September 11, 2001 attacks were planned by the United States government

I was on the other side of the river in Hoboken when the buildings went down. A friend of mine was in Tower 1 at the time the highjacked airplane crahed into Tower 1 and all he felt was the airplane hitting the building. So he got the f* out.

 

I'm not intentionally trying to get you to believe 911 was an inside job by asking this. However, when you research the corrupt history of our government, as I have done, you are reluctant to believe anything they say.

Because of the Tuskegee Experiments, a lot of African Americans today don't trust the medical establishment. Can you blame them?

The History Channel is controlled by the same corporations that are in bed with our government. Of course they would run a special attacking 911 truth. But here is the big question, and I will put it in bold, and I would like you or bogart to answer this: if 911 truth is such a dumb and crazy conspiracy, why did the history channel go to all the trouble to "debunk" it? Why not ignore it, and let it go away by itself? What are they afraid of?

If Ron Paul gets in office, corruption will still exist in government. Alex Jones is basically an investigative journalist. That is what he is. He gets the news behind the news. There will always be dirt that any journalist can pick up and report on, even Alex Jones.

Operation Mockingbird is not partisan. It covers all political parties. The attacks on Bush occur because he is president. If Hillary gets in, she will be attacked to.

Operation Mockingbird was established way before Bush came into office. It is designed for all domestic media, liberal or conservative. You have to be wary of everything you read, whether it is from Democrat or liberal channels.

 

I suggest you get out and live a little.

5 minutes with an oxy-acetylene torch and a piece of steel rod/tube will show you that you don't need to 'melt' metal to weaken it.

Now, If I'm trying to bend the steel rod, do I heat it up until the point it melts? No, because quite obviously a puddle of molten metal on the floor would be useless. What I do, is heat the metal until it weakens, allowing me to bend.

This whole idea of yours that it *needs* to be 1130 degrees exactly before heat will have any sort of impact of its structural integrity is absurd.

I've seen your argument change numerous times in this thread already, each time a fact (I use that term loosely, notice the italics, that's sarcasm) is debunked you go off to another website and bring another one back.

It's getting rather old now, 6 years on, if there was any substance to your ramblings then something would have come to light by now. Time to move on and let these people rest in peace.

 

his papers were not peer reviewed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Jones#WTC_collapse_controversy

Credibility. Tesla. He has none.

 

Wonderful. So you are avoiding the issue by saying something happened in the past, therefore this is true. A great way to avoid actually presenting evidence.

 

I can't believe that any organism with a brain is still debating this.

Bin Laden's family wasn't flown out of the country when the ban was in affect.

The very people who bring down buildings for a living, say:

DID THE WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWERS ACTUALLY “IMPLODE”?
No. They collapsed in an uncontrolled fashion, causing extensive damage to surrounding structures, roadways and utilities. Although when viewed from a distance the towers appeared to have telescoped almost straight down, a closer look at video replays reveal sizeable portions of each building breaking free during the collapse, with the largest sections--some as tall as 30 or 40 stories--actually “laying out” in several directions. The outward failure of these sections is believed to have caused much of the significant damage to adjacent structures, and smaller debris caused structural and cosmetic damage to hundreds of additional buildings around the perimeter of the site.​

The planes were witnessed hitting the building by people on the ground, hundreds of reporters, everyone watching ABC's Good Morning America, CNN, and all other news casts that morning.

Someone tell me how a massive conspiracy would've been covered up for years, for Republicans and Democrats, government officials, the media, and thousands of other Americans. No one's written a book, or exposed it before the 2004 election, to destroy Bush?

 

I bet the only people who still believe the "official" story are the same people who still live Bush. There is just too much evidence that 9/11 and the London attacks were totally set-up... I will pose a few of my own questions I didnt see here with a quick browse through...


1) Why was Norad doing an exercise of planes flying into the world trade center towers... at the same time planes were flying into the world trade center and were therefore totally confussed and did not know what the fuck to do.

2) Why are there videos of fire fighters, being being interviewed after coming out of the buildings, numerous news channel footage of people saying there were bombs going off in the building.

3) Why has the architect of the WTC towers come out and said that he designed the buildings to withstand SEVERAL hits from planes and that there is no way they could have collapsed just from the planes.

4) How did the buildings fall so perfectly straight down.

5) How did they say the steel melted from the plane fuel when plane fuel does not burn hot enough to come close to weakening nor melting steel?

6) How did they say the fires were so intense to melt steel, yet there are pics and vids of people hanging out the holes the planes made?

7) Why did Larry Silverstien take out a $5 Billion insurance policy weeks before the attack?

8) Is it simply pure coincidence that Marvin Bush, George's brother, was a principal employee at Securacom which handled WTC security?

9) How did a building burn so hot that it left not trace of any computers, desks, peices of plane, plus collapse a building, yet a lone passport from a hijacker managed to survive?

10) How come many of the hijackers are still alive?

11) Why was Osama Bin Laden treated for 10 days in a US hospital in Dubai, in Juyl, two months before the attacks?

12) Why is their interview footage of Larry Silverstien admitting that they decided to "pull" building 7? For those who don't know, pull is a term used by crews who bring buildigns down. Also, elt it be noted that it takes weeks if not months of preperation to "pull" a building.

13) Why have so many people who worked at the WTC's come foreward saying they received calls early that Tuesday morning telling them not to go to work?

14) Why did Bush not have to go under oath when being questioned by the 9/11 Commission?

15) Why does no one in the government take finding Osama Bin Laden seriously anymore? Infact two days ago when his new tape was released, a top security advisor publically said that they don't take his tape too seriously, as it is just a tape and not an actual attack... wasn't that the problem last time? Not taking security memos titled "Bin Laden determined to attack inside the US" seriously and just letting it happen?

I can keep going with these all day, but I feel I better stop

 

Tesla writes articles? Thanks for the referral!

The widow who brought a court case against the Government for 9/11 negligence asserts in her claim that in order for this to have happened "naturally", 1600 government agencies would have had to failed.

Both sides look outrageous to me.

You do have a point in that some claim that the government isn't malicious or negligent enough to be culpable in 9/11, and yet by that they are saying that a small group of terrorists could attack the US in a substantial manner, when they were only able to kill 50 Americans total in numerous attacks during the previous decade.

I don't even think the intentions of the government should be the issue. Because the negligence (see 9/11 report) is obvious, whichever side of the argument is made. Either the government didn't do their job, or Al Queda is smarter than them. Not sure which is a better reality to face.

 

It was predictable. I'm surprised he actually tried this time. It's further than he's gone in a very long time. Clearly AGS is feeling an inferiority complex, cuz I've gotten him to run away from several threads in the past few days. Poor AGS

 

Yes you should because I've answered almost all of them in this very thread, yet you clearly did not bother to show the most basic intellectual curiosity to go through and look. And it says a lot, now, doesn't it?

 

I can't believe any living organism with a brian is still debating this also, I figured anyone with a 35 IQ would be able to understand what happened that day by now.

Yes, yes they were... do you believe everything you read??

Funny, I have heard numerous other people who bring down buildigns for a living say quite the contrary... perhaps the person who released your quote was paid to do so or simply does not know wtf he is talking about.

[/QUOTE]

I don't need to tell you, you can see for yourself, it has been done. If you look deep enough Democrats and Republicans are all on the same side my friend. MANY, MANY, MANY people have written books and made tonnes of movies exposing this, it is just that thanks to the media, you don;t hear about them... thats right... your free media is not as free as it really seems.

 

I can't believe that this is still going on...are there really that many incompetent people in the world that still believe this stuff??

 

The CIA didn't do its job, and the Israelis who were chasing Saudi terrorists didn't intervene because they were not supposed to spy on US soil in the first place.

What's so complicated to understand?

The victims were real, the towers are gone, the terrorists were real Saudi Islamists, and btw it was the first suicide attack on US territory, they took the US government by surprise, just like the Danish government would not be prepared for such a large-scale attack on their biggest city.

The surprise effect has to be taken into account. Security in airports changed a lot since 2001, all across the world, it was very vulnerable.

Of course you can dispute the fact that the US government may have INDIRECTLY influenced the Islamists, but just the same way some Muslim country officials in the Middle East may have been silent witnesses, including members of the Saudi Royal Family (note: the most powerful single family of the globe, more powerful than the US government itself, so... not much to do about it).

 

Surprise attack? They received memos weks before telling them what was coming... NORAD was doign an exercise of planes hitting the WTC as they actually hit the WTC... the US is always prepared and if they wanted to stop that from happening, it would have been stopped. And if, with all the money have spent on organizations such as NORAD and the CIA did seriously fail that bady, then I think everyone in the US is entitled to a nice refund check. If you hire a guy to build you a brick house and instead he builds one with red sidding, you are not going to pay him... we payed a lot of tax dollars to these organizations to protect us, and they did nothing. Where is my refund check?

 

Where is my refund check? Clinton didn't catch osama when he could have, put a wall between the CIA and FBI, gave N Korea nuke info, and pulled the military down to one of its lowest points....

 

lol There ya go, now your thinking like me. The goverment forever "fails" us, possibly to further there secret agendas... and I thinkw e should all demand big fat refud checks.

 

no I am not thinking like you...I am thinking that most people constantly point to Bush as the problem, and Bush is not the problem...Bush is not an appeaser, and I support him for that. The more of these terrorists that are killed the better. They attacked first. Bush did not blow up the WTC.

 

Alright, I agree with you that people do point to Bush... and all Bush is a front man. I agree.. if it actualy were terrorists that blew up the WTC than yes they should be killed... but how killing Iraqi people, Afghani people, blowing their infrastructure doing anything to the terrorists... in my view we are being terrorists to them. The Iraqi people did not blow up anything in the US, why are they blowing up their country? The Afghani people did not blow anything in the US up, why are we blowing up their country? The Saudi Royal Family, CIA, US Government, funded these terrorists and made their attacks possible... why aren't people trying to blow up the pentagon, white house, saudi palaces, saudi embassies?

 

are we just killing iraqi's as if we are on a shooting rampage? no...are we trying to keep other MUSLIMS from blowing themselves and lots of others up in the process? yes...this is the common misconception of why we are in Iraq... most people think that we are there to shoot and kill anyone...now it is more of a stabilization and police process than a war...we are not fighting the country of Iraq, we are fighting all the terrorists that are coming into the country...they want to win, take over, and then turn around and attack the world again. they will never stop if we pull out.

 

I agree, we are not.

That's not the job of the American people or it's government. Our government has a mandate to uphold the constitution, and no where in the Constitution does it say that we should police foreign trouble spots, partake in treaties which undermine our sovereignty (UN, etc.) or evangelically spread democracy with tax payer dollars, either in the form of subsidy or military. Those darn Founders specifically warned us about doing things like this.

One could argue that they wouldn't be going there if we weren't there. Saddam had his internal problems, but his government was secular and didn't give a lot of power to the Islamic fanatical movement. He purposely suppressed the Imams and Mullahs who want to generate the kind of fanaticsm we see today.

We originally went in to enforce UN resolutions. Then we went in to find WMDs that could be one day used against the USA. Then we went in to overthrow Saddam and create a democracy. Then we went in to "fight'em there, so we don't have to fight'em here". Then we went in to bring stability to the region.

It's an interesting shell game. I am curious to see what the official line for why we went in, will be next year.