Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Interesting clip about the demolition of the WTC
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
So your vitriolic, profane diatribe wasn't even to do with the video in this thread. Wow, that was real clever.
This time, watch the video and see if you have anything to say about it.
I guess some people forgot about the whole system of checks and balances making all of this impossible.
Kinda hard when one pary controls all three branches of government.
You mean like how Hitler staged the firebombing of the Reichstag by Polish soldiers and then went to the elected leaders of that institution and said you must give me more power if I am to combat this threat?
Here is the same sentence as above to be amended for our generation...
You mean like how Bush staged the attack on the World Trade Center by Muslim terrorists and then went to the elected leaders of that institution and said you must give me more power if I am to combat this threat?
The problem is that those of us who remain blind to the facts of history like to pretend that no bad, evil, cruel men could ever be elected to office within the United States. That only happens in other countries. Right? Right? Right? Hello, is anyone there?
You mean like how Hitler staged the firebombing of the Reichstag by Polish soldiers and then went to the elected leaders of that institution and said you must give me more power if I am to combat this threat?
Here is the same sentence as above to be amended for our generation...
You mean like how Bush staged the attack on the World Trade Center by Muslim terrorists and then went to the elected leaders of that institution and said you must give me more power if I am to combat this threat?
The problem is that those of us who remain blind to the facts of history like to pretend that no bad, evil, cruel men could ever be elected to office within the United States. That only happens in other countries. Right? Right? Right? Hello, is anyone there?
*plays the x-files theme song*
THEY, are always watching us...
"Fear not death; for the sooner we die, the longer shall we be immortal."
Yep, Bush is the devil. He was behind the hostages being taken in Iran. He was the one who organized the first WTC bombing. He hired those who blew up the Khobar Towers. He personally blew the hole in the USS Cole. Those weren't passenger jets that hit the WTC, they were fighter jets loaded with bombs. No plane hit the Pentagon, it was a missle. And all those planes and passengers hijacked on 9-11 are now being held at area 51.
I'm not even going to come back to this thread. Some people just like to contradict the blatant truth because they are so blinded by their own self righteous bullshit. Comparing George Bush to Hitler? Hitler killed 10 million people and sparked a war that killed a millions more. George Bush has liberated the Iraqi people from a dictator who gassed his own people and ruled by force. He sent millions upon millions of dollars to aid in the Indonesia tsunamis. Open your eyes, it's right infront of you.
I watched this video and here's my comments...
It starts off with Jennie Carr recording the sounds from the building across the street. Look at the magnitude of the plane impact sound they show, then look at, what the narrator is calling, the "second explosion 9 seconds later". That second item could be just about anything from a car crashing to someone dropping a large piece of furniture on the floor above Jennie Carr.
When they are talking about the lobby, the narrator states there's "no soot, no fire and no fuel residue" in one sentance and follows that up with a second sentance stating there's a fine layer of dust which is associated with demolitions. He doesn't go on to say where the dust does come from in demolitions because that would not fit into his video. The dust actually comes from the structure itself. Those panels that were off of the walls and such, they could easily have been the source of the dust. Do you think when a builder is building a structure like that they take time to clean out what you don't see? Since there's no "ignition point" that was easily discernable in the lobby, more than likely the damage there was caused due to the extreme flexing of the structure when the plane hit. The twin towers were designed to sway to withstand high winds, but the impact may have swayed it enough to twist the structure and cause damage anywhere within it.
What document is that they are quoting from next? I'd like to read that in it's entirety and not just segments the narrator has chosen for me to hear.
Which leads to my next point... Alot of the interviews in it can easily be taken out of context by just showing segments like they did. Several of the parts could have easily gone like this:
Interviewer: Describe to me what you heard that day.
Person: I heard a loud crushing or cracking sound.
Interviewer: How loud was it..
Person: It was loud... like a bomb going off...
They clip the 'like a bomb going off' and all of a sudden, a statement they were using to describe the volume of sound that day is easily converted into a statement to stir up consipracy.
The comment about the 78th floor... You don't know the timeline for that... the 78th floor could very well have turned into a firey inferno like the government claimed.. after the chief made it there. He did say there were alot of serious injuries on that floor (multiple 10-45, Code One) so the firey inferno could not have happened before he arrived, otherwise the bodies would be incinerated.
The part of the film which talks about "explosions" going off before the collapse and does zoom shots of smoke shooting out the sides of the building... look closely at that... if those shoots of smoke coming out the side were the result of a bomb at that point, the smoke output would be instantaneous. In several of those zoom shots, you can see the smoke gradually increasing as the upper floors collapse. What this tells me is that the center of the floors were collapsing and were actually below what you can see at the exterior of the building. Assume the downward collapsing looked like an inverted pyramid, this would push the air outward forcing an increase of smoke out these pockets that were below the crumble on the exterior where we could see it.
The narrator also made a comment that Mark, the president of Controlled Demolitions, the company responsible for cleaning up the debris, spoke about the molten steel below the towers being so hot months after the crash. During cleanup, how does he know one of his own employee's didn't utilize anything that could have heated that steel up during cleanup? Then, even more humorous, the narrator goes on to imply that Controlled Demolitions was in on the whole thing when he concludes with "why don't we ask Controlled Demolitions Incoroporated who was responsible for cleaning up both September 11th and the Oklahoma City Bombing".. So to this, I ask, if they were "in on it", why would the president of CDI make comments about the molten steel below the surface to "add fuel" to a conspiracy theory?
I don't know.. Some of the points made in the video definitely would require some investigation for a more logical answer than lump summing it into a government consipiracy, but it's more effort that I am willing to make. Especially on a video that contains so many points which can be logically explained without a conspiracy twist to it.
That's my $0.02.
You mean like how Hitler staged the firebombing of the Reichstag by Polish soldiers and then went to the elected leaders of that institution and said you must give me more power if I am to combat this threat?
Here is the same sentence as above to be amended for our generation...
You mean like how Bush staged the attack on the World Trade Center by Muslim terrorists and then went to the elected leaders of that institution and said you must give me more power if I am to combat this threat?
The problem is that those of us who remain blind to the facts of history like to pretend that no bad, evil, cruel men could ever be elected to office within the United States. That only happens in other countries. Right? Right? Right? Hello, is anyone there?
Hitlers dictator Nazi regime didn't have a system of checks and balances. We do. It is IMPOSSIBLE to stage an attack or conspiracy like that within our own government. IMPOSSIBLE. Can't do it. Never will happen, it can not happen. The Constitution was written to combat this kind of stuff. It's just not possible to do it, unless you think that the whole government and Republican party are behind it. There would be no way that it could fall through the cracks, and if it ever did reach the American people, George Bush would be shot on the spot. Get it through your head, it just isn't possible. The logistics of such a thing would be enormous, from making the explosives, to finding people to plant them, and most of all, covering it all up.
You say it would be "impossible", and then you explain how it could have been done.
The word "impossible" means "something that cannot be done, under any circumstances", so unfortunately just saying "it's impossible" over and over doesn't actually make it impossible (kind of how Bush repeating "There are WMDs in Iraq" over and over didn't mask the fact that there were no WMDs).
If you mean that you find it hard to entertain the very real possibility that the towers were demolished under controlled conditions then I agree that it's not a particularly palatable idea, but given that there are a lot of unanswered questions and gaps in the official story I believe it's reasonable for Americans to discuss such anomolies.
And how about the recently released Downing Street memos that officially revealed how the government planned on "fixing the facts and the intelligence around the policy" to generate support for the war - or in other words, blatantly deceiving the American public.
i just watched the clip
I dont believe it for a minute.
I wont go into a huge explanation why I dont believe it...but i think the video is rather silly, IMO
People who have to create conspiracy and hate threads to further a cause lacks in intellectual comprehension of diversity.
Not even a brief explanation? Very strange.
You sound more like someone who just saw something they'd rather ignore and not think about than someone who's confident enough in their own viewpoint that they can effortlessly defend it.
I've seen videos like the one posted. I think if nothing else it sparks debate which is a good thing. Better to discuss these kind of things than leave them alone.
Do I think it was a scam by Bush and other higher ups? I'm guessing no, but of course I can't be 100% certain of anything. I do feel it's worth talking about though. Whether it was planned or not I don't think it can be disputed that 9/11 was Bushs' saving grace. He wasn't doing so hot before it happened and without 9/11 he probably would have been smoked in the 2004 election. I mean what does he have to boast about besides fighting terrorism? Not a whole lot.
You say it would be "impossible", and then you explain how it could have been done.
The word "impossible" means "something that cannot be done, under any circumstances", so unfortunately just saying "it's impossible" over and over doesn't actually make it impossible (kind of how Bush repeating "There are WMDs in Iraq" over and over didn't mask the fact that there were no WMDs).
If you mean that you find it hard to entertain the very real possibility that the towers were demolished under controlled conditions then I agree that it's not a particularly palatable idea, but given that there are a lot of unanswered questions and gaps in the official story I believe it's reasonable for Americans to discuss such anomolies.
And how about the recently released Downing Street memos that officially revealed that how the government planned on "fixing the facts and the intelligence around the policy" to generate support for the war - or in other words, blatantly deceiving the American public.
How do you know there were no WMDs in Iraq? We had the proof that Saddam atleast had a program developing them. We told him we were coming for a year before we went, that is PLENTY of time to hide them and cover it up to make it look like it was a harmless soil plant or whatever.
Of course, anything is possible given the circumstances, but the circumstances were not there. Sure, if there was no constitution, no ordered government it would have been 100% possible, but that is not the case.
Also werent the Downing Street memos essentially fake bullshit documents?
I also see no gaps in the story. American intelligence failed, radical extremist muslims hijacked planes and flew them into the buildings. I don't know if you saw the videos, but there is 100% proof a plane hit both of the towers. No "missiles" or military jets, or other bombs. They also have documented flight paths of the planes taking off, heading to their destination, and suddenly taking a turn.
You mean like how Hitler staged the firebombing of the Reichstag by Polish soldiers and then went to the elected leaders of that institution and said you must give me more power if I am to combat this threat?
Here is the same sentence as above to be amended for our generation...
You mean like how Bush staged the attack on the World Trade Center by Muslim terrorists and then went to the elected leaders of that institution and said you must give me more power if I am to combat this threat?
The problem is that those of us who remain blind to the facts of history like to pretend that no bad, evil, cruel men could ever be elected to office within the United States. That only happens in other countries. Right? Right? Right? Hello, is anyone there?
Hitlers dictator Nazi regime didn't have a system of checks and balances. We do. It is IMPOSSIBLE to stage an attack or conspiracy like that within our own government. IMPOSSIBLE. Can't do it. Never will happen, it can not happen. The Constitution was written to combat this kind of stuff. It's just not possible to do it, unless you think that the whole government and Republican party are behind it. There would be no way that it could fall through the cracks, and if it ever did reach the American people, George Bush would be shot on the spot. Get it through your head, it just isn't possible. The logistics of such a thing would be enormous, from making the explosives, to finding people to plant them, and most of all, covering it all up.
Ah yes, the wonderful checks and balances will save us. The soul of man hasn't changed since world war II, we still can be draged in a facist dicator with the threat that we are under attack.
Goering's(Nazi Reichsmarshall and Luftwaffe-Chief) observations that the common people:
We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.
"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."
"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."
"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
No, they're official memos; the official minutes of official meetings by government ministers. Sorry. No getting around that one. It is officially documented that the government invented false intelligence in order to deceive the American public.
No-one's contesting the fact that planes hit the towers. The assertion is that shortly after the planes hit the towers they were demolished, as was the nearby building that hadn't even been hit by a plane.
You say it would be "impossible", and then you explain how it could have been done.
The word "impossible" means "something that cannot be done, under any circumstances", so unfortunately just saying "it's impossible" over and over doesn't actually make it impossible (kind of how Bush repeating "There are WMDs in Iraq" over and over didn't mask the fact that there were no WMDs).
If you mean that you find it hard to entertain the very real possibility that the towers were demolished under controlled conditions then I agree that it's not a particularly palatable idea, but given that there are a lot of unanswered questions and gaps in the official story I believe it's reasonable for Americans to discuss such anomolies.
And how about the recently released Downing Street memos that officially revealed that how the government planned on "fixing the facts and the intelligence around the policy" to generate support for the war - or in other words, blatantly deceiving the American public.
How do you know there were no WMDs in Iraq? We had the proof that Saddam atleast had a program developing them. We told him we were coming for a year before we went, that is PLENTY of time to hide them and cover it up to make it look like it was a harmless soil plant or whatever.
Of course, anything is possible given the circumstances, but the circumstances were not there. Sure, if there was no constitution, no ordered government it would have been 100% possible, but that is not the case.
Also werent the Downing Street memos essentially fake bullshit documents?
I also see no gaps in the story. American intelligence failed, radical extremist muslims hijacked planes and flew them into the buildings. I don't know if you saw the videos, but there is 100% proof a plane hit both of the towers. No "missiles" or military jets, or other bombs. They also have documented flight paths of the planes taking off, heading to their destination, and suddenly taking a turn.
We had proof that Saddam had weapons programs because WE SOLD THEM TO HIM back in the 80's. Unfortunately or not, his other military excursions took their toll on his supplies and equipment. Why on God's green earth would he not use the weapons against us if he had them? Make some sense man.
If you listen to "Pills" Limbaugh, the Downing Street Memos were a fake.
Bottom line is that those planes were flown into the towers by remote control. At least seven of the purported hijackers are still alive with one having died two years before 9/11 ever happened. And I have a sneaking suspicion that the Pennsylvania plane was shot down because the remote control system failed. Allowing that plane to land and blow the cover story would have brought down the president in all liklihood.
Ask youyself this simple question. Why have they never shown the video of the plane impacting the Pentagon? Why have they never shown the video of the hijackers inside of the airports? Why is it so hard for you to believe that governments can and do commit atrocities against their people. Governments make terrorism possible.
I've recently had one of those lightbulb moments. When a boxer enters a ring, does he expect anything but violence, or does one act violent while the other writes poetry and philosophy? By entering into the ring, you are committing yourself to kill or be killed (in a matter of speaking). Well, the whole world is like that boxing ring in a sense. Only no one asked to be in it so we all must cooperate with each other to make life easy. Some participants in this ring (the world) refuse to be civil. The minute ANY of them think about fielding an army, regardless of size, by all rights, they are fair game with any others doing the same. You cannot build the weapons of war and not compete. If you don't like getting attacked, then do not build the army. I know the above makes no sense for the bushies in the crowd here, but that's why the world is screwed up. You have been lied to and tricked, and of course, so was I at one time.
The Downing Street memos are fakes, the reporter himself has said so.
Such a bold statement will require some kind of evidence. Link please.
I first photocopied them to ensure they were on our paper and returned the originals, which were on government paper and therefore government property, to the source,
It was these photocopies that I worked on, destroying them shortly before we went to press on Sept 17, 2004, he added. Before we destroyed them the legal desk secretary typed the text up on an old fashioned typewriter.
He took photocopies of what were supposedly original documents. He then had his secretary type them up on an old fashioned typewriter (why and old fashioned typewriter?). He then destroyed the copies. And after that, judging from the look of the released memos, he artifically aged them by repeated copying (much like the Killian memos).
So, there is no way to verify the documents. Many have said they look authentic, but we know that they aren't, so that doesn't matter. It comes down to the content, and the only ones who know if the content is authentic is the source (if he indeed exists) and the reporter. And the reporter is already suspect since he went to such great lengths to make official looking forgeries of the supposedly real memos, and then running a story representing the fake memos as authentic.
Neither Bush nor blair question that they are authentic, in fact Blair admits they are true. Why the hell would neither come out and say there false? The leader of Uk's intelligence agency says there hundred percent true.
Give us links to a decent news sources, making up quotes from Rush is BS.
Hilarious. "We know they're not real so that proves they're not real". Astonishingly childlike.
The Butler Committee, a UK commission looking into WMD, has quoted the documents and accepted their authenticity, along with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. Smith said all originals were destroyed in order to both protect the source and the journalist alike.
The most damning part of the minutes, as noted by MI-6 director Richard Dearlove, was that “Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.”
LINK
Blair ADMITS the downing street memo is a true document.
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=6736
Bush has yet to come out and say the Killian memos were fakes. Do you still believe they are real. The Downing Street memos are fake. No politician has some out to verify that everything on them is true and accurate. Until then, we have only the word of one reporter that everything contained in them is real. Funny how eager people are to put their trust in a reporter who is an admitted liar (he represented the memos as authentic when they were first released), but they will go after the most far reaching conspiracy story when it comes to 9-11.