Touchy Subject: 9/11 Conspiracy Theory

1. 61

   maplethorpejposted 13 years ago

   I am by no means asserting that our government orchestrated 9/11, but I would like to know how these terrorists living in caves on the other side of the world were able to pull off such a precise chain of events?
   
   Your thoughts.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      Adult Contentposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      They chose to HIDE in caves.  it's not like they normally live like the Flintstones.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         maplethorpejposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         lol, you get my point...

         replyreport
   2. 62

      pisean282311posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      taliban and alqueda are different..alqueda supremo is engineer while his deputy is doctor...there are many scientist , engineers , professional is their group..so living in caves doesnot apply to them...

      replyreport
   3. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      We will never know!  Or at least not til waaaay after the fact down the road......
      
      because even the Obama Administration won't try to get to the bottom of it, because they use the insinuations and the possibility of corruption in the Bush Administration to promote their OWN corruption!   If Bush is held to proving his innocence,  Obama and his minions will be held to a high standard too;  and they don't want that.

      replyreport
2. 77

   Mighty Momposted 13 years ago

   Good topic.
   I've watched Farenheit 9/11 and documentaries about the physics of the collapse of the Twin Towers.
   
   Certainly the timing of the attack was awful convenient for a president just itching to find an excuse to get into Iraq and finish his father's business with Saddam Hussein.
   Not to mention that being engulfed in said war assured W a second term in office.
   
   Do I think W himself conceived such a plot? No.
   Do I think Cheney is capable of such malevolance? Absolutely.

   replyreport
3. 78

   Shadesbreathposted 13 years ago

   Read the 9/11 report.  You'll have a much harder time buying the conspiracy thing.

   replyreport
4. 63

   I am DB Cooperposted 13 years ago

   It's not like they used their own missiles or anything. They trained a dozen or so people who were willing to die for their cause to use box cutters to hijack a plane and fly them into buildings. Some of the hijackers received flight training from pilot schools within the United States that anyone with a few thousand dollars can attend. They also used Microsoft Flight Simulator software to get an idea of the equipment on a large aircraft. That software is what, like $60? That's if it's not pirated. So you had guys who knew how to scare a crowd of people on a plane enough to make them obedient and non-aggressive (except for the plane that crashed into Shanksville) and guys who knew how to fly a plane well enough to find the target buildings (which isn't terribly hard since 90% of what makes piloting a large aircraft challenging is the takeoffs and the landings, which they didn't have to worry about). Then these trained suicide teams split into 4 groups and each carried out an attack on a plane flying at the same time. There was nothing really sophisticated about this plan at all. In fact, it's quite common for multiple suicide attacks to be planned at the same time.

   replyreport
5. 77

   Mighty Momposted 13 years ago

   The 9/11 report compiled by the federal government,you mean?

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Shadesbreathposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Yes that one.  If you are going to say that all those witnesses and investigators, and professors, and experts, and everyone in that whole thing gathered from all over the world and the country and from every walk of life are all lying in concert to perpetrate one of the most inane, disjointed, wholly unconnected fiction in the guise of truth for which the complexity of plot (or perhaps anti-plot would be better) would require genius to dwarf any plot I have ever read by people of such genius as to have their fictional and/or historical works read for centuries and beyond, then I will nod and say, "Okay, maybe you're right. What do I know?"
      
      But you have to say that first. 

      replyreport
      1. 79

         brimancandyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         I got some words for you to remember. Weapons of mass destruction. Do you not recall how well the Bush Administration duped american's into going to war in Iraq, claiming that they not only carried out the 911 attacks, and were a direct link to terrorists? And, it was only after the war began that there was talk of going after Bin Laden?
         
         There were all kinds of experts from all over the world claiming that Iraq had these weapons, and all kinds of documents saying so. Yet, after they went in there an destroyed half the countries roads, bridges, and knocked out the power and water, they couldn't find these weapons. Yet, they had no problem finding and guarding the oil fields, and rushing people in to keep the oil flowing. What do you think was in the no fly zone?
         
         They found Sadam in a fricking hole in the ground, yet these massive amounts of so called weapons could not be found? Please. I don't buy it for a second, I never did, and I never will. It's all just a big plan to take out the middle east one country at a time, to control the oil. And, when they didn't get it by taking out Sadam, they had to quickly blame someone else. Now we are in Afganistan, and talking about going after Iran. And, guess what's in afganistan....more oil.
         
         Who's next? And, what lie will they tell us to get there.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            couturepopcafeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            With respect, your recollection of history is wrong.  We hit Afghanistan first.  Remember the Daisy Cutters?  The WMDs or the means to make them were supposedly there according to sophisticated intel around the world.  Remember the UN stalling investigators?  It was almost a year before anyone finally got in to look around.  Remember the ship which was carrying plutonium bound for Iraq that was seized before it got there?

            replyreport
6. 61

   maplethorpejposted 13 years ago

   Well I watched the YouTube video called Loose Change and it absolutely changed the way I thought about 9/11. There are just so many little details that happened to work out to the benefit of the terrorists. Why did the towers even collapse? The engineers said that it could withstand a direct hit from an airplane. They stated that!!! Okay, maybe there was a possibility of one going down, but both of them!? That's just nuts...

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Shadesbreathposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      As I understand it, it wasn't the impact, it was the intense heat of the fuel burning hot enough to melt support beams on the floor where the plane hit and the heat was concentrated.  The support melted, which dropped the weight of the floors above in one giant lump suddenly. While the floor directly beneath had always born the weight of the above, it never took a direct blow from that much weight.  Much like a board can bear your weight if you stand on it, but if you karate chop it right you can go right through. (Not a perfect analogy, but you can probably see the point.)

      replyreport
   2. 61

      AboveBeyondposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I think if I'm not mistaken the buildings were built to withstand smaller planes colliding into them on accident. Accident being the keyword, a direct hit like occured on 9/11 seems to be out of the realm of normal for any enginneer in my opinion.
      
      If a smaller plane had accidnetlly collided with the building and "nipped" the side the buildings would have been able to withstand the hit. But a HUGE planes flying at top speed without evening trying to turn away is a much different story.

      replyreport
   3. 79

      brimancandyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      There is a rumor going around, and several documentaries saying that the buildings that fell during 911 blew up from the inside. There are even videos showing some of the other buildings that fell blowing up from the inside just minutes before the twin towers fell.  As if the whole thing was perfectly timed.
      
      One of the other buildings that fell housed government offices, and it was very strange that there was nobody in that building when it fell. It was also not a surprise that some of the buildings, including the world trade center had huge insurance policies added to them shortly before 911. And some companies made billions when they collected on their damages.
      
      Some people who blow up buildings for a living have even come forward to claim it as an inside job, as some of the buildings that fell, couldn't have fallen from the ground shaking, as a lot of buildings, that were in a lot worse shape did not fall. They also mention a goverment safe in another building that was burned so hot, that it turned to liquid, and that safe was not in either tower...so how did that happen?
      
      I don't know. I hate to say it. But there was a lot more going on there than a bunch of terrorists in planes. Somebody knows more, and, I'm sure when all those people are dead and burried, our grandchildren will get to be the ones to find out what really happend.

      replyreport
7. 61

   maplethorpejposted 13 years ago

   Also, there were training exercises being run by (whoever operates the air traffic) that morning for the same event that occurred! Why is this significant? Because the air traffic controllers didn't know if the flights were abnormal or part of the training exercise.
   
   During the London bombings, a similar training exercise was being run in the event of a bombing in the subway system.
   
   Btw, where was the debris from the planes that hit the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania... If you're going to look at the government's report of 9/11, you don't understand the concept of a conspiracy

   replyreport
8. 70

   Cagsilposted 13 years ago

   Hey Shades, I hate to burst your bubble, but even experts, outside those use for the report claim that "jet fuel" will not burn hot enough to melt the reinforced steel beams.
   
   So, I guess that opens up a whole new can of worms.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Shadesbreathposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Well, whatever the fuel ignited was burning too, metal, insulation, ceiling tiles, a whole conflagration.  Not being a chemist or an engineer (much less not having a photographic memory of what I read that many years ago), I can only toss out what was said by the engineers that spoke to the committee as I recollect. My point was getting at the principle of what happened more than the actual composition of the base gases formed by combustion and the subsequent temperatures as measured in degrees Kelvin or whatnot that melted or only bent the beams, etc., blah blah. 
      
      My only point being that Occam's Razor seems a reasonable approach here, albeit not near as much fun, so it is that that I take to your can of worms (which is funny really, because technically taking a razor would make more worms, but I stand by it anyway).

      replyreport
   2. 0

      china manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      The steel does not have to melt, just red hot is enough for it to go soft and change from an immensely strong load supporting beam to the consistency of soft toffee.  The report pointed up the inadequate fire shielding for the steel that is designed to prevent them heting up in a 'normal' fire. apparently the shielding just blew away in the fuel ignition blast.

      replyreport
      1. 70

         Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Yeah, but there is still a problem with that.....
         
         Steel won't melt until over 2000 degrees and the hottest temperature by any and all combustible objects couldn't cause the temperature to rise that high. The highest was about 1200 degrees.
         
         Yet the towers feel inside of 10 minutes. Sorry, don't buy it.

         replyreport
9. 61

   maplethorpejposted 13 years ago

   Yeah, it doesn't burn hot enough otherwise it makes sense. But then again, why the hell did tower 7 collapse!? No fire there as far as I know?

   replyreport
   1. 61

      maplethorpejposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Not to mention, it fell at near free fall speed.. DEMOLITION!!!

      replyreport
      1. 82

         manlypoetrymanposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         WTC #7 takes some proper explaining. How does it come down like the Twin Towers...conspiracy theory or not?

         replyreport
10. 70

    Cagsilposted 13 years ago

    So, you're saying that two people, who both have the same education and experience in the same field, cannot agree.
    
    I mean, in essence, that is what you are saying has happened. Those who agreed with government's assessment were the ones who were allowed to give input and those who were not allowed to give input, were ousted on their collective butts, so the conspiracy theory could come to life.
    
    Sounds like our government's deceitful practice. Thank you Shades.

    replyreport
    1. 78

       Shadesbreathposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Well, conspiracy theories are kind of like God.  I can't disprove their existence, so all I can say is, "I guess it's plausible."
       
       
       And MM, I can't defend Bush on that, so, if you're going to take me down that road, even if I wanted to, I got nothing. Maybe he was in shock?  Or maybe he was at a really good part of the story and didn't want to stop? 

       replyreport
11. 77

    Mighty Momposted 13 years ago

    Being laypeople* we could argue the physics of combustibility and metal destruction all day.
    The biggest clue in the conspiracy theory has nothing to do with the collapse of the towers.
    It's President Bush's REACTION to the news.
    What kind of commander-in-chief sits reading a children's book for seven whole minutes after he hears his country is under attack?

    replyreport
    1. 61

       AboveBeyondposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I am no Bush fan but to be honest he was probably in shock, and not wanting to alarm the children he continued reading to them. I know when I get hit with news that calls for immediate reaction I sometimes go through shock and then jump into action. Not the best trait for a president though.....

       replyreport
12. 66

    MikeNVposted 13 years ago

    I will side with the Government just as soon as they offer a reasonable explanation as to why the media is not allowed access to the debris and how Building #7 a 47 Story Tower which was not hit by and Airplane nor was it hit by either of the other falling towers was completely reduced to rubble.
    
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T2_nedORjw

    replyreport
13. 70

    Cagsilposted 13 years ago

    Hey Shades,
    
    My only point was to make it known that government does indeed lie to the public. Many people see it all the time, but the lies cannot but help magnify government actions as deceitful in nature.
    
    Thus, it leads to the fact the a Democracy Capitalistic Republic isn't properly working, due to manipulation of those in power.
    
    The elected officials are supposedly working for the betterment of society, and it has worked very well, since it's inception.
    
    So, I put nothing past government. Killing several thousand to have access to full control, including homeland security? SO, government intrudes/invades both domestic and abroad, while everyone mourns those who died.
    
    It's a gimmick sold to the American public.
    
    Oh, on another note- do you have an answer for- why the videotapes confiscated from the local businesses were never returned or released to the public?
    
    Just a thought.

    replyreport
14. 77

    Mighty Momposted 13 years ago

    Shades -- you are not the first to suggest that explanation.
    The plot to "The Pet Goat" (which most people erroneously call "My Pet Goat") is indeed scintillating.
    
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar … Jul13.html
    
    The only thing that gives me pause is the fact that the tale only covers 2 pages -- 155 to 156. Two pages? Seven minutes? Hmmm.

    replyreport
    1. 78

       Shadesbreathposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       He's not a fast reader.  You ever notice his lips moving while he's reading off the teleprompters during his speeches?
       
       And to Cags:
       
       No I don't have an answer why the video tapes weren't returned.  Occam's Razor would suggest that famously blundering bureaucratic ineptitude lost them.  HOwever, playing along, I'll say:  I don't even know if there were actually tapes in the recorders at those shops to begin with, since businesses are notoriously lax in that regard.  But, it might be that, in a conspiracy to undermine the government, the media is putting out information to make it seem like those missing tapes were held by the evil government as a plausible option to there never hving been tapes at all.  Just tossing that out there as another possibility.  Conspiracy theories go both ways, that's why both sides have them.  Again it's like God, you either have to pick a side and just cling to it relentlessly or remain observant and try not to get crushed beneath the feet of either sides blind violence.

       replyreport
15. 74

    Reality Bytesposted 13 years ago

    One passport was found at the scene.  It just happened to belong to one of the terrorists.
    
    OK
    
    
    In 2001 it would have been impossible to receive a cell phone call from a plane at that high of an altitude.  But calls got through.
    
    OK
    
    
    Building seven
    
    
    Yeah right.

    replyreport
16. 61

    TMMasonposted 13 years ago

    You answered your question in your first statement.
    
    "but I would like to know how these terrorists living in caves on the other side of the world"
    
    That perception alone enabled most of what occurred, along with lax Visa laws and Immigration issues we still refuse to address.
    
    These people do not live in caves... they are not goat-herders who can't think beyond the stable.
    
    Under-estimating an enemy is the first step into your own grave.
    
    And I would suggest if you have questions about 9/11 you read this. It blows apart all the BS spun by "Loose change".
    
    Which by the way I have seen.
    
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol … ws/1227842
    
    I understand the desire to think it couldn've been pulled off by lowly goat-herders from the caves of Afghanistan.
    
    Well... no I don't. But you get what I mean.

    replyreport
17. 77

    Mighty Momposted 13 years ago

    The 9-11 Commission Report was not swallowed whole by everyone:
    
    http://patriotsquestion911.com/
    
    As for the Popular Mechanics article, PM is published by Hearst Media. Interestingly, both William Randolph Hearst the Bush family are implicated in supporting the Nazis.
    Hmmm.
    http://www.emperors-clothes.com/article … /swas1.htm

    replyreport
    1. 61

       TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       There is no connection to Bush and the NAZIs... that would be Joe Kennedy and his family. And keep in mind Bush is a progressive and I am not a fan of his.
       
       And you know I would like to believe it... becuase NAZIs and Progressives are of the same ilk.

       replyreport
       1. 65

          AdsenseStrategiesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Bush is a progressive... Can you spell that one out for me. I'm not trying to get at you; I'd like to hear the argument.

          replyreport
          1. 61

             TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             Yes he is.
             
             And I am not the only one to know this.
             
             The Left itself knew just were he had to go to get his backing in his second election. And they knew thier poisonous ideology was just sitting there waiting to spew its puss all over.
             
             "NEW YORK – Rudy Giuliani. George Pataki. John McCain. Michael Bloomberg. They were all over the GOP convention yesterday. And then tonight, you'll see Arnold Schwarzenegger. One left-leaning Republican after another. You'd think Nelson Rockefeller had risen from the grave and progressive Republicans had retaken the GOP.
             
             If it were only so. Progressive Republicans have much to offer their party. They know how to win races in places where you see more than Suburban-driving Republicans. They campaign in union halls, go into immigrant communities and listen to black voters.
             
             In other words, progressive Republicans are the kind of people George W. Bush needs to secure a second term. No wonder he got them to kick off his convention. I would too in a tight race.
             
             And there aren't just a few progressive Republicans, the kind who favor abortion rights but hate deficit spending. A bunch of them packed the top floor of the Met Life building Sunday afternoon for a Republican Main Street Partnership reception. And another Main Street meeting occurred yesterday with former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich and ex-Bush environmental adviser Christine Whitman holding forth on the importance of centrist Republicans."
             
             http://faculty.smu.edu/jkobylka/America … Street.htm
             
             Who/What do you think got him re-elected to office.
             
             But the American public will not be fooled again.
             
             We see now that Progressives are no more than the infection of Marxist/Socialist Ideolgies, ozzing thier puss and rot throughout our political parties.
             
             And yes, they are in the Independent Party, also.
             
             They seem to think they can run there when-ever one party or the other runs them out.
             
             Why do you think Bush never vetoed any bill filled with democrat goodies and add ons, (especially the war bills.), they know better than to fight with thier own... it has cost them before and they learned from it.
             
             Like all of them, his actions speak louder than the (R) after his name.
             
             Why do you think Independents and the true conservatives are about to toss every incumbant who does not govern as they should.

             replyreport
18. 61

    maplethorpejposted 13 years ago

    I love being able to come home from work to a great dialogue!
    
    Question: Who was responsible for the 1993 WTC bombing?
    (George W's papa was in office at the time)
    
    I do like Shades analogy about conspiracy theories. We can't really prove anything, but when there is this much doubt about the government's involvement, it's kinda scary. Why are they keeping so much information from the public?
    
    World Trade # 7, the debris from the plane that hit the Pentagon and the one that crashed in Pennsylvania, the one recovered passport, BOX CUTTERS(!?), oil dependency and a president that comes from oil, DiCk ChEnEy, etc, etc.
    
    The conspiracy theory could be wrong, but I doubt it. To be fair, I will read the PM article to see what I think.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I just think you should look at all the evidence.
       
       I have been through it all myself... from Alex Jones to PM.
       
       I don't buy our Govt. did it.
       
       But I will agree they were a major factor in it being pulled off.
       
       The Dems hog-tied our intelligence agencies, top that off with the open borders poilicy, and the Leftist mind-set that the whole world loves one another.... and you have a recipe for a desaster of this magnitude.
       
       If the only thing neccessary for a conspiracy to be true, was the amount of doubt about someones  involvment, or not. Then everything that is a conspiracy theory, is real.
       
       That is kinda a loose standard to have for proof.

       replyreport
19. 77

    Mighty Momposted 13 years ago

    I actually went on the site of the 9-11 report to look up who comprised the commission. That's as far as I got.
    But I think it would be worth investigating the political affiliation (read: agenda) of those responsible for putting out the report!
    
    Conspiracy theories are fun!
    Meet ya on the Grassy Knoll....

    replyreport
20. 61

    JON EWALLposted 13 years ago

    HUBBERS
    On 9/11/01 the US government was caught off guard and simply ignored our enemies ability to strike the homeland. The collapse of those buildings impacted our financial systems as well as the loss of some 3000 citizens. It was a time when many Americans, President Bush  and members of our government put aside their biases and united behind a cause to find and punish those responsible for their inhumane actions.
    
    The structural integrity of the supports ( steel beams and columns ) of the building, the fireproofing of those members and the loss of the sprinkler systems to contain the fire created a combination proved to be fatal.
    The properties of the strength of steel  is in its temperment,size and thickness. The loss of temperment due to the intense heat and the additional weigh of the building above where the planes crashed into the buildings caused the structure to collapse.
    People in the construction industry understand the values of structural design and integrity. There is no building in the world that could have survived the calamity and the destruction.
    America must never forget 9-11 because the world just got a lot smaller. We must keep up our vigil, our enemies are real and they must be eliminated if we are to live in peace and tranquility.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       maplethorpejposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       June 17, 2009: 29 Structural & Civil Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Explosive Demolition in Collapses of All 3 WTC High-Rises on 9/11 – more than 1,000 Architects and Engineers have joined call for new investigation, faulting official collapse reports
       
       http://www2.ae911truth.org/downloads/29 … -06-17.pdf
       
       The initial shock is over. Now we need to start realizing what happened and how it has led to the events of today.

       replyreport
21. 70

    Cagsilposted 13 years ago

    Sorry, still not buying it. Nope!

    replyreport
22. 70

    Cagsilposted 13 years ago

    Thank you Shades.

    replyreport
    1. 78

       Shadesbreathposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       <3 you, Cags. 

       replyreport
23. 68

    bgamallposted 13 years ago

    It must be pointed out that the Taliban went to Texas in 1997. They then turned on Unocal and refused to build the pipeline to the Caspian Sea. That pipeline was to extract oil investments of Halliburton. Dick Cheney now had motive to get back at the Taliban.
    
    Then in 2000 PNAC, a neocon website, put a statement on their website to the effect that there needed to be a new Pearl Harbor in order to speed the entrance of the US into the middle east. Cheney was a member of this organization.
    
    Cheney had both motive and knowledge. Turns out, that passage was on the website for years so as not to look suspicious, and I read it with my own eyes.
    
    
    Also here is a link about Warren Buffet's involvement. This is very sobering. A CEO saved who went to Buffet's party at Strategic Command on 911 had a director who ended up being the lead investigator of 911.
    
    Add to this the one time announcement by Berkshire that netjets followed flight 93 and you have some events that would be virtually impossible without Buffet knowing about 911: http://killtown.911review.org/buffett.html

    replyreport
24. 60

    EPmanposted 13 years ago

    If 9/11 was a conspiracy, then it would take the cooperation of thousands of government workers -- from low-level employees to the elite. All would have to keep their mouths shut.
    
    I do not believe the U.S. government is capable of orchestrating such an intricate plan. We're all familiar with the ineptness of government, and I'd be surprised if they had the capability to execute a scheme as elaborate as this.
    
    Also, I believe that our foreign policy gives terrorists good incentive to attack us.  America is despised not because we are free and prosperous, but because we are over there, meddling in foreign affairs. It is not too unbelievable for extremists from the Middle East to feel compelled to carry out an attack on American soil.
    
    That being said, corruption in government is certainly no secret. I could be wrong.

    replyreport
    1. 68

       bgamallposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Many in government knew that there were going to be hijackings. But only a few knew where they would be flying.

       replyreport
25. 77

    Mighty Momposted 13 years ago

    
    
    Is he one of the ones who knew?

    replyreport
26. 83

    psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

    Saying people living in caves (many of whom had Ivy league educations and millions of dollars) couldn't put men with knives on planes strikes me as either naive or racist.  Like the people who say aliens built the pyramids because they could see how anyone but a modern white guy could do anything really impressive.

    replyreport
    1. 68

       bgamallposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Before you keep talking psych, you may want to watch this first: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlWSv0NZ … re=related
       
       I also suggest that nothing close to this has been launched since. Wonder why? Because a sophisticated plot allowed it.
       
       That video btw has George Bush's meltdown OJ style. You may want to watch it to the end.

       replyreport
    2. 82

       Aya Katzposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Good point!

       replyreport
27. 88

    Paragliderposted 13 years ago

    I think there are two completely different issues here.
    The first is: did the collisions and subsequent fires cause the towers to fall (including building 7)?
    The second is: If not, who/what was the cause?
    
    As a physicist, I am wholly unconvinced that the vertical collapse of these three buildings was caused by the fires in two of them. There have been no convincing explanations yet offered. (There have been many unconvincing ones though).
    
    But as to the second issue, I'd say the cause appears to have been controlled explosion, i.e. demolition. But that's as far as science can take me. The whodunnit part - I won't even go there because it would just be speculation and I know far less about American politics than many people here.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Twyler (Crazy T)posted 13 years agoin reply to this

       For those who believe we (american people) don't know some things, well here are a few things we know for sure -
       
       -- We know the twin towers were brought down by controlled demolition.  There is already plenty of chemists out there who have done chemical analysis on debris left over from the collapse of the towers.  They found lot’s of thermite residue .  Thermite is an incendiary used to ignite explosive charges. NO REASON FOR THERMITE TO BE THERE. Also, if you watch how the towers came down, it is clear as day…it was part of a planned controlled demolition. 
       
       -- We know the second plane that hit the second tower was not a commercial aircraft. A Fox news reporter, watching the plan go into the tower, moments later said - conclusively - it was NOT a commercial airliner. It looked like a “military cargo plane”.
       
       -- We know SOMEONE put short orders on American Airlines’ stock.  The SEC won’t tell us who did it. It’s classified.
       -- We know that Israelis were arrested inside a van loaded with explosives and  trying to blow up the Brooklyn bridge.
       -- We know the only ones seen celebrating on 9-11 in NY City, and arrested, were Israelis.
       
       I can go on & on...  I wrote a Hub about this with 14 indisputable facts.  Unless you got serious math problems, or serious reading comprehension problems, all the evidence adds up to Israel as the ones who carried it out.  The US (CIA), of course, gave them the green light - so they could manufacture a reason to get back into Iraq and then KILL Saddam and his sons (Bush Sr. original goal).  There WERE two enemies to Israel in 2001 (and 1991): Iraq and Iran. One is still there.  Somehow, some way, we going into Iran. 
       
       Oh, this just reported today.  Look WHERE these state-of-the-art battle tanks are being deployed.
       Iran is RIGHT NEXT DOOR.  The OTHER objective of  9-11 has not fulfilled. But it will be. 
       http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 06856.html
       
       Somehow, I think Rahm Emmanel (mr. Jerusalem and King Kong Sleazeball) and Chicago are connected to Iran invasion.  I just got a feeling about this.  Wait and see. Election day for Chicago mayor is Feb. 22, 2011.  Rahm is in fellas. The Chicago machine has been payed off … and Rahm is already guaranteed winner.  I would bet my mortgaged house on this right now. Watch out Chicagoans! Something is in the works.  (I know, Crazy T , YOU crazy.  Well, time will tell.)

       replyreport
       1. 76

          lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          September 12, 2001, Ehud Barak was on CNN telling us we must go into Afghanistan.
          He was recently at a conference with McCain and Graham also in attendance, and he said we must get Iran. But "not for the tv cameras".
          Israel is given credit for the recent worm that got into Iran's nuclear secrets.
          
          PNAC has plans to rearrange the world for "Full Spectrum Dominance". Read it here: google
          
          REBUILDING
          AMERICA’S
          DEFENSES
          Strategy, Forces and Resources
          For a New Century
          
          Mottto of Mossad is "By deception shall you wage war."

          replyreport
          1. 68

             bgamallposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             Oil was the main motivation for 911. The oil men first sought involvement in the middle east to control oil. However, clearly, PNAC had some members who came from Jewish backgrounds as descendents.
             
             However, just because someone has Jewish parents does not mean that they practice Judaism. The "Godfather" of neoconservatism, Leo Strauss, who taught Paul Wolfowitz at University of Chicago had Jewish parents. He was not Jewish, but rather was an atheist or agnostic. However, he was a Zionist. Paul Wolfowitz was the architect of the Iraq War and lied about WMD.
             
             It is interesting to note that while religious Zionists do exist, the early founders of Israel were not religious!
             
             This Jewish fellow has a brilliant website that even admits that Zionism is not a religious movement: http://www.mideastweb.org/zionism.htm
             
             He seeks peace in the middle east as do I.

             replyreport
28. 61

    mikelongposted 13 years ago

    I see that the Project for the New American Century has already been mentioned....as I'm sure has their quotation regarding what it would take to get the American military into Iraq....which was one of the primary goals of that organization....
    
    "some catastrophic and catalysing event – like a new Pearl Harbor” ...would be needed in order to create the political will to invade Iraq and "reorder" the globe...
    
    "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way"-Franklin Roosevelt...
    
    I agree......
    
    PNAC membership:
    
    -Dick Cheney (former Sec. of Defense, former Nixon aide, CEO of Halliburton when PNAC was formed, and of course, VP when the "catalyzing event" occurred.
    
    -Steve Forbes
    
    -Donald Rumsfeld
    
    -Paul Wolfowitz
    
    (Looks like the gang got a great hookup-cushy gov't jobs-right before the "big event")
    
    And it has been funded by, among others....the Scaife Foundations......the force behind the New York Mellon Bank......who also fund the Heritage Foundation, among other "conservative" political drives...
    
    Mr. Scaife also funds organizations like the Social Contract Press.....who fund the publishing of mind-altering garbage like the "Camp of the Saints"......
    
    What a bunch of goons..

    replyreport
    1. 68

       bgamallposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       As I pointed out above, the primary motive for involvement in the middle east was oil control and empire building. A secondary motive was to protect Israel.
       
       The primary motive happened because the Taliban went to Texas in 1997 and then refused to build the pipeline to Halliburton investments in the Caspian Sea. Again, first motive was control of oil resources and empire building. This is a war crime, but if you are big enough, you control the war crime tribunals.
       
       Here is the BBC report about the Taliban going to Texas in 1997. Only local news reported this in the United States. It was ignored by the major media for the most part: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/west_asia/37021.stm

       replyreport