Was 911 an inside job

If its on the TV or the internet it has to be the truth.

 

that story is hardly in the mass media, I'm not saying its true, I just want explanations

 

It was definitely an inside job. The 3,000 victims decided to commit suicide and the "media" blamed it on Arabs just so we could start a war.

Seems like the most logical explanation to me, doesn't it?

 

Maybe they supported Osama Bin Laden and his battle to save the world from American domination? You know, the same way that the Klingons cheer the humans in their mutual struggle not to be absorbed by the Borg.

 

I think of Stalin, Hitler, and an assortment of others when I think of evil. We're not immune in the US to this.


As to the question, I suspect that more was known beforehand and it just wasn't stopped, or maybe it was even helped along a little.

 

Oh don't you believe it. There is a very strong strand of opinion that says the British Government was behind the IRA terror campaign of the 1970s and 80s. Sure it started off independent, but it was quickly infiltrated by British agents until it became an arm of the state.

As with all these conspiracy theories there's just enough peripheral facts to make it stand up - members of the IRA Army Council being unmasked as British agents and the fact that MI5 knew where the IRA arms dumps were but didn't stop weapons being taken out and used against British soldiers 'because it wasn't their job'.

As to WHY the British government did it; well their are several reasons. Firstly it was 'jobs for the boys', by bigging up the terrorist threat all the various anti-terrorist departments could keep their budgets and staffs. Indeed the various branches of the army, intelligence, police, etc saw each other as 'the enemy' (because they could lose funding to them) and the IRA as 'the customers'.

Secondly it allowed the British Army to use Northern Ireland as a giant training area for counter-insurgency techniques (with live ammunition).

Thirdly it allowed the British Government to have several draconian laws on the statue books curtailing free speech - all in the interests of 'National Security' of course.

Finally, and more in keeping with this thread, in the 1970s Britain was well on the way to becoming a Third World country. Every time the people started to get restless (strikes demos etc) and started to turn on the Government there would be an 'IRA bomb outrage' and people would forget their grievances and condemn the IRA instead. It was all just a *little* too convienent.

So yes, there is a view that the British government were quite happy to see its citizens killed for its own ends.

 

*passes out the tinfoil hats.

The answer is no.

 

If someone as a U.S. citizen living IN America thinks the Government did this, why are you living here? Why haven't you packed your bags and gotten OUT OF THE COUNTRY!???

 

Why would they?
The government does a lot people do not agree with, people do not run every time the government does something they do not agree with. The best way to make sure something does not happen again is also to stay and fight, via any method possible. In such a case it would be spreading information and asking for hearings, etc.

 

Hitler had a theory about the "big lie". That if you tell a lie big enough to cover for a grotesque truth, people will choose to believe the lie, because the alternative is unimaginable and revolting.

I don't know if 9/11 was an "inside job". What is an "inside job" anyways? The government purports to represent the will of 300 million people, while also serving thousands of special interest groups, corporations and ideologies. An inside job could involve one person or thousands, and the motivations could be varied.

The known issues are,

1) The first responders and live events of the day do not reconcile with the 9/11 report.

2) Both the Republican and GOP chairmen of the 9/11 Commission now say that their investigation was obstructed.

3) The government refused to have an inquiry and only capitulated when the Jersey Girls cranked up the pressure with a protest in Washington.

4) George Bush never testified at the hearings. Several testimonies have been established to have been contradictory, including testimony by Dick Cheney.

5) NIST is still unable to release a final report on Building 7, almost 7 years later.

6) The NYC Truth Movement is composed of many first responders and victims families. Perhaps they are bitter, perhaps they smell a rat.

7) Thousands of professionals, from academics, to engineers to pilots have come out against the "official story". This doesn't prove the "official story" is false, but it does lend weight to the criticisms.

I could list a lot more. What's most disturbing, is that 9/11 was used as the reason to invade and occupy both Afghanistan and Iraq, generating death tolls in the hundreds of thousands, causing billions in destruction, and costing the taxpayer trillions. If we don't really understand, and have a 100% accurate account of the events of 9/11 (and apologists don't even all have the same understanding and knowledge of the 9/11 commission report), then how can we say that any of the actions since 2001 have been justified?

Surely we as a moral and rational people have to hold ourselves to a high standard of accuracy and truth before we drop bombs on foreign cities and occupy their countries while overthrowing their established governments. Any failure to do so, makes us reckless and irresponsible.

 

I can't even list all the exposed false-flag attacks
1. Gulf of Tonkin (Vietnam)
2. Bay of Pigs (Cuba)
3. Iran-Contra affair

There could be so many more... Why would you give a clean-chit tot he US government run by neocons and PNAC group members who call for "a new Pearl Harbor" to revitalize American military...

 

Short answer: No.

Long answer - Our government has consistently shown itself to be incompetent at almost everything they handle. The government is inefficient and unwieldy. The Nixon administration couldn't cover up a break in at a shitty hotel. Clinton couldn't cover up a blow job. Bush couldn't cover up his blow habit.

It would take an inordinate amount of people to plan and pull off something like 9/11 if it was an inside job. The likelihood of our inept government keeping every one of those people silent is...well, it wouldn't happen.

Numerous expert reviews of the collapse of the towers show no evidence of explosive charges. None. Any claims that jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt the steel structural support beams is likewise BS. The jet fuel alone was not the only thing burning in the towers. Additionally, the steel would not have to be *melted* to compromise structural integrity - and the fire was definitely hot enough to weaken the supports to the point they could no longer support the hundreds of thousands of tons of building above the impact point.

Allegations that anything other than a plane hit the Pentagon are asinine as well. Watch some interview videos of rescue workers that were there. Get actual first-hand accounts.

Look, the search for order in the universe is a natural and understandable human instinct. However, in the case of nearly all conspiracies, this desire is so great that it over-rides logical reasoning.

 

Lol, very good

 

This fits the big lie theory. Of course, Clinton was capable of convincing America to go to war in Kosovo, and Bush was capable of convincing America to go to war in Iraq. Funny how they can do big things, but not little things, ain't it?

This is another one of the "big lies". For 30 years, the government suppressed the truth about the Gulf of Tonkin. Only now is the truth coming out about how much FDR knew in advance about Pearl Harbor. The Georgians took everyone by surprise when they invaded South Ossetia. Congress can't even find out what the CIA is doing covert in Iran right now, let alone even get a look at each and every Executive Order.

From an outsider, simple view, it seems impossible. But everything that does and has gone on covertly in the military, intelligence agencies and government says it is not.

I always find it funny when laymen on the internet try to explain this, when NIST has been refuted by the Underwriters Labs and many experts, including experts they hired to do modeling of the crash!

It's not that you're wrong and I am right, but that there is no way you can conclusively know any more than the people who say it was a demolition can now it was. Both sides just regurgitate what they have been told and fits within their paradigm.

Given the holes in the government investigation(s) and the Chairs of the Commission now saying they were obstructed, I think there should be a new, independent (non-governmental) investigation. I think it should happen soon, because the international community is now talking about possibly doing it, and I don't believe in world courts, so this is a bad idea for American sovereignty.

What is most shocking, is the number of people who say there should not be a new investigation. If the Chairs have said the commission was obstructed, and the determinations (which most laymen don't even know about) may not be accurate, then how can anyone in good conscience say, "move along, nothing to see here".

That's like saying, "Sorry, I don't want to hear the truth." or "The truth doesn't matter".

And yet a lot of people take this anti-intellectual stance that we shouldn't make sure the record is 100% accurate. It's crazy how hysterical people become when you ask them to be rational and look at things objectively.

Anyway, this wasn't directed at you personally Damian, and I hope you don't take it as such. I'm not interested in flame wars, and the world is big enough for both of our opinions. I just hope you and others will consider what I have written based on the merits of the argument, not on any predispositions you may already have.

An example of predisposition is the stance that government is incapable of carrying out the attacks and keeping it secret. If you take that stance before you objectively evaluate what happened leading up to, on and after 9/11, you have already ruled out certain conclusions regardless of what facts are presented.

 

I challenge deniers to look at the evidence surrounding the Pearl Harbor attack being a conspiracy and tell me afterwords if you think it is unimaginable for those with power to do something like that again.

We have technology, we have goodies, but we will never have an end to these destructive forces of power.

 

Come on, Nate. Tell me you didn't let the RP loonies turn you into a "troofer" too?

Brotherman....seriously?

Man, I should have started a cult.

 

There doesn't seem to be enough reasons to believe the original story, as funny as that seems. Too many unanswered questions and cover-ups..

I will admit I am a conspiracy theorist, but not for the same reasons you might suspect. I am not a doom and gloomer and love the principles of America, I find there is more of a philosophy to most conspiracies and they happen for reasons the common man may never suspect. A material food chain of humankind really does exist (the poor, middle class, rich, elite, etc.) and some things are out of our power, so I don't find it worth it to get too excited about some things. They may actually happen for our own good.

Lately I've tried not to delve in too deep to some of these subjects because they can be quite depressing and gloomy and really only further one's personal miseries.. I'm starting to find that it isn't worth it to dwell on worldly events. Our encounter on this forum is a classic example of how politics cleverly divides and separates humanity into the illusion that we are worlds apart when we are really no different at the core.

 

Yes, I strongly believe 9/11 was an inside job, the war on terror is fake etc. Without doubt.

 

One of the most profound statements I can recall reading on the forums. So eloquent your words, this should truly be published somewhere.

 

Of course it was a cruise missle, they diverted the plane to the moon so it would never be found, oh wait, moon landings are impossible too.