Pentagon witnesses=good/WTC witnesses=bad??

Gringao said:

That's how I read it, but it might just have been out a bit. It's clear that the cell phone call was able to reach the plane, however.

Click to expand...

this is with 2006 technology, not with the 2001 technology which of course didn't allow for Cellular telephones to work on airplanes.

I'll try to google up a C&P to blow you out of the water later, right now I want to have a cup of tea and a sandwich.

kbate said:

this is with 2006 technology, not with the 2001 technology which of course didn't allow for Cellular telephones to work on airplanes.

I'll try to google up a C&P to blow you out of the water later, right now I want to have a cup of tea and a sandwich.

Click to expand...

Your priorities are in order. Steady as she goes.

Gringao said:

Your priorities are in order. Steady as she goes.

Click to expand...

Just trying to be helpful and save LN some time - now she'll know what to google to help find her position on this matter.

And my Salami would be better if I had hot mustard. Oh well.

kbate said:

I'll try to google up a C&P to blow you out of the water later, right now I want to have a cup of tea and a sandwich.

Click to expand...

Google is a shill-tool.

Gringao said:

Uh-oh:

Ringing mobile turns flight around

A BRITISH Airways flight from London to New York turned around mid-flight and returned to London's Heathrow airport after a mobile phone started ringing, the airline said.

"Flight BA179 has returned to Heathrow as a precautionary measure," a spokeswoman for BA told AFP.

"A mobile phone was located on board the aircraft which none of the passengers appear to own."

Click to expand...

Oh that's nice. Somebody had set the alarm on their cellphone.

Gringao said:

Didn't someone tell the pilot that it was impossible for this phone to be ringing?

Click to expand...

Who said it was impossible for a cellphone to ring?

You can usually set a cell phone to work as an alarm clock. A phone set with an alarm will start ringing at a preset time, even if it were turned off (but with the battery left connected). Many phones also allow users to set "reminders" for future appointments and timers to countdown to an alarm.

If the flight were way out over the Atlantic Ocean (with no cell phone towers), there would have been "no service," so the ringing couldn't have come from a phone call anyway.

What nonsense LIES were you trying to push this time, Gringao?

I've asked many times in many threads for many months what the motive would have been for the U.S. Government to cause the actions of 9/11 and have had no response from those who appear to believe that it was the U.S. Government behind the events of that day.

That is odd. I do not understand why that one simple question has not been answered. Almost every other question has been answered and/or refuted but not that one. It isn't a trick question. Surely stating the motives behind the actions would help, rather than hurt, your credibility.

Are you going to explain this to me and the others here or do you plan to ignore it or come up with some specious reason why asking the question is dumb?

Lavared said:

I've asked many times in many threads for many months what the motive would have been for the U.S. Government to cause the actions of 9/11 blah, blah, blah...

Click to expand...

Yeah yeah ,we get it.

You want to ignore the FACT that none of you SHILLS has ever been able to get past this

EVERY OTHER OCCASSION both before and since Sept 11 2001, when steel & concrete buildings collapsed down at near free fall speed into their footprint, it has been due to a controlled demolition.

Can you cite a single exception to this?

With a photo.

Click to expand...

nor have you have ever been able to prove that cellphones can make successful calls from planes flying six miles up at over 450mph!

Nor have you ever been able to cite a source, link, and quote from anyone who has been able to simulate the collapses of the WTC buildings. The only logical and rational explanation is that they were controlled demolitions - as the physics PROVES.

It is a FACT that it is impossible to make a cellphone call from a metal-skinned passenger plane flying 5 to 6 miles up without an onboard cellular basestation (technology unavailable before 2004), and it is a FACT that it's impossible to make cellphone call last longer than a few seconds when moving at hundreds of miles per hour. Which means it's also without any doubt that the alleged cellphone calls from the planes were FAKE.

It is a FACT that no steel-framed hi-rises or tower buildings have ever collapsed directly downward at nearly freefall through their own structure into their footprint without a controlled demolition. It is a FACT that nobody has been able to simulate/model the WTC building collapses with the empirical data, except as controlled demolitions, and that according to the empirical data even in the worst case scenarios of NIST, the collapses were impossible and could not occurr, despite their layering of assumptions to explain the collapses because they couldn't model them.

Let's not forget that nobody has yet simulated or modelled those collapses while ignoring controlled demlitions. NIST didn't, they stopped the simulations because they couldn't simulate the collapses with the empirical data, even in their worst case scenario! They gave up! Instead they added pages and pages of nonsense explanations, suppositions, and assumpions to cover what they couldn't simulate. NOVA and Eagar couldn't simulate the collapses either. Barant and Zhou had their math torn to pieces already as they tried to FORCE the simulations to fit, and changed them unrealistically. That chinese "engineer" didn't even publish his formula for his simulations, and he ADMITS in his paper that he forced the simulations in ways which deviated from reality, and he's not experienced with steel buildings anyway (he works with concrete). Dr Francis Green is a chemist, not an engineer or a physicist, and he did a similar trick, deviating from real data to force his formula to simulate what was impossible with the empirical data - AND HE STILL COULDN'T SIMULATE THE COLLAPSES. Nobody has been able to simulate those collapses, except as controlled demolitions.

The more facts that come out, the worst you shills position becomes.

Lovelynice said:

Yeah yeah ,we get it.

Click to expand...

And yet, I still have no response. How very strange.

Lavared said:

And yet, I still have no response. How very strange.

Click to expand...

Get no response to what?

You can't prove the cellphone callls are possible, because they are FAKE.

You can't prove that the WTC collapses were anything other than controlled demolitions, because they were CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS.

All you want to do is ignore all that, and whinge because I'm not bothering to give you a theory.

Why should I? People can make up their own minds given the facts that the cellphone calls were FAKE and the WTC collapses were CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS.

You see, I'm not really a conspiracy theorist. I don't make up conspiracy theories. I attack the IMPOSSIBILITIES and IMPLAUSIBIIES inherent in the Official Loony Conspiracy Theory that alleges that some Arabs did magical and impossible things. Those IMPOSSIBILITIES which you shills can't get around, and have been dodging for MONTHS AND YEARS are not going to go away, and they speak for themselves.

Lavared said:

I've asked many times in many threads for many months what the motive would have been for the U.S. Government to cause the actions of 9/11 and have had no response from those who appear to believe that it was the U.S. Government behind the events of that day.

Click to expand...

BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO ATTACK IRAQ AND STEAL THE OIL!!!!!! THAT'S WHY THEY pinned it....on......a............guy.................in..................Afghanistan.

Uh, never mind.

Gringao said:

BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO ATTACK IRAQ AND STEAL THE OIL!!!!!! THAT'S WHY THEY pinned it....on......a............guy.................in..................Afghanistan.

Uh, never mind.

Click to expand...

With current gas prices they failed horribly at the teft part.

Baddaboom said:

With current gas prices they failed horribly at the teft part.

Click to expand...

It's all part of the plan, man. Just don't ask what the plan is...the kooks can't tell you, though they know it as soon as it happens.

Lovelynice said:

Get no response to what?

You can't prove the cellphone callls are possible, because they are FAKE.

You can't prove that the WTC collapses were anything other than controlled demolitions, because they were CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS.

All you want to do is ignore all that, and whinge because I'm not bothering to give you a theory.

Why should I? People can make up their own minds given the facts that the cellphone calls were FAKE and the WTC collapses were CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS.

You see, I'm not really a conspiracy theorist. I don't make up conspiracy theories. I attack the IMPOSSIBILITIES and IMPLAUSIBIIES inherent in the Official Loony Conspiracy Theory that alleges that some Arabs did magical and impossible things. Those IMPOSSIBILITIES which you shills can't get around, and have been dodging for MONTHS AND YEARS are not going to go away, and they speak for themselves.

Click to expand...

They aren't impossibilities. I've shown you that over and over again.

I've also shown you that many of the assumptions that you call facts are false, yet you keep including them in your posts. You can't claim that you're not making things up.

phrodeau said:

They aren't impossibilities. I've shown you that over and over again

Click to expand...

Bullshit.

Not even once have you been able to refute any of my points.

Typical little lying shill that you are.

Here's I replied to your last lie about cellphones making calls via satellites, a claim of yours which is very revealing of your stupidy.

Lovelynice said:

cellular basestation onboard on the plane, idiot. You need one on the plane otherwise it's impossible for a cellphone to make a successful call.

The technology has only been around to put a cellular basestation onboard on the plane since 2004, and it's still being tested.



Are you are moron? Yes, you must be.

Let's make this ABSOLUTELY CLEAR

CELLPHONES use Cellular Networks to communicate and make calls, NOT SATELLITES!

A satellite phone is a completely different device. I have both a cellphone and a satellite phone. With my CELLPHONE I can use ONLY THE CELLULAR NETWORK - and NOT SATELLITES.

With my satellite phone, I can go anywhere and have full coverage, in the deserts of Australia, out in middle of the ocean, able to call from any location - but a CELLPHONE can only make calls from within the areas covered by a CELLULAR NETWORK which is a VERY DIFFERENT THING ENTIRELY.

And CELLPHONES do not, and never could, make calls via satellite.

Neither can CELLPHONES make successful calls from passenger jets flying six miles up at over 500mph!

You need a SATELLITE PHONE to do that.

I guess the story of the CELLPHONES being used to call from the planes was made up by VIP idiots and military fools who got so used to their military satellite phones that they were TOO DUMB to realise that CELLPHONES using civilian technology don't use satellites and can't make calls from planes flying at over 450mph and miles up in the sky!

Click to expand...

Gringao said:

BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO ATTACK IRAQ AND STEAL THE OIL!!!!!!

Click to expand...

Interesting theory.

Do you have some evidence?

vetteman said:

The reason it remains unanswered ...

Click to expand...

because none of you can make a case for it being relevant.

You want to ignore the FACT that none of you SHILLS has ever been able to get past this

EVERY OTHER OCCASSION both before and since Sept 11 2001, when steel & concrete buildings collapsed down at near free fall speed into their footprint, it has been due to a controlled demolition.

Can you cite a single exception to this?

With a photo.

Click to expand...

nor have you have ever been able to prove that cellphones can make successful calls from planes flying six miles up at over 450mph!

Nor have you ever been able to cite a source, link, and quote from anyone who has been able to simulate the collapses of the WTC buildings. The only logical and rational explanation is that they were controlled demolitions - as the physics PROVES.

It is a FACT that it is impossible to make a cellphone call from a metal-skinned passenger plane flying 5 to 6 miles up without an onboard cellular basestation (technology unavailable before 2004), and it is a FACT that it's impossible to make cellphone call last longer than a few seconds when moving at hundreds of miles per hour. Which means it's also without any doubt that the alleged cellphone calls from the planes were FAKE.

It is a FACT that no steel-framed hi-rises or tower buildings have ever collapsed directly downward at nearly freefall through their own structure into their footprint without a controlled demolition. It is a FACT that nobody has been able to simulate/model the WTC building collapses with the empirical data, except as controlled demolitions, and that according to the empirical data even in the worst case scenarios of NIST, the collapses were impossible and could not occurr, despite their layering of assumptions to explain the collapses because they couldn't model them.

Let's not forget that nobody has yet simulated or modelled those collapses while ignoring controlled demlitions. NIST didn't, they stopped the simulations because they couldn't simulate the collapses with the empirical data, even in their worst case scenario! They gave up! Instead they added pages and pages of nonsense explanations, suppositions, and assumpions to cover what they couldn't simulate. NOVA and Eagar couldn't simulate the collapses either. Barant and Zhou had their math torn to pieces already as they tried to FORCE the simulations to fit, and changed them unrealistically. That chinese "engineer" didn't even publish his formula for his simulations, and he ADMITS in his paper that he forced the simulations in ways which deviated from reality, and he's not experienced with steel buildings anyway (he works with concrete). Dr Francis Green is a chemist, not an engineer or a physicist, and he did a similar trick, deviating from real data to force his formula to simulate what was impossible with the empirical data - AND HE STILL COULDN'T SIMULATE THE COLLAPSES. Nobody has been able to simulate those collapses, except as controlled demolitions.

The more facts that come out, the worst you shills position becomes.

Pookie referred to a Dr Frank Greening before.

Dr Frank Greening is a CHEMIST, not a structural engineer or physicist.

To make things worse for him, his mathematical simulation for the WTC towers collapse doesn't work despite his claims that it does. Using Dr Frank Greening's own math, it was easy for Gordon Ross to show that the "Collapse is arrested" (stopped) according to Frank Greening's own math at an early stage due to the energy deficit.

THE FOLLOWING IS WHAT HAPPENS WITH GREENINGS OWN MATH when taken a mere 50 milliseconds further than Greening did in his simulation (which only covered 50 milliseconds as well). In other words, like NIST, since Frank Greening couldn't simulate the collapse, he just used the first part of the beginning, then knowing that it wouldn't work, he added assumptions about the rest to cover up that the collapse would stop early according to his own calculations.

Energy sources
Kinetic energy from initial freefall 2105MJ
58Ktonnes * g moving through 3.7m
Potential energy from additional downward movement
58Ktonnes * g *[16.5/16] moving through 555mm deflection of impacted storey 325MJ
58Ktonnes * g *[15.5/16] moving through 555mm deflection of impacting storey 305MJ
Compression of remainder of impacting section allowing an effective mass of 58Ktonnes * g *
[[11/2]/16] moving through a proportion of 11 affected storeys elastic deflections of 7.4mm
13MJ
Compression of remainder of impacted section effective mass of 58Ktonnes * g * [17+
moving through half of 20 affected storeys elastic deflection of 7.4mm 52MJ
Total energy available 2700MJ
Energy demands
Pulverisation of impacting floor concrete 128MJ
Pulverisation of impacted floor concrete 128MJ
Energy consumed by inertial changes in collision 1010MJ
Strain energy in impacting storey 710MJ
58Ktonnes * g * moving through 555mm deflection of
impacted storey *
Strain energy in impacted storey 710MJ

58Ktonnes * g * moving through 555mm deflection of
impacted storey *
Elastic strain energy in remainder of impacting section 26MJ effective mass of 58Ktonnes * g *
2 * moving through a proportion of 11 affected storeys' full elastic deflection of
7.4mm
Elastic strain energy in remainder of impacted section 104MJ effective mass of half of
58Ktonnes * g * 2 * moving through half of 4 affected storeys' full elastic
deflection of 7.4mm
Total Energy demands 2816MJ
Energy DEFICIT 2816 - 2700 = 116MJ

That means there's not enough energy to continue the collapse.

His simulation doesn't work, in other words.

(from Gordon Ross' reply to Dr Greening)
By adopting Dr. Greening's own arguments, corrections, contentions, figures and reasoning, the analysis once again shows that the collapse would be arrested at an early stage. Dr. Greening has not disproved the logic and conclusions of my article, but has in fact reinforced the most important conclusion: that collapse would have been arrested at an early stage.

Click to expand...

First two simple questions:

Q1: On September 11 2001, how many buildings collapsed in New York City?

A: Two? No, THREE. The Twin Towers were hit by aeroplanes, but WTC 7, a massive 47 storey steel-framed skyscraper also collapsed. It was NOT hit by a plane. The evidence is clear - this was a controlled demolition. http://wtc7.net/ http://911physics.co.nr/ (Click on WTC 7 link)

Q2: How long did it take the FBI to bring charges against Usama bin Laden in connection with 911? One hour, eight hours, a day, a week?

A: Usama bin Laden is NOT on the FBI most wanted list in connection with 911. Why not? According to FBI spokesman, Chief of Investigative Publicity Rex Tomb, “The FBI has no hard evidence connecting Usama Bin Laden to 9/11.” http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=4673 http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm (accessed 20 August 2006)

If you believe 911 was an inside job, YOU ARE NOT ALONE. Below are just a small selection amongst the millions of credible persons including engineers, scientists, intelligence analysts, actors, theologians, philosophers, authors, investigative journalists, lawyers, military personel, politicians, family members and eye-witnesses who believe the investigation into the events of September 11 2001 must urgently be reopened.

Seekin' that ol' 911 Truth August 2006

On July 29 and 30, and then again on August 1, something happened that increasing numbers of people believe is of great importance. On these dates C-SPAN rebroadcast a 911 panel discussion, held originally in late June, sponsored by an organization called the American Scholars’ Symposium to discuss what really happened on September 11, 2001. http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/c-span_firestorm_911_truth_gains_momentum.htm http://www.c-span.org/homepage.asp?Cat=Series&Code=APS&ShowVidNum=10&
Rot_Cat_CD=APS&Rot_HT=206&Rot_WD=&ShowVidDays=100&ShowVidDesc=&ArchiveDays=100

Held in Los Angeles, the meeting lasted two days, and the C-SPAN rebroadcast covered one almost two-hour wrap-up session. The meeting was attended by 1,200 people interested in hearing something other than the official story of 9/11. The TV audience was evidently large enough to spur C-SPAN to broadcast the panel discussion five separate times in four days.

Even a month late, this is a lot of airtime for stories that many people call conspiracy theories!

The seekers after 911 truth have been around for almost 5 years now, and they're NOT GOING AWAY - they're growing day by day!

In April Charlie Sheen made national news (CNN Showbiz Tonight 7pm) three nights in a row, with coverage continuing every day the following week. http://www.911blogger.com/2006/03/fourth-night-of-showbiz-tonights-sheen.html http://prisonplanet.com/articles/june2006/280606juggernautoftruth.htm

What newsworthy event prompted such coverage? Mr. Sheen announced that he thinks the government has been covering up the truth about 9/11. Charlie thinks 9/11 was an inside job! http://9eleven.info/ http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060323162638376

Two of Sheen's fellow actors, Ed Asner and Ed Begley, Jr, agree with him. http://www.911blimp.net/videos/EdAsner-UnityIsTheKey.mov http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7140359934129245752&q=Ed+Begley+911

And so does movie director Aaron Russo. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2947267143366647266&hl=en

Maybe you don’t care what they think, they're just actors. Perhaps you want the opinion of scientists. Well, how about an expert like Steven E Jones, professor of physics at BYU? Professor Jones has found forensic evidence of thermate, an explosive, being used to cut through key support pillars in the WTC buildings. http://www.9eleven.info/911JonesPaperhtm7.htm http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/print.asp?ID=4688 http://www.question911.com/linkout.php?filename=Steven Jones Shows WTC Demolition Evidence.wmv

Or perhaps MIT Engineer Jeff King who also believes the WTC were brought down by a controlled demolition. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1822764959599063248&pl=true http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=related&search_query=
News+WTC+911+Conspiracy+Flight+77&search_sort=relevance&search_category=0&page=2

What about a mathematician? Professor of mathematics, University of Western Ontario, and founder of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven (SPINE), A.K Dewdney. http://www.serendipity.li/wot/operation_pearl.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._K._Dewdney

Maybe they’re too theoretical for you. You want someone from the applied sciences. May I suggest Clemson mechanical engineering professor Judy Wood? http://www.911blogger.com/2006/03/mechanical-engineering-professor-from.html http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/BilliardBalls.html

Or how about Kevin Ryan, former department head at UL (Underwriter Laboratories), the company which certified the steel which went into the WTCs upon their construction, and inspected it after the WTC collapses in 2001. He found the official reports to be full of lies and contradictions. http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041112144051451 http://www.snowshoefilms.com/

Maybe you don’t care for ’eggheads’. http://www.st911.org/ http://physics911.net/spine.htm http://911physics.co.nr/

You want to hear from true patriots, military men, like former head of Star Wars and air force colonel, Bob Bowman, who says the 'official story of 911 is a bunch of hogwash and impossible'. http://benfrank.net/blog/2005/10/27/oil_mafia_treason/ http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/030306Evidence.htm http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6900065571556128674 http://bowman2006.com/

Or USAF Col. (Ret) George Nelson, an authority on aircraft crash investigation. http://www.physics911.net/georgenelson.htm

Or former chief Pentagon arms negotiator for the Middle East, USAF Col. (Ret) Don de Grand-Pre http://www.prisonplanet.com/022904degrand.html

Or how about military men from other countries who are also skeptics of the 'official' story of 911? Here's a few:

Canadian National Defense Minister, the Honourable Paul Hellyer http://www.septembereleventh.org/kc/multimedia/movies/Hellyer.mov

National Minister of Defense (Germany). Also, served as Minister of Technology Andreas Von Bulow. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8274552561914055825

Former Chief of Staff of the Russian armed forces, and chief of the department for General affairs in the Soviet Union 's ministry of Defense, General Leonid Ivashov http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NIM20060123&articleId=1788

Maybe military types scare you. How about a lady of letters like poet Erica Jong? http://www.etruscanpress.org/02_september_11_2001.html

Maybe you’re not into poetry. Prose is more your style. How about Webster Tarpley author of 9/11 Synthetic Terror made in USA? http://www.tarpley.net/welcome.html

Or authors Gore Vidal, Bill Douglas or Christopher Bollyn? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13969.htm http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/EnemyWithin.html http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bollynbeaten.htm

Or if you prefer your message in song, what about putting some of the hard questions to music? Les Visible: 9/11 Was An Inside Job (music) http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=97737

Maybe you don’t trust actors, authors, musicians or poets. You want to hear from a man of God. How about David Ray Griffin theologian, professor emeritus at the Claremont School of Theology? http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html

The respected Presbyterian Press has recently published his book Christian Faith and the Truth behind 9/11 https://www.ppcbooks.com/index1.asp

Not just into Christianity? What about MUJCA-NET, a group of scholars, religious leaders and activists dedicated to uniting members of the Jewish, Christian and Islamic faiths in pursuit of 9/11 truth. http://mujca.com/

How about philosophers? What about distinguished McKnight professor of philosophy, Jim Fetzer. http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/BigLies23Apr2006.html

Or Dr. Jim Hoffman? http://911research.wtc7.net/

What could theologians and philosophers know about national security? You want to hear from insiders to the covert world. How about CIA analyst and former presidential adviser Ray McGovern, an expert on National Security who’s career spanned JFK to GHW Bush. http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2006/01/interview_with_ray_mcgovern.html

Or Bill Christison, a former senior official of the CIA. He was a National Intelligence Officer and the Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis before his retirement in 1979. http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Aug06/Christison14.htm

Or how about David Shayler, the MI5 Whistleblower? http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2005/270605insidejob.htm http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5403286136814574974

Or former cop Michael C. Ruppert? http://www.fromthewilderness.com/store/books.shtml#ruby

Or former 9/11 Commission Member and democrat senator, Max Cleland, who blasts Bush and claims "The White House Has Played Cover-Up". http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/03/23/1546256

Other members of the 9/11 Commission panel also believe that authorities sought to mislead the commission and the public about what happened on Sept. 11.

"I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described," John Farmer, a former New Jersey attorney general who led the staff inquiry into events on Sept. 11, said in a recent interview. "The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. . . . This is not spin. This is not true." http://unsungwar.com/

Or what about Republican Thomas Kean and Democrat Lee Hamilton, the two chairmen of the official government 9/11 Commission Report? In their book, “Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission.” Kean and Hamilton reveal that the US military committed perjury and lied about its failure to intercept the hijacked airliners.

"It proved difficult, if not impossible, to raise hard questions about 9/11 in New York without it being perceived as criticism of the individual police and firefighters or of Mayor Giuliani," Kean and Hamilton said.

The commission even debated referring the military’s lies to the Justice Department for criminal investigation.

Why should we assume that these admissions are the only coverups and lies in the 9/11 Commission Report? http://letsroll911.org/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?p=117589 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14531.htm

Or Cynthia McKinney, a five-term U.S. Congresswoman from Georgia's fourth district from 1993 to 2003, or Catherine Austin Fitts, a former Assistant Secretary of Housing under President George Bush Sr. and a former managing director and board member of Dillon, Read & Co. Inc. http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041101130426916

Or Michael Meacher MP former UK Minister for the environment who says "The war on terror is bogus", or Andreas Von Bulow, former German Secretary Of Defense, who says "The official [9/11] story is so inadequate and far fetched that there must be a different one." http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11222.htm http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8274552561914055825

Or Sibel Edmonds, a 32-year-old Turkish-American, who was hired as a translator by the FBI shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 because of her knowledge of Middle Eastern languages. She was fired less than a year later in March 2002 for reporting shoddy work and security breaches to her supervisors that could have prevented those attacks. http://www.justacitizen.com/

Or Daniel Ellsburg, famous Vietnam 'Pentagon Papers' whistleblower and former American military analyst and Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of Defense (ISA), DOD. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg http://www.911blogger.com/2006/07/daniel-ellsberg-comes-out-for-911.html

Or how about the FBI? Did you know that the reason Usama bin Laden isn't on their most wanted list in connection to 9/11 is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting him to the crimes? http://www.911blogger.com/2006/06/fbi-states-no-hard-evidence-connects.html

What about another country's government, such as the Venezuelan government under Hugo Chavez, supported by billionaire philanthropist Jimmy Walter and WTC survivor William Rodriguez, which is set to launch an international investigation into 9/11? http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/83785

Maybe they're all too far left for you! You want to hear from a Republican. How about Paul Craig Roberts assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury under Ronald Reagan? http://www.tpmcafe.com/node/28070 http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2006/02/post.html http://www.wanttoknow.info/050908insidejob911#roberts http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14531.htm

OK, he’s a Republican, but that was back in the Reagan days. So how about Ron Paul, a Republican congressman from Texas? http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul200.html http://www.house.gov/paul/ http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Ron_Paul
#Congressman_Ron_Paul_Admits_Conspiracy_to_Create_World_Government

Maybe you need to hear from someone in GW’s administration. How about Morgan Reynolds professor emeritus at Texas A&M University and chief economist for the US Department of Labor during Bush’s first term? He believes the events of 9/11 were a staged event, orchestrated by people within the Bush government. http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html

Since the attacks of 911 were obviously a crime, maybe you want to hear from trained legal minds. People whose job it is to carefully investigate the details of a crime and reach a well considered conclusion.

Well, how about attorney Philip Berg? Berg, who has filed a lawsuit against the Bush admin on behalf of WTC survivor William Rodriguez says "They (Bush et al) made it happen or let it happen. And if they let it happen, then they made it happen. And they must be held responsible." http://www.911forthetruth.com/

Or attorney Stanley Hilton? http://www.suetheterrorists.net/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Hilton

Or Bill Veale, with 30 years of legal experience. After much research he has come to the conclusion that the attacks of 9/11 were in essence an inside job perpetrated at the highest levels of the U.S. government. http://www.vealetruth.com/?page_id=6

Maybe none of the above does it for you. You want to hear from "eye-witnesses" - people who were there on the scene on that fateful day. May I suggest you listen to the firefighters who were in the building at the time? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1822764959599063248&pl=true

What about first responder, NY Fireman Lou Cacchioli who says the 9/11 Commission twisted his words. "I finally walked out. They were trying to twist my words and make the story fit only what they wanted to hear. All I wanted to do was tell the truth and when they wouldn't let me do that, I walked out.

"It was a disgrace to everyone, the victims and the family members who lost loved ones. I don't agree with the 9/11 Commission. The whole experience was terrible", Fireman Lou says. http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/200705twistedwords.htm

Or perhaps to news reporters who were on the scene who repeatedly described hearing "explosions"? http://*******.com/bzg64 (you need to fast forward a little...) http://www.letsroll911.org/articles/controlleddemolition.html

Or how about WTC survivor William Rodriguez, a janitor who worked at the WTC for about 19 years, and was decorated as a 911 hero by Bush. He testifies that he heard and felt explosions in the basement of the North Tower BEFORE the planes hit overhead. William asks: "How could a jetliner hit 90 floors above and burn a man's arms and face to a crisp in the basement below within seconds of impact?" It's a good question! http://williamrodriguezwtc.blogspot.com/ http://www.911forthetruth.com/

What about the families who lost loved ones on 911? http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html http://www.911truth.org/index.php?topic=endorsements

Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg, Patty Casazza and Monica Gabrielle of New Jersey lost their husbands Kenneth, Alan, Richard and John who all worked in the WTC. Sally Regenhard lost her firefighter son Christian, and Bob McIlvaine lost his son Bobby.

None of these people are satisfied with the official story of what happened on 9/11. Will you listen to their questions? http://www.911pressfortruth.com/families

Well, if you don't believe any of them, why not listen to the OWNER of the WTC, Larry Silverstein, who admits on Public Broadcast Television that explosives were used to demolish WTC building #7?!

Yes, Silverstein, who had conveniently insured these buildings (which had been ordered to be dismantled due to safety hazards) for billions of dollars just weeks before 911, said on public television:

"(The Fire Department) were not sure that they were gonna be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, we´ve had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. They made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse"

In the demolition industry, “pull” is the common term they use for demolishing buildings with carefully positioned explosives, an operation that can take seasoned professionals weeks to plan. http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/rosebud/wtc_7_archivel.htm http://www.letsroll911.org/articles/controlleddemolition.html http://www.wtc7.net/ http://911physics.co.nr/ (Click on WTC 7 link)

So even the building owner admits that explosives were used to demolish at least one of the three WTC buildings!

And if planning to demolish WTC 7 had been carefully prepared for weeks, why not the other two?

Maybe you don’t want to listen to any of these individuals, but the fact is, a lot of Americans agree with them. Like the 83% of over 50,000 CNN Showbiz Tonight online poll respondents who think the government is covering up the truth of 9/11. http://www.911blogger.com/2006/03/fourth-night-of-showbiz-tonights-sheen.html

Or a Scripps Howard News Service/Ohio University poll taken from July 6 to 24, 2006, concluded that “more than a third [36 percent] of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them, so that the United States could go to war in the Middle East.” A poll done by the Zogby polling organization two months earlier, between May 12 and 16, 2006, concluded that 42 percent of Americans believed there had indeed been a cover-up of the true events of 9/11, and an additional 10 percent of Americans were “unsure.” http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Aug06/Christison14.htm

Maybe you don’t care what the American people think?

Yea, we know.

[Ref. http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=11205 ]

- -

WHAT POSSIBLE MOTIVES COULD THERE BE FOR A 9/11 INSIDE JOB??

These are some of the plutocracy's 'foreign policy' and other lesser goals that 9/11 (the "new Pearl Harbor") has helped them to pursue:

* to get the American people's support for an endless bogus "war on terror" which will ensure continued gargantuan military budgets. This will continue to enrich and empower the plutocracy and the military/industrial complex. http://www.addictedtowar.com/

* the WTC buildings needed massive repairs - or to be demolished altogether - which would have caused a financial loss to the owners. But instead the owner (the Silverstein group), who had conveniently insured the WTC complex against terrorism only weeks before, got paid out billions in insurance, allowing them to not only rebuild, but make a hefty profit also http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/08/16/18297965.php

* insider trading - there were 'put options' placed on airline stocks (a sort of bet that the stock will go down) days before the attacks which made someone millions of dollars

* to help James Baker negotiate massive repatriations from Iraq to Kuwait, making the Bush family/Carlysle Group billions in the process.

* it has been suggested there was a massive amount of gold bullion in the basement beneath the WTC that was looted on 9/11 (unconfirmed).

* the removal of Saddam Hussein

* the removal of the Taliban

* a possible war on Iran?

* to help further the goals of Israel

* the establishment of permanent military bases in the oil rich Middle East

* to keep the price of oil artificially high, so as to ensure continued massive profits for the OPEC countries/oil companies. http://www.gregpalast.com/big-oil-and-the-trillion-dollar-war-bonus http://www.gregpalast.com/the-best-thing-in-the-world-for-big-oil

* the spread of "globalisation" and "corporatism" (i.e. big business and money) e.g. massive contracts for Halliburton and other crony firms with ties to Washington, control of the production and price of oil http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/4354269.stm

* "a means to install a unipolar world with a sole world headquarters, a pretext to erase national borders and to establish the rule of a new world elite” and

* “is a phenomenon that combines the use of terror by state and non-state political structures as a means to attain their political objectives through people’s intimidation, psychological and social destabilization, the elimination of resistance from power organizations and the creation of appropriate conditions for the manipulation of the countries’ policies and the behavior of people.” http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NIM20060123&articleId=1788

* arguably to reassert their control of the opium trade (if this sounds crazy, then remember, Britain had opium wars with China in the 19th Century to keep control of this lucrative trade, so this is nothing new). btw, Afghanistan is the world's leading producer of opium. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060816/ap_on_re_as/afghan_opium_boom

* to establish a precedent for the role of "pre-emptive" war in their efforts to shape the world according to their belief systems (this will make their next "pre-emptive" war easier to push through).

* to shake the "Vietnam Syndrome" and get the American people accustomed to the deaths of thousands of their sons (about 2,800 so far plus tens of thousands more maimed or injured) in order to serve the goals of the plutocracy

* the spread of "democracy" (TM) and "freedom" (TM) across the Middle East

( For example, I believe Hitler was sincere in his desire to establish a "glorious thousand year Reich". Likewise, the ideologues in Washington also have certain belief systems about how the world should be, and are more than willing to use violence and military force to achieve their aims.

This isn't conspiracy theory, btw. Just look at the "shock & awe" campaign which murdered and maimed tens of thousands of innocent people in Baghdad, or you can read their own words here: http://www.newamericancentury.org/ Read through their visions for the world, and see how many you agree with.)

* to pass legislation that removes the rights of dissenters who object to these goals (e.g. the PATRIOT Act, 'anti-terrorism' laws, government domestic surveillance etc.)

So there are plenty of motives for a 9/11 inside job!

SO WHAT CAN YOU DO?

Even if you are still skeptical, but think there are too many questions about the events of September 11 2001 that need answers, here are a few suggestions:

Ask Oprah to host a three-part special that investigates 9/11 http://oprah.bravocharlie911.com/

Sign the petition to release the 9/11 information that is currently being held by the U.S. government to an independent review: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/929981172

Get informed and share these links to several 9/11 investigative documentaries with your friends:

Loose Change Second Edition Not perfect, but well researched and very thought provoking. http://unsungwar.com/ http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6272212643859761010&q=Loose+Change+editionb http://www.loosechange911.com

911: In Plane Site Hard-hitting investigative journalism. http://unsungwar.com/

911 Press for the Truth The families of 911 victims speak out and question the official story of 911. http://www.911pressfortruth.com/

Rise Short and sweet - to the point! http://unsungwar.com/videos/Rise.swf

9/11 Revisited This film provides stunning evidence that pre-planted explosives were used in the complete demolition of the WTC twin towers and WTC 7. http://911revisited.infad.net/video.html

9/11 Eyewitness A rigorous scientific analysis of the destruction of the WTC towers. http://www.freedomisforeverybody.org/911Eyewitness.php

Here is an archive of a large selection of thought provoking documentaries you may like to check out. http://www.question911.com/links.php http://www.universalseed.org/

"The most powerful weapon of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed." Don't give them yours! http://www.snowshoefilms.com/

Perspective 9-11 This research will give you an insight into the story behind the 9-11 attacks. http://*******.com/layem

American Scholars’ Symposium Scholarly panel which met in Los Angeles for two days to discuss what really happened on September 11, 2001. The consensus: no doubt, it was an inside job. http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/c-span_firestorm_911_truth_gains_momentum.htm http://www.c-span.org/homepage.asp?Cat=Series&Code=APS&ShowVidNum=
10&Rot_Cat_CD=APS&Rot_HT=206&Rot_WD=&ShowVidDays=100&ShowVidDesc=&ArchiveDays=100

Everybody's Gotta Learn Some Time Compelling film outlining many disturbing and heavily censored facts associated with the worst terrorist attacks in American history. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8372366181300641663

David Shayler - ex-MI5 whistleblower David Shayler introduces 911 Truth Bristol's ‘Face the Facts’ and explains why 911 is of vital importance today. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5403286136814574974 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2953150409490347185

Unitarian pastor Davidson Loehr explains the PNAC drive to reshape a new world order and the connection to the attacks of 9/11. http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/170806_austin_pastor.html

Pentagon Strike What hit the Pentagon? http://unsungwar.com/videos/pentagonstrike.swf

9/11 Special: Dutch Television Documentary (20 minutes) Two senior government ministers express grave doubts about the official 9/11 stories and the so-called "war on terror". http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11222.htm http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8274552561914055825

Discover the Truth about the Events surrounding 9-11-01 via Video Presentations from some of the top Scholars, Researchers, and Analysts from the International Community. http://911busters.com/

TerrorStorm (Alex Jones) Alex Jones' latest film covers in detail the proven history of government sponsored terrorism, and focuses on the 7/7 London bombings and 9/11. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5948263607579389947 http://www.lastingnetworks.com/alex/

911: The Greatest Lie Ever Sold by Anthony Hilder Sometimes quite opinionated, a bit long, but some valuable information never-the-less. Worth watching. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6952102263921897950&hl=en

911 Guilt: The Proof is in Your Hands A Video Exposing the Core Facts of the September 11th Attack http://wtc7.net/store/videos/proof/index.html

Watch David Ray Griffin, professor of theology, and other speakers who speak candidly and lucidly about the events of 911. http://911busters.com/911_new_video_productions/index.html

. . .

And finally, if you still think it's all bunkum and you can debunk the 9/11 Sceptics who refuse to believe the USA government's LIES, then take the million dollar challenge! I'm sure you could use a spare million bucks?

http://www.reopen911.org/Contest.htm

Lovelynice said:

Pookie referred to a Dr Frank Greening before.

Dr Frank Greening is a CHEMIST, not a structural engineer or physicist.

Click to expand...

And pray...who is Gordon Ross? Where did he get his structural engineering degree? Masters? PhD?

Where do the figures about energy loss due to the impaction of subsequent floors come from? I agree with his initial kinetic energy figure (2105MJ), but the rest are murky and unsupported.

Gringao said:

And pray...who is Gordon Ross? Where did he get his structural engineering degree? Masters? PhD?

Where do the figures about energy loss due to the impaction of subsequent floors come from? I agree with his initial kinetic energy figure (2105MJ), but the rest are murky and unsupported.

Click to expand...

those figures are exactly what Dr Frank Greening used. Gordon Ross simply took the calculations that 50 milliseconds further, that's it, and discovered that Greening had to have known that his own calculations showed that collapse would stop at an early stage.

Lovelynice said:

those figures are exactly what Dr Frank Greening used. Gordon Ross simply took the calculations that 50 milliseconds further, that's it, and discovered that Greening had to have known that his own calculations showed that collapse would stop at an early stage.

Click to expand...

Takes what 50 milliseconds further? Further into the collapse? You do know that it took more than 0.8 seconds (that's 800 milliseconds) for the first two floors to close on each other, do you not?

And tell us...where did Gordon Ross get his degree? What was it in?

Gringao said:

And pray...who is Gordon Ross? Where did he get his structural engineering degree? Masters? PhD?

Click to expand...

This should be interesting.