moustache, may be the most fervent member of Sacramento’s 9/11 Truth movement. He’s a card-carrying member of the American Civil Liberties Union and belongs to several local peace activist groups. On Tuesday afternoons, he can be found at the anti-war demonstration on the corner of J and 16th streets in Midtown, spreading the 9/11 Truth gospel.

“Once you go down the rabbit hole and start looking into these things, you develop a certain worldview,” Kimball told SN&R. Indeed, in the world perceived by Kimball, nothing is as it seems, reality itself is suspect, created by government propagandists and their mass-media enablers. It’s Chomsky on steroids, the manufacture of consent as well as cover for a vast, hidden-in-plain-sight criminal enterprise bent on establishing a new world order. “You have to put yourself in the mind of the criminal,” he said, noting that he spent his boyhood reading Sherlock Holmes novels. “When you do, you find out what these criminal bastards are up to.”

It’s not unusual for such mysteries to morph into complex conspiracy theories, according to UC Davis history professor Kathryn Olmstead, an expert on the history of the CIA and the FBI who is currently working on a book titled, Governing Conspiracies: Conspiracy Theories About the Government, From WWI to 9/11. Like many of her academic colleagues, including UC Davis professor emeritus Thomas Cahill, who intensively studied hazardous air pollution at Ground Zero immediately after the attack, Olmstead doesn’t put a lot of stock in the truth movement’s theories.

“9/11 was an intelligence failure, but lots of times in American history, people think it was a deliberate plot when there are people who benefited,” she said. “Generally, the government tries to move along and pretend all the questions have been answered. People prefer to pretend there is some sort of conspiracy behind it. You see this time and again. During the McCarthy era, the Truman administration claimed they [communist infiltrators] had all been caught. Still, there was this idea that everyone had not been caught. There’s the same sense with the 9/11 Commission, that the government did not go far enough.”

That’s a sentiment shared by an increasing number of Americans, according to a Zogby Poll taken last month. The survey of 1,200 people found that 42 percent agreed that the government commission that investigated the attack was “covering up.” Fully 45 percent said the attacks should be reinvestigated.

Reopening the investigation is the goal of the 9/11 Truth movement, a possibility that may be realized if control of Congress shifts from Republicans to Democrats in this fall’s midterm election. If that comes to pass and even the mildest of the movement’s theories is proved correct, the results may be akin to turning over an old, rotten log in the forest: Americans might not like what they find.


Name your poison: UC Davis professor Thomas Cahill exposed hidden health hazards at Ground Zero--and the White House’s attempt to cover them up.
Photo By Larry Dalton

An explosive theory
Like Kimball, James Israel, publisher of Sacramento’s Comic Press News, a monthly compendium of political cartoons gathered from across the country, finds the government’s explanation lacking. Israel belongs to a growing number of everyday citizens who’ve taken an interest in the controversy. “You look at the official investigations, and it’s just so full of holes,” he said. “None of the facts support the government’s thesis. Either the government’s theory is wrong, or the laws of physics were suspended on 9/11 at that particular locale.”

The government’s initial investigation was conducted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which determined that the twin towers and Building 7 collapsed because of what structural engineers call pancaking. Fire weakened steel beams in the buildings, causing one floor to collapse upon another and then another, setting off a chain reaction similar to a cascading row of dominos. A 2005 follow-up study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reached the same conclusion.

However, critics point out that FEMA’s initial investigation was hampered by the removal of almost all of the debris from the site of the attackin essence the evidence of the largest mass murder in U.S. historyby cleanup crews under the direction of then New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, making any meaningful study virtually impossible. Both The New York Times and Fire Engineering magazine complained about the removal of the evidence, which is a federal crime, to no avail. Additionally, FEMA provided no explanation for the collapse of Building 7, concluding:

“The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remains unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis [fire/damage-caused collapse] has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue.”

Yet, no further investigation has been forthcoming. As both Kimball and Israel point out, FEMA spent only $600,000 on its study of the damage caused by the terrorist attack on the WTC, compared with the $40 million special prosecutor Ken Starr spent investigating former President Clinton’s tryst with an intern.

The Bush administration stonewalled a more thorough governmental investigation for more than a year before finally giving in to public pressure brought by the “Jersey Girls,” the four 9/11 widows recently savaged by extreme-right-wing author Ann Coulter. By the time the 9/11 Commission was formed, the evidence was long gone--most of the steel beams were melted down and recycled--forcing the commission to accept FEMA’s incomplete findings. Incredibly, the collapse of Building 7 is not mentioned at all in the commission’s report. The building’s unexplained collapse has become the focal point of the 9/11 Truth movement.

“Building 7 is the big smoking gun,” Kimball said. “All you need to know is that Building 7 was not hit by a plane. It was hit on one side by a little bit of debris.”

The 47-story skyscraper is the only steel-framed building ever known to collapse because of fire alone. Many demolition experts have commented that its symmetrical collapse at near free-fall speed looks exactly like a controlled demolition. As The New York Times has noted, with the exception of the NIST study, which reached no definitive conclusion, no structural engineers have offered an explanation for the building’s collapse.

If fire didn’t bring down Building 7, what did? Last fall, Brigham Young University physicist Steven E. Jones proposed a compelling theory that made national news and revived the then-flagging 9/11 Truth movement: Building 7, he argues, was brought down by pre-positioned thermite explosives in a controlled demolition. Jones’ theories have been shunned by most academics, including those at his own university, but he appears to have few qualms about putting his reputation on the line.

He became suspicious after viewing video of the building’s rapid, symmetrical collapse. The 47-story building was totally leveled in less than seven seconds, roughly the same amount of time a tennis ball dropped from its roof would take to hit the ground. This is physically impossible, according to Jones, since the ball encounters only wind resistance while the building is propped up by a massive steel frame.

“The Second Law of Thermodynamics implies that the likelihood of complete and symmetrical collapse due to random fires as in the 'official’ theory is small, since asymmetrical failure is so much more likely,” Jones writes in a detailed, peer-reviewed report that can be read in full at http://wtc7.net. “On the other hand, a major goal of controlled demolition using explosives is the complete and symmetrical collapse of buildings.”

Jones notes that many of the telltale signs of a controlled demolition are present in the video of Building 7’s collapse. Puffs of smoke ejecting out of the space between each floor, “squibs” in the vernacular of demolition experts, can be seen an instant before the buildings crumples. Engineers told The New York Times that steel beams in the building had evaporated; several eyewitnesses reported seeing molten metal in the aftermath of the collapse. Neither can be explained by the relatively low temperature caused by the small fires in the building. Both are signatures of thermite explosives. Still, Jones is careful to point out that he’s merely offering one possible explanation.

“[F]urther investigation and analyses are needed, including consideration of the controlled-demolition hypothesis which is neglected in all of the government reports,” he writes. “Note that the 9-11 Commission report does not even mention the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11.”

Olmstead has not yet read the commission’s final report in detail and could not comment directly on it. However, she said the government’s reluctance to investigate itself often provides fertile ground for conspiracy theorists.

“There’s this historical impulse for people to believe that the government can’t be trusted to investigate themselves,” she said. “The commonality between conspiracy theorists is that they’re always looking for connections, and they’re inclined not to trust authority. They want to find the truth for themselves.”

Sometimes, they’re even successful, Olmstead said, noting that scandals such as Watergate and the Iran-Contra affair began as conspiracy theories until they were proved correct, at which point they became genuine conspiracies.

“A conspiracy theory is a theory people have about a conspiracy that hasn’t been proved yet,” she said. “9/11 researchers at this point just have theories.”

As far at the 9/11 Truth movement is concerned, that may be the understatement of the year.


Conspiracy nation
Countless theories have sprung from the ashes of Building 7. Once the possibility of Building’s 7 alleged controlled demolition is accepted, the leap to the controlled demolition of the twin towers is not hard to make. From there, anything goes, as long as it can be linked together by chance events, government malfeasance or both:

" Some theorists believe that Flight 93, the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania, was shot down by a U.S. military jet, a theory bolstered by the jet’s debris field, which is spread out over a large area.

" Considerable mystery surrounds Flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon after executing a spiraling 270-degree turn from an altitude of 5,000 feet, pulling out of the dive at the last second. Many professional pilots doubt that the alleged hijacker, a poor pilot whose only experience handling large aircraft was on a flight simulator, could execute the maneuver. In addition, the hole in the Pentagon appears to be too small to have been made by a Boeing 767, and very little debris from the plane has been found, giving rise to speculation that the building may have been struck by a cruise missile rather than a jetliner. Although many within the 9/11 Truth movement discredit the theory, it continues to hold the public’s fascination.

"The most widely accepted theory holds that the Bush administration, either through incompetence or a limited level of complicity, allowed 9/11 to happen. Evidence commonly cited for this theory includes the repeated warnings of an impending attack that were ignored by the Bush administration as well as the Federal Aviation Administration’s destruction of tapes of air-traffic-controller conversations recorded during the hijackings.

“We all have different takes on it, and there’s plenty of room for disagreement,” Kimball said. “Building 7, the way it came down, we agree on. All the rest we can speculate about.”

One of the movement’s leading speculators is David Ray Griffin, professor emeritus of philosophy of religion and theology at California’s Claremont School of Theology and author of The New Pearl Harbor and The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. Like Jones, Griffin thinks that Building 7 and the twin towers were brought down by controlled demolition, a belief that has earned him the scorn of most academicians.

Nevertheless, Griffin persuasively connects the dots, citing scores of suspicious coincidences sourced from the official record. Perhaps the most astounding coincidence he reveals concerns who might have had potential access to the towers to plant explosives:

“Agents of the Bush-Cheney administration ... could have gotten such access, given the fact that Marvin Bush and Wirt Walker III--the president’s brother and cousin, respectively--were principals of the company in charge of security for the WTC.”

From there, Griffin piles on the coincidences, all of which are footnoted with traceable sources. For example, on the weekend before 9/11, security systems in both towers were temporarily shut down--for the first time ever--for a telecommunications upgrade, providing ample opportunity to wire the buildings with explosives. The fact that several of the 19 alleged suicide terrorists have been discovered alive and well in the Middle East has led to the theory that the jetliners may have been controlled by radio signals from the CIA’s New York City headquarters, which just happened to be located in Building 7. The thermite explosives could have been set off from this location as well, suggests Griffin, necessitating the building’s later demolition to destroy the evidence.

As to why members of the government might perpetrate such a despicable act, many members of the 9/11 Truth movement point to the Project for the New American Century, or PNAC, a neoconservative think tank founded by Richard Perle that has counted Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld among its members.

In a 1997 position paper, PNAC argued that the United States must take advantage of its current status as sole global superpower to establish a new world order. However, the paper noted that in the wake of Vietnam, Americans had lost their appetite for imperialistic adventure. Without the occurrence of a “new Pearl Harbor,” the opportunity to establish a worldwide U.S. hegemony would be squandered.


Shortly after George W. Bush was elected, 9/11 fulfilled the neocons’ wish. For members of the truth movement, it’s yet another disturbing coincidence, but Olmstead seriously doubts that members of PNAC planned and carried out a brutal attack on their own country.

“It’s a fairly public way to conduct a conspiracy, to put a document on the Internet and then go out and create a new Pearl Harbor,” she said. “I see why 9/11 conspiracy theories are compelling, but ultimately, I think we should not put our energy into chasing these theories about 9/11. People should put their energy into why the government is lying today about Iraq.”

Still, as the Zogby Poll indicated, such theories hold increasing sway with the public. The “it wasn’t a plane that hit the Pentagon” theory recently made the rounds of talk-radio shows nationwide after the government released more video of a blurry, unidentified flying object striking the Pentagon.

“The Pentagon one bothered me,” said Tom Sullivan, longtime Sacramento talk-show host at KFBK. Sullivan, a conservative, was introduced to the Flight 77 controversy by his son, who’s an airline pilot. “There’s something they’re not telling us,” he said. “That doesn’t mean I think the Bush administration did it. But there’s something they’re not telling us, and I don’t know why.”

Sullivan’s listeners couldn’t get enough of the topic, and he wound up doing an entire hour on it.

“I was surprised,” he said. “When I did that show, I have quite a few things that are just little bits like this was. But boy, people really called in on that one.”

Liberal talk-radio host Christine Craft of 1240 Talk City initially rejected 9/11 conspiracy theories. But, like Sullivan, she was drawn to the controversy surrounding the Pentagon video.


“As somebody who is older, a lawyer, with a little more of an analytical mind, I was really skeptical,” she said. “The story that made me really scratch my head--and I’m not some kind of tinfoil idiot--was the plane hitting the Pentagon. Let’s just say my mind is open to the possibility that there are things that are pretty alarming about it. I certainly don’t accept as fact the official line.”

Craft says she’s become more willing to discuss 9/11 theories on her show during the past year. At first, callers were split evenly on whether the government is covering something up. Now, Craft said, nearly 100 percent of her listeners are convinced of it, and she finds herself sharing their doubts.

“The Building 7 theory, how neatly everything collapsed at once, even that, which seemed so bizarre, now gives you pause to wonder,” she said. “Things that I would have never questioned, I’m much more willing to entertain alternative theories, though I take no joy in it.”

People are more willing to buy into conspiracy theories, Olmstead said, since it was revealed that the Bush administration doctored intelligence reports to gain support for the Iraq invasion. “Since there’s documented evidence that people lied about Iraq, they backtrack and think that they’re lying about 9/11,” she said.

A simpler explanation
Of course, not everyone buys into 9/11 conspiracy theories, particularly professional scientists and engineers familiar with the subject. Mike Taylor, a UC Davis structural-engineering professor emeritus, agreed with Olmstead that energy shouldn’t be wasted chasing down such theories. Although he declined to be interviewed at length, Taylor made his position clear in an e-mail to SN&R:

“As an engineer, I feel that this is probably a waste of your time. If Professor Jones feels that the official report is in serious error he should write his own report so that it may be studied by others. Only after independent engineers (more than one) agree that serious issues exist need any further steps be taken. If it gets that far I would be happy to talk to you then, but if does, there will be far more people talking to everyone.”


Perhaps no one from the Sacramento area spent more time at Ground Zero during the immediate aftermath of the attacks than UC Davis professor emeritus Thomas Cahill. Trained in nuclear and atomic physics at the University of California, Los Angeles, Cahill now specializes in the transport of aerosols and their radiative effects in the atmosphere. He has performed the most definitive studies to date on the pollutants that smoldered up out of Ground Zero’s rubble piles and into the lungs of cleanup workers. He has no love lost for the federal government.

“There were difficulties in getting information on 9/11,” said Cahill, who arrived at the scene on October 2, 2001. “Stuff would appear on a Web site, then disappear. They didn’t measure the temperature of the piles or set up video cameras to track the removal of material. There was wild, gross, criminal incompetence. I’m quite furious inside.”

Cahill is particularly angry about the treatment of the 10,000 workers who helped clean up the area. Since the cleanup was completed, 4,500 workers have become sick because of pollutants inhaled during the cleanup; 800 workers have gone on permanent disability. Several people have died. Cahill said the illnesses and deaths might have been avoided if the White House hadn’t covered up the hazards caused by the smoldering debris piles.

“The EPA reported that the fire posed no hazard, the air is safe to breathe, the water is safe to drink,” Cahill said. But there was a caveat in the EPA’s report. “It read something like, 'However, our measurements raised concerns about people working on the pile and in the vicinity of Water St.’ The White House removed that statement.”

Nevertheless, despite being angry about his own experiences with the government, Cahill is inclined to support the government’s official 9/11 story, if only because it provides the simplest explanation.

“I live by Occam’s razor,” he said. “The simplest explanation is the best. I have been in contact with the people with the thermite theories, and I’m not convinced. The idea that the building was brought down by thermite ... there was plenty of energy in the building to bring it down. If you do an inventory of the building, there’s an incredible amount of combustible material. The plane comes in, lets in large amounts of oxygen, and you get intense heat. At 600 C to 1,000 C, the steel starts to bend.


“The buildings were extremely vulnerable to fire,” he continued. “The information to me seems to be very clear: A lot of energy and very poor design were responsible for the collapse.”

Cahill arrived at Ground Zero weeks after the reports of molten metal at the scene, but his extensive research on why the rubble piles smoldered so long was of interest to controlled-demolition theorists, who believed molten steel in the bottom of the piles provided the heat source. Such was not the case, Cahill said. Instead, fuel oil from the WTC’s generators seeped into the ground, ignited and slowly consumed the debris stacked on top of it. As the piles were peeled open, oxygen stoked the underground fire, which burned for weeks.

Cahill agreed that the collapse of Building 7 hasn’t been fully explained, but he refused to accept the thermite hypothesis.

“I don’t blame people for being interested in these things,” he said. “It’s the only building ever brought down by fire. Are there strange things going on? Is it unique? Yeah. Am I convinced it was thermite? No.”

He also refuses to believe that the shoddy investigation and the destruction of so much evidence prove the government’s complicity in the attack.

“I think that the buck stops with the Bush administration,” he said. “I think a decision was made at the highest levels of the White House to somehow eradicate a symbol of national shame and get back to normal as quickly as possible.”

Enter the new normal
The nation never did return to normal. Instead, it entered the “new normal” of the Patriot Act, pre-emptive war and Abu Ghraib. It’s a decline that’s been illustrated monthly in Israel’s Comic Press News, and he believes reopening the 9/11 investigation could go a long way toward restoring the country’s eroded democratic values.

“I think more and more people are becoming aware, and I hope the whole thing opens up so we can’t ignore it anymore,” he said. “It could help the country immensely to open their eyes and realize they’ve been hoodwinked on all these other things.”

Cahill doesn’t necessarily disagree with that, but he thinks a new investigation is unlikely.

“I can almost guarantee everybody wants it to go away,” he said.

David Kimball often wears a button that quotes Einstein: “The important thing is to not stop questioning.” But questioning the official 9/11 story in public can be hazardous to one’s career, as author Webster Griffin Tarpley reports in “9/11 Synthetic Terror.” After 9/11, two editors at local newspapers in Texas and Oregon were sacked after daring to question the Bush administration’s role during the attacks. Larger publications such as The New York Times, home of weapons-of-mass-destruction fabricator Judith Miller, toed the government line, despite the paper’s own reports contradicting the official story.

Just as Jones and Griffin have been assailed by their colleagues, politicians who have dared to question the official story have run afoul of the establishment, Tarpley asserts. After then-Senator Robert Torricelli, D-New Jersey, pushed for an in-depth probe of the 9/11 intelligence failures, he became the subject of a corruption investigation that destroyed his re-election campaign. The investigation was dropped shortly after the election. Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean received similar treatment after criticizing the Bush administration’s obsession for secrecy in a radio interview in December 2002. The media turned against Dean, and the onetime frontrunner lost the Iowa primary.

Coincidence or clampdown? Israel thinks it’s the latter.

“I’m amazed that they’ve been able to convince the country of this ruse and be so successful,” he said. “The way they got away with it was with the assistance of the media. If the mass media had reported this, they wouldn’t have gotten away with it. Instead, they turned a blind eye.”

Longtime Sacramento peace activist Jeanie Keltner, citing the myriad number of 9/11 coincidences, finds it “amazing that anyone believes the official story.”

“Could it be that Marvin Bush was the head of the company put in charge of security at the World Trade Center?” she asked rhetorically. “Could it be true that the FAA cut up all the tapes? I would love to have a true investigation, but it would have to be beyond reproach, and nowadays I’m not sure if there’s anybody who’s beyond reproach.”

For his part, Kimball intends to keep preaching the 9/11 Truth gospel, selling books and pamphlets at farmers’ markets, holding his picket sign high at the weekly protests on the corner of 16th and J streets. He’s convinced the country has reached a tipping point and that a new investigation will soon be forthcoming, perhaps after the midterm elections.

“Do people gather in rooms and conspire things?” he asked. “Of course they do. Look at Enron, Iran-Contra, the Gulf of Tonkin. These are all conspiracies. Why are we taking this as a nation, these blatant obstructions of justice right in our faces, regardless of who did it? We need to immediately convene a grand jury with a special prosecutor.”

Kimball rejects the term “conspiracy theory” as a “mind-closing device.” He knows convincing people to support a new investigation won’t be easy, but he has all the conviction of a true believer.

“We understand why it can be hard for people to accept this,” he said. “It makes them reconsider everything they’ve been told since they were very tiny children. I encourage them to study the issue. Anyone who studies this for even a modicum of time with an open mind comes around to our point of view.”

This story has been corrected from its original print version.

Link (http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/Content?oid=oid%3A65238)

[Nickdfresh]

By R.V. Scheide
"Yet, no further investigation has been forthcoming. As both Kimball and Israel point out, FEMA spent only $600,000 on its study of the damage caused by the terrorist attack on the WTC, compared with the $40 million special prosecutor Ken Starr spent investigating former President Clinton’s tryst with an intern.

The Bush administration stonewalled a more thorough governmental investigation for more than a year before finally giving in to public pressure brought by the “Jersey Girls,” the four 9/11 widows recently savaged by extreme-right-wing author Ann Coulter. By the time the 9/11 Commission was formed, the evidence was long gone--most of the steel beams were melted down and recycled--forcing the commission to accept FEMA’s incomplete findings. Incredibly, the collapse of Building 7 is not mentioned at all in the commission’s report. The building’s unexplained collapse has become the focal point of the 9/11 Truth movement."

I'm not a believer in most of these conspiracy theories, but that stat is pretty telling. No wonder why there is so much speculation...

[diamondD]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
The same can be said for you, Mr. Denial....

:D


As long as it's the whacked out conspiracies you 2 believe, then the name fits.

[DR CHIP]

A good honest re-cap of 9/11....

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

[Satan]

Originally posted by DR CHIP
A good honest re-cap of 9/11....

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

Honest???

It was written by Michael Chertoff's nephew.

I'm the Devil, and I'm more honest than any member of that family.

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by FORD

And to answer Sesh's question of WHY.....

The entire purpose of the the WTC destruction was designed for psychological impact. The planes provided the initial shock, because nothing like this had happenned before.

But if it had just been the planes, it would have been a matter of rebuilding the towers, probably just on the floors hit by the planes themselves, or possibly a few above and below that, if they sufferred any structural damage.

The twin towers would still be standing today, and probably open for business, at least halfway up. They might still be renovating the floors.

But that wasn't enough for the PNAC plan. Remember that the objective was to provide a "new Pearl Harbor". The Japanese didn't just fire a couple rounds on those ships, they sank the motherfuckers. But you can't sink a 110 story concrete & steel building with an airplane.

So you blow it up. You maximize the psychological impact on those watching. And by that time, the entire world was watching. With media whores babbling about potential death tolls of up to 50,000, no less.



http://deadparrot6000.tripod.com/monty/pics/colonel2.jpg

This thread has become very silly

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by Cathedral
How about where it came from, and it wasn't collected at the site by credible sources, it was "a woman from the Northeast" who was an apparent neat freak at a memorial, and other un-named sources described as "private people" some time after the attack which was not elaborated on as to the date these people were there.

Let's also point out that between the clean up and the start of the memorials, there are controlled demolitions done to clear some areas, especially the areas under the towers.

My point is that the conspiracies began before that day ended, and there is NO PROOF that it came from the WTC sites.

Your asking us to trust total strangers here, well, i need proof to even consider this 'theory', can we call it a theory?

So, your assertion that it was in the rubble is subjective in my opinion.

Sorry, but that evidence is what we call 'tainted'.

You're right, Sesh, it has become very silly.

I'll blame the 'head in the sand' mentality for my last post not even being adressed.

Hey, i have a piece of JFK's dried brain matter here with a small lead fragment attached to it...maybe I can send it in and have it analyzed.
It just might prove there were two different guns that shot him, eh?

Silly how 'mail order evidence' carries so much weight in such a HUGE conspiracy, but what can ya do, hey, it's all in the name of truth, justice, and the american way of nut-jobbing.

[DLR'sCock]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I'm not a believer in most of these conspiracy theories, but that stat is pretty telling. No wonder why there is so much speculation...


Things like this only open up more questions, and this is all that I am saying. There are too many questions, and this is not over, although it may never be.

I mean come on guys, isn't anyone curious IF, and again I say IF this possibly could be true and perhaps how this Thermate may have gotten there?

I am open to whatever the truth is, but nobody or no idea is completely out of the question.

Many people have agendas, and that goes from booksellers and whackos to those who play this Global game of chess. The human condition is capable of doing very heroic and benevolent things but also very evil and maliciously self cenetered things.


I am all for having my suspicions being proven wrong without a shadow of a doubt, cause the alternative is well pretty fucking scary for most, but no surprise to me. Then again most people wouldn't be able to handle it.


These are interesting times yet seem all so familiar to me.....I feel like I have been through this before, I guess that's why I don't feel all too fazed.......of course I am a nut job.....

[FORD]

For those "Egyptians" out there who choose to remain in "de-nile", answer just ONE question........

What happenned to WTC-7?

[DR CHIP]

Originally posted by FORD
For those "Egyptians" out there who choose to remain in "de-nile", answer just ONE question........

What happenned to WTC-7?

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

[DR CHIP]

And Ford I am sure that you will say the writer is the great grandson of some lukid party member ;)

There ARE plenty of rational reasons to believe 911 was what it was...

[FORD]

Originally posted by DR CHIP
And Ford I am sure that you will say the writer is the great grandson of some lukid party member ;)

There ARE plenty of rational reasons to believe 911 was what it was...

Likud party member? Not likely.

But with a name like "Luis Perez", he might be a BCE/CIA asset from Miami ;)

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by DR CHIP
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

I think we found Ford-bane!

[diamondD]

Damn! That pretty much bitchslaps the Building 7 "Pull" nonsense.

[diamondD]

Originally posted by FORD
For those "Egyptians" out there who choose to remain in "de-nile", answer just ONE question........

What happenned to WTC-7?


You ever pull out that one again and your new nickname will be Cleopatra! ;)

[FORD]

Originally posted by diamondD
Damn! That pretty much bitchslaps the Building 7 "Pull" nonsense.

No it doesn't. That page is crap.

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by FORD
No it doesn't. That page is crap.

And your experience in demolition is?.............

Uh huh, yeah, hmmmmm, you don't say, well that's just crazy, get the fuck outta here, oh no.....That degree comes in handy, don't it?

Hey Ford, you like land on water?
Let me send you some info on a piece of property a buddy owns in Florida.
It's within walking distance to a Diebold Voting Center. ;)

You got a boat?:p

[diamondD]

Originally posted by FORD
No it doesn't. That page is crap.


No, those 9-11 conspiracy movies are crap. It takes more proof to dispute that page than just dismissing it. What proof are you offering because that comment crap isn't gonna cut it to a rational person.


"The fireman said to pull out, that 's what demolition guys say, so that PROVES it was a demolition" That's freaking stupid.


I was down there one year after 9-11. The Embassy Suites I was staying in had just reopend because of all the damage done to it by just the force of the towers coming down. Blew out every window facing the towers a block away. Went last year and there's a huge building next door that's still empty. Everything around there was damaged. I have pictures of a store 2 blocks away that had all of their windows blown out and the store was filled with debris.


How's sailing up de-nile going for you Cleo?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by FORD
No it doesn't. That page is crap.

So are about 90% of the conspiracy theories. There are a lot of unanswered questions, and certainly a lot of gov't bureaucratic incompetence both before, and after, 9/11. But this inside job BS only further muddies the waters dude.

[DLR'sCock]

Originally posted by Satan
Honest???

It was written by Michael Chertoff's nephew.

I'm the Devil, and I'm more honest than any member of that family.

how do you know this?

[FORD]

Originally posted by DLR'sCock
how do you know this?

Ben Chertoff was interviewed on Coast to Coast radio the same week that the Popular Mechanics article was published. He admitted to being Michael Chertoff's nephew, but of course denied that biased his article in any way.


Yeah, sure Ben. whatever you and uncle vampire say..... :rolleyes:

[THE BCE]

You prove nothing, David.

[diamondD]

They were debunking 9-11 myths just now and the editor-in-chief of Popular Mechanics (non BCE relations ;) ) said that one of the most popular conspiracies that people like to spread is that cell phones don't work in airplanes. He said they had talked to several cell phone engineers and it is entirely possible to use one in the air.


Not that I expect FORD to admit he was wrong, misled even. ;)

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by diamondD
They were debunking 9-11 myths just now and the editor-in-chief of Popular Mechanics (non BCE relations ;) ) said that one of the most popular conspiracies that people like to spread is that cell phones don't work in airplanes. He said they had talked to several cell phone engineers and it is entirely possible to use one in the air.


Not that I expect FORD to admit he was wrong, misled even. ;)

FORD didn't say those things.

The BCE hacked his computer and wrote them in his stead.

:D

[FORD]

Originally posted by diamondD
They were debunking 9-11 myths just now and the editor-in-chief of Popular Mechanics (non BCE relations ;) ) said that one of the most popular conspiracies that people like to spread is that cell phones don't work in airplanes. He said they had talked to several cell phone engineers and it is entirely possible to use one in the air.


Not that I expect FORD to admit he was wrong, misled even. ;)

Because I'm NOT wrong.

The problem with cell phones in mid air is two fold.

Obviously, the fact that their are no towers at 35,000 ft is the big one. Many cell phones still won't work in an elevator or in concrete buildings which aren't moving. Try getting a signal from 35,000 feet under a moving airplane.

The second problem is at the rate of speed the plane is moving, the phone would have to reroute itself to the next tower so often that it would be next to impossible to maintain a signal even if it DID come in from under the plane at a decent level.

It's not a mystery or a conspiracy. It's just a fact.

My Verizon map says I should be able to get a signal anywhere on the I-5 corridor in this state. But I know of a stretch of highway between here and Portland where it simply doesn't work. Elevation has a lot to do with it, as the road takes a turn downhill into a valley where the Toutle River flows down from Mt St Helens. So if they would have had cell phones in 1980 and you had been stuck there when the bridge washed out, you would have been fucked anyway.

It's just a geographical anomaly. Not a conspiracy. But a scientific fact, no less.

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by FORD
Because I'm NOT wrong.

The problem with cell phones in mid air is two fold.

Obviously, the fact that their are no towers at 35,000 ft is the big one. Many cell phones still won't work in an elevator or in concrete buildings which aren't moving. Try getting a signal from 35,000 feet under a moving airplane.

The second problem is at the rate of speed the plane is moving, the phone would have to reroute itself to the next tower so often that it would be next to impossible to maintain a signal even if it DID come in from under the plane at a decent level.


How about they just used air phones and the initial reports were wrong?

This shit reminds me of the 'fake' moon landings thing.

A hundred websites saying 'THERE IS NO WIND ON THE MOON. HOW COME THS US FLAG IS FLYING'.

Yeah after a few beers you start to wonder. Hmm.

Then a guy from NASA says 'WE KIND OF FUCKING KNEW THAT. UMM WE SENT PEOPLE TO THE FUCKING MOON WHICH IS A BIT FUCKING TRICKY TO SAY THE LEAST. WE DID REALISE THAT THERE WAS NO FUCKING WIND SO MADE THE FLAG STIFF AND STRAIGHT'.

At that point you should slap your head and think fuck, I've been eDummied. Dumb dumb dumb learn from it.

Another one was JFK. I was always dubious about this for 3 reasons.

Firstly the way his head went 'back and to the left' as Oliver Stone said so many times in the movie. WTF?

Secondly the number of shots from a bolt action rifle.

So then I watch on 'Bullshit' the Penn and Teller show where they fire the shots easily in the time required and demonstrate how the head goes in the opposite direction of the entry wound because the entry wound is small but the exit wound causes a ton of shit to fly out pushing your head in the opposite direction. Suddenly again I feel dumb.

Third reason was why would Jack Ruby a guy with terminal cancer and no obvious strng political beliefs sacrifice himself to kill Harvey Oswald. I dunno but suddenly at least half my determined belief set has been blown away to a certain extent by 1 minute of TV.

I've never even felt the same way about the 9-11 thing and have been less and less convinced by the conspiracy theories as time has gone on.

It's all bullshit.


Cheers!

:gulp:

[diamondD]

Originally posted by FORD
Because I'm NOT wrong.

The problem with cell phones in mid air is two fold.

Obviously, the fact that their are no towers at 35,000 ft is the big one. Many cell phones still won't work in an elevator or in concrete buildings which aren't moving. Try getting a signal from 35,000 feet under a moving airplane.

The second problem is at the rate of speed the plane is moving, the phone would have to reroute itself to the next tower so often that it would be next to impossible to maintain a signal even if it DID come in from under the plane at a decent level.

It's not a mystery or a conspiracy. It's just a fact.

My Verizon map says I should be able to get a signal anywhere on the I-5 corridor in this state. But I know of a stretch of highway between here and Portland where it simply doesn't work. Elevation has a lot to do with it, as the road takes a turn downhill into a valley where the Toutle River flows down from Mt St Helens. So if they would have had cell phones in 1980 and you had been stuck there when the bridge washed out, you would have been fucked anyway.

It's just a geographical anomaly. Not a conspiracy. But a scientific fact, no less.


No, the scientific fact is, they weren't flying at that height. You can't hit the WTC at several miles up. And being in a valley is a hell of lot different than being in an aluminum tube up in the air where there's absolutely nothing to block it. Should be a great signal. Cell phone towers broadcast 16 miles in EVERY direction. Not that you will acknowledge it, you never have. 35000 feet my ass. I've proved my part. Prove where they were flying at that height. :rolleyes:

Your stretch of highway may not have the coverage New England does. It doesn't mean they couldn't ever get a signal long enough to make a call. Towers change instantly.

Quit while you're behind, Dave. This one doesn't have any wings at all and it's BULLSHIT.

Just admit it, you were misled by a bunch of kooks who don't know what they are talking about. ;) I do know exactly what I am talking about on this subject and you know it.

[diamondD]

And Verizon is shitty, that's half your problem. The other problem is the wiretaps the BCE has on you is probably causing some interference too. ;)

[DLR'sCock]

Air phones do work.....

anyway, this article addresses the still many many unanswered quetions vs the theories that go all over the place....


i really "think" that there is a scary truth that is somewhere in the middle.......ofthe official and well the unknown(unaccepted).......




<p class="body_headline" align="left"> 9-11 Truth Movement: Focus or Die</p> <p class="subheadline_body"><a href="http://falseflagnews.com/terrordrills/9-11_truth_movement_focus_or_die">FalseFlagNews | August 7, 2006 </a><br> <strong>By D. L. Abrahamson</strong></p> <p class="subheadline_body">These next few months may be the most critical time in the history of the 9-11 truth movement.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">We stand on the brink of a nuclear world war. The potential for a staged terror attack and subsequent invasion of Iran & Syria has never loomed larger. This, while Israel continues to offer a back-door entry into WW III with their daily massacres in Lebanon and Gaza, urging the desperate neocon fascists to join them in the march toward Apocalypse.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">At the same time, last week was a time of overwhelming success as C-SPAN aired the 9-11 Scholar's conference four times at prime time hours. Then came a Scripps News poll saying 36% of Americans suspect government involvement in 9-11, with most suggesting they were directly behind it.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">The truth movement also recieved balanced coverage from newspaper and television networks, while a radio call-in mobilization resulted in hosts on Air America finally confronting 9-11 truth and neocons like Sean Hannity begging for mercy.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">We have never been closer to nuclear annihilation. And at the same time we have never been closer to breaking the media censorship, building a large-scale political movement around 9-11, and arresting the traitorous plotters behind the attacks.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">So which direction will the world follow?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Analysts ranging from authors James Bamford and Nafeez Ahmed to Pakistani ISI Chief Maj. Gen Hameed Gul are all predicting an imminent strike on Iran and Syria.</p> <p class="subheadline_body"> Additionally, the confluence of major terror drills and nuclear war games over the next few months is particularly ominous. STRATCOM, those generals with their finger on the nuclear button, are running Vigilant Guardian (also run on 9-11) from August 17-26. </p> <p class="subheadline_body">Then, from Oct. 24-Nov.8, STRATCOM will run Global Lightning, a massive nuclear war game within the Global Storm series of drills running through December.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">On August 14-16, Hawaii is running a drill where a half-kiliton nuke explodes, killing 10,000 resulting in a martial law situation with a FEMA and military takeover. All of these drills and more are monitored at FalseFlagNews.com<br> <br> We must remember that on 9-11, the military ran at least 15 drills, with many "simulated" hijacking terror drills and nuclear warfare war games against Russia. So are these drills a sign of a potential goverment-staged terror event to usher in the nuclear clash of civilizations? </p> <p class="subheadline_body">The STRATCOM Global Strike documents, available here, clearly document how these upcoming drills are part of CONPLAN 8022, the plan for an immediate nuclear strike on-demand with B-1 and B-52 bombers (with an emphasis on so-called "low yield" nukes). </p> <p class="subheadline_body">We must also recall former CIA agent Philip Giraldi, who last year warned that the neocon cabal assembling around Cheney's office were calling for the nuclear invasion of Iran, with the aid of STRATCOM, in the wake of a new WMD terrorist attack on American soil..</p> <p class="subheadline_body">At present, the neocons find themselves militarily defeated in Iraq and Afghanistan, while the Israeli massacres and war crimes in Lebanon have failed to stop Hizballah rockets. With the November elections approaching, can the neocon plotters rely on electronic vote-rigging alone to keep their power over the Congress?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Additionally, with the Euro-based Iranian oil bourse opening in September, the financier faction of bankers is facing the death of dollar hegemony,. This will result in a massive dollar sell-off as central bank reserves flow into Euros. Will they allow such a collapse to happen?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">It is "now or never" for the rogue network of coup plotters that siezed control of the military and government on 9-11. Their agenda must move forward now, or they will find themselves under investigation in Congress or overwhelmed by the growing millions of Americans who are waking up to the truth about the 9-11 inside job. How much longer can they wait?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">And for 9-11 truth activists, could the stakes ever be higher?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">One only need witness Professor Kevin Barrett's disastrous interview on "Fox and Friends" a few days ago to understand our precarious situation. Barrett, dressed in a black "Investigate 9-11" t-shirt, started well as he discussed WTC7, the NORAD stand down, and asked who was in command that day. </p> <p class="subheadline_body">However four minutes into the interview, Barrett descended into the fringes, falling into a trap set by his interviewers. He asserted that no hijackers ever got on the planes, and that the airport videos were faked (as the shadows prove, he says). Also, according to Barrett, all the phone calls were fake, not just the cell phone ones.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Is he aware of the fact that calls made from the air-phones do work at cruising altitude, and many of the calls originated from these phones? Is he aware that drills like Amalgam Virgo (planned before 9-11) war gamed FBI agents posing as hijackers on a real flight? Has he examined the links of Mohammed Atta to the SOCOM Able Danger program, and the "Door Hop Galley" cell? What about the "hijackers" who trained at US Air Force bases?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Furthermore, claiming every phone call was faked alienates the public and is based on incomplete science. Barrett should know that cell phones can work on planes, albeit poorly and infrequently. Additionally, the Canadian study he cited did not fly over the zone where flight 93 allegedly did.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">If we listen to the "no phone-call" theorists, government uber-spooks actually took the time to voiceprint Mark Bingham and call his mom but were then stupid enough to make it so obvious by saying, "Hi Mom, it's Mark Bingham."</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Watching Barrett fumble the ball was painful. The professor, usually so eloquent in his TV appearances, lost his focus of the facts and strayed into true conspiracy theory. To the average viewer, he came unraveled as he peddled pet theories about "no hijackers," bogus phone calls, and faked videos. This type of speculation, venturing so far from the core points proving an inside job, destroyed Barrett's entire message.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Even if Barrett and others who talk about faked cell phone calls are correct, does their speculation get us any closer toward building a nationwide political movement and arresting the 9-11 plotters? Or is it a divisive strawman that will isolate us from the mainstream media and average Americans?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Suddenly it appears the controlled demolition, WTC 7, NORAD stand down, hijacking drills, war games, "Angel is Next" call to Bush, living hijackers, double-agent hijackers, CIA insider put options, and "al-Qaeda" links to Anglo-American intelligence are not enough. Now every researcher has their own pet theory about no planes, no hijackers, no phone calls, no Pentagon Boeing, and no flight 93 crash (they claim it landed it Cleveland and the wreckage in Shanksville was, you guessed it, planted).</p> <p class="subheadline_body">At the same time we are now encountering the violent resurection of the "no WTC plane" thesis, which is dividing the Scholars for 911 Truth. A small group of internet researchers is claiming the towers were hit by nothing, and the videos of the second plane hitting the south tower were vector-key CGI uploaded to the video news networks, along with the aid of WESCAM helicopter camera technology. </p> <p class="subheadline_body">This group usually claims nothing hit the south tower, but if pressed, will offer possibilities like an entomopter formation, missile, commuter plane, or some futuristic cloaked weapon.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">But can such radical claims survive the most basic questions? These researchers will have to find substantial answers to the testimonies of those eyewitnesses who saw planes, the many snapshot pictures of the plane, the amateur videos showing a plane, plane parts in the WTC wreckage, and how if this is true why NONE of the eyewitnesses ever said something about this massive deception.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Do these "no plane" theorists have adequete answers that do not include labeling everybody but them as government agents? Why are those who ask these fundamental questions labeled as idiots and agents, while this group simultaneously slanders Dr. Steven Jones a government-asset?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">"But wait!" they cry. "The towers were exploded with nanothermite and a mini-nuke weapon! Anyone who claims anything less is just a provocateur NSA undercover agent!"</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Of course, why the plotters would require the redundancy of nanothermite and a nuke is of no concern. And when asked for evidence to prove their claims, they point to shaky research showing slightly elevated tritium levels in the air. And of course, they never, ever forget the mention that Steven Jones is just an limited-hangout junk scientist Perhaps this because his research showed no radioactive isotopes?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Wait, I must be an agent. And if you disagree with that, maybe you are an agent.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Maybe we are both agents, and were secretly brainwashed from understanding the real truth: The towers were hit by a swarm of African killer bees and all the witnesses were mind-controlled with virtual reality googles and Valium. Also, the twin towers never existed; they were merely part of a holographic magic trick run by the shadow government in collaboration with David Copperfield. And the towers were exploded with nanoplasma antimatter, and anyone who discusses conventional demolition is an agent.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">It was this same motley assembly of internet researchers that selfishly belittled the four airings of the 9-11 Scholar's conference on C-SPAN. And while dedicated 9-11 truthers were devising a campaign to build up the audience, they mocked our efforts.</p> <p> <span class="subheadline_body">"If these scholars were such a threat, the establishment would never let them get on TV," they whined. This group of websites also failed to publicize the airing dates or times of the C-SPAN conference, but often took the effort to write scathing pieces about the participants, slandering them all as government agents or Zionist front-men.</span></p> <p class="subheadline_body">This same group was also conspicuously completely absent during this past week's radio mobilization effort, when fearless 9-11 activsts overwhelmed the neocons and left gatekeepers, smashing through the Maginot Line of 9-11 censorship.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">It was a week in which a red-faced Hannity was forced to hang up on callers, Ed Schultz was simply apoplectic, and Michael Savage used call-screeners to block 9-11 truthers.. I personally made successful calls to nationally syndicated shows like Hannity, CoastToCoast AM, Alan Colmes & Matt Drudge, with other call in's to WBZ in Boston and WTIC in Hartford.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Webster Tarpley believes our combined efforts likely tripled the C-SPAN audience, if not more. Even better, we finally forced Randi Rhodes to confront 9-11 truth and the NORAD stand down on Air America, while the C-SPAN event momentum continued. It was a week which culminated with Tarpley's brillaint two and a half hour performance on Mike Malloy's nationally syndicated show on Air America.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Frustrated 9-11 activists (like myself) who had always asked how we could wake up millions, discovered the power of using radio as a giant megaphone to warn other prisoners. This type of success must quickly multiply. If we hope to stop the next false-flag terror attack and the march into nuclear world war, we must wake up their millions of radio listeners....NOW.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">So, in the midst of our success, I ask that we reflect.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Which websites, activists, and organizations supported and promoted the C-SPAN event last week? And who were the shrill sectarians and slanderers that failed to even announce the air time of the event? What were the motives of each of these groups?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">We are currently in the midst of a mass awakening in America. 9-11 truth is having the biggest coming out party in its history, as mainstream coverage and national polls suggest our movement is growing far larger than even optimists had suggested.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">A Scripps News poll showed 36f American believe that 9-11 was either allowed to happen or an inside job, and a full 16f Americans believing in a controlled demolition of the towers. This means that a large portion of the country, likely more than one fifth, already understand 9-11 was an inside job. A previous Zogby poll suggested the number of 9-11 skeptics were around 42ælt;/p> <p class="subheadline_body">Now come the release of the NORAD tapes, which have journalists and the formerly timid "Jersey Girls" calling for a new investigation of 9-11. This on top of the C-SPAN coverage, the radio breakthroughs, and the surprisingly fair treatment from mainstream newspapers and tv propaganda organs like CNN and Fox. Clearly, the wheels are coming off the government's official mythology, and a revolution of thinking is brewing in massive numbers .</p> <p class="subheadline_body">We are hitting the big time. Millions of Americans, who had previously ignored or derided suggestions of government complicity, are asking questions.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">So we must ask: Is this the time for sectarianism, name-calling, jealousy, territorial squabbles, and McCarthyist witch-hunt tactics where everyone is labeled an agent? Have some individuals become so egostistical that they are blind to the need for rationality at this critical time? Do they truly believe their own selfish needs and pet theories outweight the effort to actually arrest the criminals who engineered the terror attacks of September 11?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">I ask again: what are their motives?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">What is needed now is maturity. As a movement, we must focus or die. Going on national television with outlandish pet theories risks destroying the momentum we have worked so hard to build. </p> <p class="subheadline_body">Those lucky enough to make television appearances must remember that there is still a large portion of this country who has not woken up to 9-11, and we need to introduce them with facts, not fantasy. We are trying to wake up conservative Republicans, college anarchists, and senior citizen book clubs. Is this the time for speculation about "no hijackers?"</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Can we build a national political movement around the idea of fake cell phone calls and CGI planes? Or should we instead point to the NORAD stand down and hijacking drills, asking about the roles of Gen. Eberhart, Gen. Myers, Col. Marr, Gen. Schoomaker, Ben Sliney, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Richard Clarke, and others inside the chain of command? </p> <p class="subheadline_body">Should we label each other as agents instead of telling the world about WTC 7, controlled demolition, and Dr. Steven Jones's groundbreaking thermate research?</p> <p class="subheadline_body">It's now or never for both sides. The rogue network seeks to usher in a nuclear WW III, and 9-11 truth is the only way to stop them and expose the myth of terrorism. In this time of imminent danger, we have to stay on message.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">If we get lost in a sea of speculation, we will lose the average American. It is high time to save the frothy theories for the message boards and stay focused when we get TV time. And those who engage in petty backstabbing, slander, name-calling, blackmailing, and intellectual McCarythism need to seriously question their priorities.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">Now is the time to build a national movement. We can make calls and disrupt the radio propagandists. We can use friendly forums like CoastToCoast AM to reach millions of fellow Americans. We can make Sean Hannitys life a living hell. We can monitor the drills and war-games to stop the next false-flag attack, like at FalseFlagNews.com</p> <p class="subheadline_body">And most importantly, by focusing on our best points, rather than our weakest hypotheses, we can stop World War III.</p> <p class="subheadline_body">For the 9-11 truth movement, the camera is rolling and America is watching.</p> <span class="subheadline_body">Focus or die.</span>

[FORD]

Yeah, but I noticed this particular area was bad long before the BCE started tapping my phone.

So if Verizon sucks, who's better? Seriously, I'm asking because I'm seriously considering a switch when this contract's up. Verizon used to have the best network overall, but I don't like the way they lock down your phones so you can't transfer files from the computer - so they can make money off their ringtone sales and other ripoff services.

So I'm looking at network vs features vs willing cooperation with BCE fascism. Who's better?

[diamondD]

I'll shoot you a PM. ;)

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by diamondD
And Verizon is shitty, that's half your problem.

Actually, I've never had a problem with Verizon dropping out. I even get clear signals going under the 5 tunnels in this area.

That's more than the other carriers can say, especially that shitty-assed Sprint. My neighbor's cell drops out when he's talking to his wife only a mile away...on flat terrain.

:D