Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Sign in to follow this  
PolyNewbie

9/11

Your apoinion on 911  

57 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I challenge government apologists everywhere to show that 911 was not an inside job.

Popular Mechanics and 911Myths are full of lies and misleading information. This is an open challenge to governemnt apologists to quote from these and other sources. I will show that these sources are lying or misleading.

911 was an inside job. We know this for the following reasons.

(1) Air defence stand down during attacks.

(2) Unusual collapse of buildings, particularly building 7, www.wtc7.net

(3) Subsequent cover up and/or removal of evidence

(4) Incomplete & biased investigation

(5) Congressional lies surrounding the investigation

(6) Numerous high ranking people from the establishment say it was an inside job. They have nothing to gain by doing this & everything to lose.

(7) Refusal to have unbiased independent investigation

(8) Hole in pentagon was too small for the jetliner.

(9) You could not make cell phone calls from 30,000 ft as the government sponsored Hollywood propoganda says you can "Hi Mom, Its Mark Bingham" :huh:

(10) People involved in coverup are involved in other war crimes such as invasion of Iraq and surrounding lies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's one from the Nation tips, and this is a liberal-progressive oriented magazine as well.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20061225/hayes

(1) Air defence stand down during attacks.

Show me the proof, are you sure it wasn't stood down because of the fear that a airliner could be shot down that wasn't taken by hijackers.

(2) Unusual collapse of buildings, particularly building 7, www.wtc7.net

Civil Engineers don't find anything unusual about it, and thats their area of specialty.

(3) Subsequent cover up and/or removal of evidence

No real proof besides conspiracy websites.

(4) Incomplete & biased investigation

Perhaps they needed to investigate more. However I don't think any level headed person is paranoid enough to blame the government for it.

Congressional lies surrounding the investigation

How do you know they were lies, back it up.

Numerous high ranking people from the establishment say it was an inside job. They have nothing to gain by doing this & everything to lose.

Did you include quotes taken out of context so they seem to be alluding to a government conspiracy. I hope your not including the people that believe in Aliens, and have been involved in holocaust denial and questionable schemes.

(7) Refusal to have unbiased independent investigation

By who, people who think every national tragedy is part of a government conspiracy. Even with an unbiased independant investigation somehow is you don't like the results you'll simply blame the "establishment".

(8) Hole in pentagon was too small for the jetliner.

According to civil engineer's, the damage was consistent with what would have happened if a jetliner had crashed into the Pentagon. Besides, what would be the point of firing a missile into the pentagon, so you could disrupt your own National Defense.

(9) You could not make cell phone calls from 30,000 ft as the government sponsored Hollywood propoganda says you can "Hi Mom, Its Mark Bingham"

So the government sponsers all those Jewish Homosexual Limosine driving Liberal's that constantly attack Bush. Yet somehow they are complicit in the events of September 11th.

(10) People involved in coverup are involved in other war crimes such as invasion of Iraq and surrounding lies.

I think you need a refresher course in what "War Crimes" actually mean since you have no idea. As well most people believe the invasion of Iraq was a major mistake on both sides of the political fence, and the US is trying to find a way out.

I challenge government apologists everywhere to show that 911 was not an inside job.

I'm not a government apologist. I just hate people that find one or two holes in any story and blame any national tragedy on a group of people they know nothing about. It's like the people that say evolution is a hoax because their are a few unanswered questions, same with the people who say Hitler couldn't have killed 6,000,000 Jews and say the actual figure was around 200,000.

PS: I hope that Black Dog comes back on here because I wanna see a good old fashioned boxing match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I challenge government apologists everywhere to show that 911 was not an inside job.
Why? The onus is on you to prove your claim. Most of your points are simply complaints about how the gov't handled the investigation - they don't prove a damn thing even if they were reasonable complaints. Most of the others are opinions that cannot be substantiated. I will pick on this one you have yet to provide a counter arguement:
(2) Unusual collapse of buildings, particularly building 7, www.wtc7.net
Buildings will naturally collapse into their footprint unless there is some large force pushes them sideways like an earthquake. Demolition crews spend weeks trying to get buildings to collapse properly because they have a duty to ensure that absolutely _no_ debris affects the surrounding buildings (e.g. it was debris from WTC1 & WTC2 that damaged WTC7). IOW, your statement that the collapse of the buildings was unusual is simply false. However, I will give you another opportunity to produce one example of where a building topples sideways when there was no outside force.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Riverwind is exactly correct, the onus is on you.

Moreover, you are drudging up old arguments that have already been dealt with on 911myths.com and other sites. What's the point of discussion if we're going to have these old scarecrows come back at us again and again ?

I find it sad that these types of disasters (the JLK assasination, Princess Diana's death) now give birth to a cottage industry of parasites to make money on whatever controversy they can paste together from coincidences of the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CanadianBlue:Here's one from the Nation tips, and this is a liberal-progressive oriented magazine as well.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20061225/hayes

Thats commentary not proof of anything. If I post a link to someone that says the moon is made of cheeze does McCain start buying rights to it ?

Show me the proof, are you sure it wasn't stood down because of the fear that a airliner could be shot down that wasn't taken by hijackers.

I see so they would do nothing in case they got the wrong plane. I never heard that before, did you make that up ?

Civil Engineers don't find anything unusual about it, and thats their area of specialty.

No it isn't. Building construction in such a way to prevent collapses is their area of specialty. They don't study mechanics of actual collaspes - only how to prevent them.

No real proof besides conspiracy websites.

Evidence was immediately removed from all sites right after the crashes and before any investigations could start. Are you doubting this ?

Perhaps they needed to investigate more. However I don't think any level headed person is paranoid enough to blame the government for it.

Still, it was an incomplete and biased investigation set up by known liars (Iraq/WMD's). A level headed person would assume nothing and judge from the evidence. All governments are inherently corrupt because power corrupts and the absolute power that the US government now has shows that they are absolutely corrupt.

...I'll get the rest later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The set of unlikely events and the guilty behaviour is my proof.

PolyN:

That's very honest. I wouldn't blame people for becoming suspicious based on those things, but it doesn't constitute proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael Hardner:That's very honest. I wouldn't blame people for becoming suspicious based on those things, but it doesn't constitute proof.

Maybe not in math class but its proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The guilty behaviour of hiding evidence really wraps it up nicely.

Why do you suppose those Pentagn tapes were so quickly rounded up ? Why were the cops and fireman gagged in NY ? Why can't we see the Pentagon tapes that show this airliner hitting the Pentagon ?

Why doesn't mainstream ever (very rarely and not always when asked) show the wtc7 collapse ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been looking into 9/11 for some time myself. I have a couple other threads dedicated to it as well.

I have looked at it as a large bank heist, to a catalyst to get support for the Iraq war. Without some catalyst on the U.S.A.'s soil, there would not be enough support for this war that has now claimed more soliders lives than people died on Sept 11, 2001. Not to mention this war has gone on longer than WWII. There were more players during WWII so that may have been the factor to a relatively short war.

Here is a scenario that I think is plausible from all this. Even if the US government did not have a hand in that tragic day, they at least knew about it, and knew it was going to happen. The U.S. already had plans for Afghanistan and Iraq even before Bush ever hit office. (How long does it take to prepare for war in a country on the other side of the planet?) Now we all know 9/11 was used by Bush and Co. to wave the banner of war on terror. 'There is a time for politics...' How much support for a war in Afghanistan and Iraq would be drummed up without a catalyst like 9/11 to help out with that?

I have moved away from the idea of bombs in the building ect ect and am looking at the big picture. Sept 11, 2001 was fateful to many of us now still alive today. I think it really did change things. It has many reprocussions that are yet to be felt and/or understood by many.

I have watched alot of documentaries on youtube and googlevideo's. I will link them later on and then tell you how I think they are important and fit into all this.

Even if 9/11 was not an inside job, it was used and abused as a tool/weapon against everything that America does NOT stand for (With us or against us) The Bush admin used and abused that day over and over again for the last 5 years. Do you remember the lessons of 9/11 ?? Whatever that really means since there is alot of controversy about that day, the events and who knew what and when.

The result of this is now a Patriot Act (and revisions) that seem to actually negate some parts of the Constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act

The following shows what that actually means. It is just an acronym.

The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-56), known as USA PATRIOT Act or simply the Patriot Act, is an American act which was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. The Act passed in the Senate by a vote of 98 to 1, and in the House by a vote of 357 to 66. Although the bill enjoyed widespread Congressional and Presidential support it is a very controversial federal legislation.

Sounds good right? And by naming it PATRIOT, you are shunned and ridiculed and told you do not understand anything, you are unPATRIOTic.

http://www.answers.com/topic/patriot-act

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe 911 was done to create the police state and side track us from the North American Union.

Going into Afganistan and Iraq were side issues.

"Let's you and him fight" Tholian Mantra.

That reminds of a a looney tunes cartoon "Lets You and Him wrestle"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So any actual proof yet Noob???

Why does publications like Popular Mechanics mislead wrt facts of 911 ? Why did Nova and BBC do it wrt wtc construction ?

Because they talked to more people who were expert's, than people who had electrical engineering degrees who are slightly paranoid and have no idea what they are talking about.

I believe 911 was done to create the police state and side track us from the North American Union.

I believe BD said it best: What kind of a crappy police state allows people to spew a bunch of these 9/11 conspiracies and allows so many people to oppose the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Canadian Blue:Because they talked to more people who were expert's, than people who had electrical engineering degrees who are slightly paranoid and have no idea what they are talking about.

How about some content in your posts ? I've already stated that the set of coincidences & unusual happenings and coverups is my proof.

You turn to insults when you do not have an arguement.

Grow Up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not much of a police state if it can't keep Streisand and David Lynch quiet.

As time marches on, there will be less and less interest in this 'conspiracy'. Even those serious-minded people who are interested in real debate with the conspiracy-minded will lose interest (starting with me as of now) and there will be less and less clatter and flash.

Thankfully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just trust experts, you know people who know what their talking about. Not some guy that does the special effects for the show Lost [Rivero]. Besides I think its more likely that September 11th was done by the Aliens, it all started in 1947.............

PS: I've shown you the evidence, and have shown you content. Oddly enough all of it has been perpetrated by the government to support the official version. It's hard to debate a person replies to all proof by saying the government was involved.

I do this more for the entertainment value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CanadianBlue:Not some guy that does the special effects for the show Lost [Rivero].

You keep making that silly comment and I keep pointing out that my link to his site was really a link to a brigadier geneneral who was an explosives expert and who wrote a report to congress showing that the official version of the Oklahoma bombing was a scientific impossibility.

Why can't you tell the difference between Rivero and a brigadier general ? - they are not the same person. Do you think that Rivero is trying to pass himself off as a general and that he wrote the report ?

This kind of arguemnt is so typical of the neocon types. They cannot attack the evidence so they go after the web master. Stupid. If you do this for fun you should be better at it.

PS: I've shown you the evidence, and have shown you content. Oddly enough all of it has been perpetrated by the government to support the official version. It's hard to debate a person replies to all proof by saying the government was involved.

What evidence ? The lies of Popular Mechanics, the lies of 911Myths or the mainstream media lies about the investigation and its "conclusions". I've already shown how all these people use propoganda to mislead the non critical thinker. So what "evidence" ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really should have this stock reply saved somewhere so I could just copy/paste it every time this topic is resurrected.

While I DO believe that Bush and company knew that something big was going to happen on 9/11, I simply do NOT believe they had the brains to mastermind something of this scope, and keep it quiet.

I mean, come on, we're talking about the guy who says "I decide, I am the decider."

We're talking about the guy that when first informed about WTC, sat with a silly, stunned look on his face in front of a classroom full of schoolkids.

No, Bush and company simply don't have the collective brains to pull off something of this magnitude without the beans being spilled prematurely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What evidence ? The lies of Popular Mechanics, the lies of 911Myths or the mainstream media lies about the investigation and its "conclusions". I've already shown how all these people use propoganda to mislead the non critical thinker. So what "evidence" ?

Yes those lies, the lies of the people who have actual credible theories instead of a few guys with crackpot theories that revolve around them being paranoid of the government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really want to hear a "inside job" truther-type explain the following to me

1) If the Government carried out 9-11 by crashing planes into the twin towers to cover up the controlled demoloition of the WTC, why would they bother to fake a plane crashing into the Pentagon? I mean, why not just crash an actual plane like they did in New York? If the Pentagon was hit by a missile, where did all the suspiciously airplane-like debris (including wheels and scraps bearing the airline's colours) come from?

2) If the air defence was told to stand down, who shot down flight 93? Or was there a Flight 93 at all? If not, why fake a crash in the middle of nowhere? And what happened to the people who were on the actual flight 93?

3) How come nobody actually involved in the conspiracy has come forward? There must have been thousands of people directly involved and imagine the book deal awaiting the person who can blow the lid off of one of the greatest conspiracies of all time. Instead, we get Babs Streisand's husband. Oooh.

4) How did they manage to wire the WTC with explosives and when did they start? The tallest building ever imploded was the 439 foot (that's less than half the size of one WTC tower) J.L. Hudson Department Store in Detroit. That job took seventh months of prep work, 2,728 lbs of explosives in 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on columns on nine levels of the complex, and 36,000 ft of detonating cord. Now imagine the time and material required to bring down two WTC towers and WTC7. Now tell me how they were able to do all of that work undetected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

Really, though, kimmy: don't you want to know why the government opted for a conspiracy that resembled a game of "Mousetrap"? Because, when you add up the pieces of the truther "plot", it looks less like a clever conspiracy and more like some kind of Dadaist performance art piece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All Polynewbie needs it truthiness to prove his point, truth comes from the gut, not from fancy facts and newspapers.

Soon after the bombing an analysis by Brigadier General Benton K. Partin (Ret.) concluded that "the damage at the Murrah Federal Building is not the result of the truck bomb itself, but rather due to other factors such as locally placed charges within the building itself". Partin's report, released in the weeks following the bombing, was based on assumptions the bomb was fueled with diesel fuel, but did not account for the greater explosive strength of nitromethane in an improvised explosive device.

Eat it PN!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the suggestion made that an administration who can not keep the fact that George W Bush choked on a pretzel or any memo with their fingerprints on it from landing in the New York Times orchestrated this attack? The amount of people required to pull this thing off is immense.

There are a few of the points I would love to attack, and I agree with the earlier post that we should copy and paste our responses from a receptical to save time.

First, the plane in the pentagon thing. Okay, if it wasn't a plane, what happened to the plane? Did the government make up the lives of nearly 100 people and then make them vanish? I dare you to go to the family members left behind from the incident and tell them that it really wasn't the plane carrying their loved ones that crashed into the pentagon.

Second, the towers falling. The only thing out of that whole thing that I have seen that is hard to prove is WTC 7. I've tried believing the free falling building theory and the bombs in the building and both have been disproved.

Third, one item I never see mentioned anymore is the put options placed on the airlines. Of course, not many people mention it now after it was discovered it was for a person who was covering a position where they had purchase tens of thousands of shares in the company.

Fourth, the cellphone thing. This seems like such an easy thing to prove. Get somebody flying over the east coast of the US to try and make a phone call. In addition, I know there is evil in this world, but do you really think out of a group of people in a call center making tens of calls at the same time as trying to reenact the sounds of a plane being taken over by terrorists that not one of them would break and tell people. The person who came forward would be a hero beyond anything.

Finally, the whole police state thing is laughable at best. The dixie chicks are still alive (despite my cries).

And if you call me a neo con for thinking this way you can shove it up your ass.

I know by writing this you won't change your mind. You will probably just accuse me of being shortsighted or a government apologist, as you did in your title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...