Seems like that closes the case for 9-11. It's all there.

http://tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_-_all_the_proof_you_need.html

Discuss...

ray b made a website?

No.

quote Originally posted by Uaana: ray b made a website?

Conn helped.

Nice try, but no cigar I take it no one gives a crap about the truth behind the events of 911? I mean that seems to be how Americans go about there business everyday.

Have you seen Loose Change? It covers some of the same info and is pretty scary to watch. I admit that such an event doesn't warrant much after thought of was it really our government but I think there are some valid questions that could really clear up what went down that day and dispel any fright of what our government might be doing to us as a nation. I care, I'm surprised we never had a president elected that was willing or interested in letting some past taboo info out like all that UFO stuff for example, if we keep this current trend of presidency and government action with out knowing weather they are legit or not we could face some serious problems some day. Heres to the revolution.

Daniel

Hey cool there are some black helicopters outside...ooh and there waving at me too, I'll be right back.

But another website says something else. They can't both be right, can they?

"It must be true. I read it on the internets!!"

The site raises some interesting questions, but just like every theory out there, you present the data that supports your theory. This isn't saying he's being dishonest - only that the author has a preconceived idea of what happened and is picking out facts that support his claim and discarding those that dispute it as propaganda.

They sell DVD's at that link too:

"Marcus Allen of Nexus Magazine describes it as "Mind Blowing!" - and it is. The entire political system of the United States and Britain is being controlled by a small group of elite occultists who have all sworn allegiance to the All Seeing Eye of Lucifer. For more than two centuries, the aristocracy of Britain and America have been involved in Satanic Secret Societies which have seeded all the major positions of power in Politics, the Media and the Military.

THE ILLUMINATI draws on historical records, footage and photos which take the viewer on a voyage of discovery - it starts with the JFK assassination, through the dark depths of the two Gulf 'Wars', and brings you bang up to date with details of how members of the SKULL & BONES secret society engineered the 2000 and the 2004 U.S. Presidential Elections.

THE ILLUMINATI takes you deep into the forests of Northern California with secretly filmed footage courtesy of ALEX JONES, exposing the Bohemian Club's annual rituals and mock sacrifices - ceremonies which have been attended for years by U.S. Presidents, Vice-Presidents and CEO's from the world's largest corporations.

THE ILLUMINATI journeys to TIBET where China - the nation which George Bush describes as 'America'a Most Favoured Nation' are routinely beating and torturing innocent Tibetan monks.

We expose how senior members of the British Royal Family were members of HITLER's SS.

We then voyage deep into the heart of Westminster and expose the fact that Freemasonic temples exist within the House of Commons and that the Queen of England is Grand Patronness of International World Freemasonry.

THE ILLUMINATI exposes the links between ALEISTER CROWLEY, Freemasonry, the Royal Family of Great Britain and asks if TONY BLAIR is a Freemason.

We then expose how the SKULL & BONES society at Yale University conducts it's rituals with secretly filmed footage from inside the 'TOMB'.

THE ILLUMINATI is a feature length documentary which runs for nearly TWO HOURS.

The New York Gazette said: “The Illuminati is... an explosive exposure of the British Royal Family’s ties to Nazism, Black Magic & Zionist, Quabalistic Secret Societies. Quite astounding!”

Subjects Covered Include: Aleister Crowley & 33 degree Freemasonry • Albert Pike & The Ku Klux Klan • Tony Blair & The 1591 Studholme Masonic Lodge • Footage from inside the Skull & Bones Tomb • Winston Churchill & The Order of Druids • Masonic Lodges inside the British Parliament • The O.T.O. & The Golden Dawn • British Royal Family Members of Hitler’s SS • Satanic Possession • Devil Worship Amongst Hollywood Stars • How The 2004 U.S. Presidential Election Was Fixed"

The Alluminati however you spell it, I was watching about this on the television about there's reptiles morphed as humans and that they're some extremely secret organization, some new world order. c'mon! thats ludicris!!

Back to 911, the link I gave shows FACTS on that particular page.

I don't believe everything I read, but some things do make me wonder. One thing that I like to make fun of of the video I mentioned was that he recalled the time that a B-52 collided with the empire state building back in the 40s which I know to be bad info cause there weren't any B-52s ever in the 40s but he was close enough to the actual case that it was minor, it was actually a B-25. I understand that there are few if any that really know and grasp the entirety of those events but complicated schemes are in fact complicated and such schemes have, and forever will be challenged at least by the few, but I think most just don't care. I support the finding out what's up group. There just questions.

Heres what I want to know. How do two planes incinerate completely if its impossible, and how do two towers collapse so neatly if nothing like it has ever happened before with similar cases. And how come all the aircraft that were destroyed are still in active duty. And how come cell phones worked on an airplane so high up when its apparently impossible. And how come there making a movie about 9-11.

Daniel

[This message has been edited by The Poopsmith (edited 04-17-2006).]

B-52 and B-25 can easily get mixed up with the numbers but it helps to know exactly for sure.

Think about this, what if those airliners were remotely controlled? I mean you have 2 successfull hi-jacks from guys using BOX CUTTERS, come on but I'd DEFINITELY be doing something about it. Now I don't remember exactly, but the passenger jets altogether were carrying a total of 450ish passengers, AND these planes should be holding (I think) 450ish passengers each, which I'm saying that each plane were fueled for intercontental flight and they should of been maxed out with passengers. Anyways, now lets say you make up cell phone calls of the people on board, radio control the airliners (it's been done), slap some arabs labaled as terrorists and you would be looking at the middle east. I think some of the passengers were using the planes phones, but cell phone calls at high altitude is shockingly impossible, now if they were made at low altitude MAYBE, but I have my doubts if you could call someone at that speed. Just to think how different RIGHT NOW would be if Dubya wasn't in office in 2001. or was it 2000.

[This message has been edited by fierogtowner (edited 04-17-2006).]

I know what I saw and what can NOT be disputed... the towers came down at freefall speed as did WTC7. Tell me they werent all 'pulled'. The damage at the Pentagon appears to be nothing more than an unarmed bunkerbuster hole. Want more undisputable fact? Why was it that, while our country was under attack, did WPE fly unescorted and unprotected? Why was he not hastilly taken away and protected? Oh, nothing to worry about? His plane was in the air at the same time as the last 2 'hijacked' planes, yet he flies unescorted. The fact he flew at all is absurd if this was not a staged event. Last and final visual and well documented proof that this was staged... for months, the wreckage of the towers burned several storied below street level, long after the jet fuel was spent. If, in fact, this was a terrorist attack, doncha think the feds from every department would have been crawling all over every inch of that pile of rubble? In fact, they were not even present. In fact, the rubble was hastilly hauled off... the steel that we could have desperately used ourselves was sold to china before anyone could have a look at it to determine why the building fell at all, let alone fall at freefall speed. How much more do you need before you start checking out the scenarios that arent quite as well documented and tangible? What I have just brought to light is documented in every way possible and available to everyone. No hocus pocus about it. A crime scene that went uninvestigated should perhaps shake you up just a bit. I cant debate the put options deal, or the alleged hijackers that have been seen alive and well since that day, along with a few other odds and ends, because I havent personally seen any documentation in black and white detailing these facts. I dont need it. I have it all right there in beautiful downtown NY... the final resting place for 3,000 Americans done in by their govt. I hope you feel good about funding the real terrorist on this, the last day of the tax season.

Think about this, ok you have 2 buildings. TWO, that fell acordion demolition style. Now, the structure at the top was weekend severely that the top section just fell, why didn't it topple over? And you had debris ejected like 600feet away, which is impossible on a building just falling.

Looks like no one wants to discuss this any further. Hopefully you all are thinking now. Thats all I ask... think on your own, dont take my word for anything. Have a good tomorrow.

Whats with this controlled demolition of bldg 7 crap?

People who take holucinagens give conspiracy theorist a bad name.

According to Larry Silverstein, when the fire department sayed to 'pull it', he meant lets pull the firefighters out of the building, oh wait, there were no firefighters in the WTC7. Anyone with half a brain would know pull it is a demolition term to blow up a building. What's wierd is when Larry said to 'pull it' the building then proceeded to crumble. It wasn't necessary to blow it up since fires have been extinguished before. He knew damn well what was going on with HIS building that he owned. He knew.

quote Originally posted by fierogtowner: . Anyone with half a brain would know pull it is a demolition term to blow up a building. .

According to who?

I worked explosives/demo for 6 yrs, I've heard drop it, light it, blow it but never Pull It
Although, in my experience in EMS/Fire I've heard "Pull it" as in pull the teams/men out as the building/structure is gone.

Oh so it had nothing to do with the fact that the sevearly damaged foundation under building 7 (which shared the foundation with towers 1 and 2) was weakend by hundreds of tons of debris falling from sevearl hundred of feet? Ever think that maybe, just maybe it was the cracking walls and the gorans of steel buckeling under the strain that prompted him to "pull" people out of an already evacuated building nearing collapse?

No? Ok....
Thats like saying a piece of styrafoam couldn't possible damage the reinforced carbon carbon leading edge of a space shuttle.
Puff puff.... pass.

quote Originally posted by fierogtowner: According to Larry Silverstein, when the fire department sayed to 'pull it', he meant lets pull the firefighters out of the building, oh wait, there were no firefighters in the WTC7. Anyone with half a brain would know pull it is a demolition term to blow up a building. What's wierd is when Larry said to 'pull it' the building then proceeded to crumble. It wasn't necessary to blow it up since fires have been extinguished before. He knew damn well what was going on with HIS building that he owned. He knew.

[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 04-18-2006).]

So you refer to your firemen has to 'pull it', should it not be pull your men out or something along those lines. I'm sorry but when you have explosives set and ready to be detonated you don't do it without the owner's permission to do so. Obviously, there was no mix up at all about this SINCE Silverstein knew what was in profits for him. Like $500m. And won a settlement of $861m for WTC7.

Bill, Silverstein had something to do with the attacks since setting up explosives takes weeks and there was absolutely no way of doing this in a day. And why was it that every single building of his (includes WTC 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7) were 'pulled'? And other buildings closer to WTC were not demolished. But this also doesn't mean those buildings were severely damaged just because they're closer to WTC1and2. This man is a crook.

Every building on that site had the same foundation. Every building on that site collapsed with acception of a few. Those few left were demolished because the foundations were sevearly compromised by damage from falling debris. End of story. This bit about planting explosives weeks in advance under the noses of hundreds of employees scampering about on a daily basis without raising suspicion or detection is highly unlikely.
Now I will go as far as to agree that there were some who had prior knowledge of the attack as evidenced by the absolute intelligence failure and sudden loss of the whereabouts of the terrorists themselves. Maybe Silverstein did have prior knowledge but to try an smuggle enough explosives to dedtroy the complex under the noses of everyone including security is far to risky just plain silly in concept.

quote Originally posted by fierogtowner: So you refer to your firemen has to 'pull it', should it not be pull your men out or something along those lines. I'm sorry but when you have explosives set and ready to be detonated you don't do it without the owner's permission to do so. Obviously, there was no mix up at all about this SINCE Silverstein knew what was in profits for him. Like $500m. And won a settlement of $861m for WTC7. Bill, Silverstein had something to do with the attacks since setting up explosives takes weeks and there was absolutely no way of doing this in a day. And why was it that every single building of his (includes WTC 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7) were 'pulled'? And other buildings closer to WTC were not demolished. But this also doesn't mean those buildings were severely damaged just because they're closer to WTC1and2. This man is a crook.

Geesus. Some people just have way too much time on their hands. Not everything is a conspiracy. Truth is, probably very few things are true conspiracies. TV has ruined the minds of our children.
The collapse of the buildings was the result of simple engineering, and physics combined with unforseen external influences. Within a couple of days of the collapse I remember seeing a show that had an engineer describing very plainly what had happened. I was a contractor for 15 years, and spent a few years as the chief engineer of a commercial building complex. I can tell you with all certainty that there was absiolutely nothing unlikely in the way those building collapsed. The fact is, in a manner of speaking, the structure performed exactly as it was intended to. Only they certainly probably never anticipated the extent of the trauma the buildings encountered.

Yep I'm going with Bill on this one today, too. (I feel .... strange....)

I have no doubt that our government is involved in a huge coverup.... to hide their mistakes and embarassing ****ups.

But this conspiracy theory that they did it themselves is complete BS.

fierogt88, is it so hard to believe that your government may have lied to you about 911? Dubya has lied about the WMD's. That's a start. That's precisely what a great deal of Americans have such a diffucult time imagining and accepting. Look. It might be an inside job, it might not BUT questions must be answered. Until then I reasonably believe this to be an inside job by our government. 911 raged Americans into thinking Arabs or middle eastern terrorist terrorized us. Here's a list of 500 questions that I found to try convince you that this may of been an inside job by the U.S. I mean how does Osama even link to 911?! A video tape!? This can be fabricated.

The way it should have gone down IS terrorist with box cutters hijacked American planes and only they would have known and of course the CIA and whatever. What about the put options? Just have a look at the questions and decide for yourself and think for yourself.

911 Top 500 Questions: http://www.rense.com/general24/t500.htm

[This message has been edited by fierogtowner (edited 04-18-2006).]

quote Originally posted by fierogt88: Yep I'm going with Bill on this one today, too. (I feel .... strange....) I have no doubt that our government is involved in a huge coverup.... to hide their mistakes and embarassing ****ups. But this conspiracy theory that they did it themselves is complete BS.

Ok, what mistakes exactly? Can you tell me why there was NO forensic level investigation before the rubble was extracted? This was a 'terrorist attack', was it not? After every catastrophic building failure, there is an engineering level investigation of what happened to cause that failure so that building codes can be ammended to rectify the situation. Where was this investigation team? Oh, thats right... no one was allowed on the site per FEMA, with the exception of a few ASCE people to sift through a handfull of items offsite. Maybe the months of smoldering molten steel 4 stories deep in the ground had something to do with that. Again, I'll remind you that these facts are well documented... no black magic, no witchdoctor voodoo, no medicine man hocus pocus. Just your average, everyday coverup. An impeachable, treasonous coverup.

quote Originally posted by fierogtowner: fierogt88, is it so hard to believe that your government may have lied to you about 911? Dubya has lied about the WMD's. That's a start. That's precisely what a great deal of Americans have such a diffucult time imagining and accepting. Look. It might be an inside job, it might not BUT questions must be answered. Until then I reasonably believe this to be an inside job by our government. 911 raged Americans into thinking Arabs or middle eastern terrorist terrorized us. Here's a list of 500 questions that I found to try convince you that this may of been an inside job by the U.S. I mean how does Osama even link to 911?! A video tape!? This can be fabricated.

Hard to believe our government has lied? Not at all.

Hard to believe our government orchestrated an attack supposedly with remote control airplanes, supposedly with hundreds of civilians willing to disappear off the planet, supposedly with tons of munitions snuck into three of the biggest & most populated buildings on the planet under the noses of thousands of security & civilians, supposedly with holographic technology, supposedly in cohoots with the very arabs that we went to war with who was openly anti-US even before the attack, supposedly to steal all the gold under the wtc and all the oil in Iraq? Buuuuullllllssshhhhiiiitttt.

quote The way it should have gone down IS terrorist with box cutters hijacked American planes and only they would have known and of course the CIA and whatever. What about the put options? Just have a look at the questions and decide for yourself and think for yourself. 911 Top 500 Questions: http://www.rense.com/general24/t500.htm

I took the time to read every one of those questions.
I was able to answer for myself, easily, 95% of them with common knowledge and/or a google search, or by reading other questions further down the list (a most unimpressive list even for conspiracy theorists).
I was able to answer about 4% of them through first hand "been there, saw that" personal knowledge.
I was not able to answer about 1% of those questions through sources/means available to me.
There are several questions that I have myself about the situation that are not on that list, but none of them are about our government being behind it.

So yes, I do have 100% faith in our governments ability to screw things up.
I have 0% faith that they could orchestrate a global conspiracy.

Did I ever mention that I killed Kennedy?
...except that I wasn't born until '79...

MinnGreenGT, there's a lot of people with the first and last name Kennedy, could be any Kennedy. It's a joke from a person who can't tell jokes.

fierogt88, I'd appreciate if you could give every single answer to those questions on that site. I mean, if you say you know almost all of them, then by all means please tell me. You don't have to be detailed, just give me the facts. Thanks!

quote Originally posted by fierogtowner: MinnGreenGT, there's a lot of people with the first and last name Kennedy, could be any Kennedy. It's a joke from a person who can't tell jokes.

Ummm... yeah

You didn't have to rub it in!

quote Originally posted by fierogtowner: You didn't have to rub it in!

Didn't mean to "rub it in" - you just seem to be taking this whole thread awfully seriously!

And that's considered a bad thing or something, jeeze I'm sorry I ever cared about 911 consipary theories.

I would also like to add that the Twin Towers were in fact rated to be able to take a hit from an airliner at the time they were built. They were built to be able to withstand a direct hit from a 707 from its day which I don't know but am pretty sure is bigger that a 737. But I do keep in mind that the structural codes for the air plane hit were not to be assumed that it would be hit at full speed.

The video I watched also explained that it is impossible for planes to incinerate even with secondary explosions but two on that day seemed too I never saw any major wreckage from either the pentagon nor the PA crash and if it were able to happen those two planes would be the first in history. Also it was mentioned that it is very, very unlikely for the steel inside the Twin Towers to have heated enough to fail due to lack of "the right conditions" to burn at such a heat. I'm gonna have to watch "Loose Change" again but its chock full of information that makes you think "holy crap!". You know the government could really relieve some pressure if they just came clean about a few things. I find it interesting that a lot of movies and such touch on similar theories like the latest "24" for instance, and "V for Vendetta" both have corrupt governments doing atrocious things supposedly for the good of their country. Suppose it could happen in real life, lets find out.

So far here is the only evidence that I have found that is clearly not part of a cover up or consipricy though it does put the Russians in a bad light. http://wtct.ytmnd.com/

Daniel

quote Originally posted by fierogtowner: fierogt88, I'd appreciate if you could give every single answer to those questions on that site. I mean, if you say you know almost all of them, then by all means please tell me. You don't have to be detailed, just give me the facts. Thanks!

What, too lazy to google the answers yourself? Or are you just trying to win e-points by suggesting an overwhelmingly large task that couldn't possibly be typed up in my free moments? But I'm in an entertaining mood. Pick one. ONE AT A TIME. I'll do my best to answer it. Choose wisely however, because I get bored easily. Just to get you started, here is the answer to the first one:

1. Why didn't jets intercept the airliners since they had numerous warnings of terrorist attacks?

Read this link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5232563/

Several reasons.

The military never received more than nine minutes' notice from the Federal Aviation Administration on any of the four hijackings.
There was a delay in passing along an order for pilots to shoot down any hostile aircraft.
The first call from the FAA to the military for help prompted a question: “Is this real-world or exercise?"
One plane moved into a gap in Federal Aviation Administration radar coverage.
A single air traffic controller wound up with responsibility for two hijacked planes simultaneously.
The FAA failed to notify the military that one of the four planes had been hijacked.
The FAA incorrectly told the military that the first plane to crash into the World Trade Center was still in the air after impact.

So contrary to the assertion of the question, there was a massive response by both the FAA and the military involving thousands of people that just could not respond to the situation in the time alotted. This was further mired by the fact that even though there were three known hijacked planes at the peak, there were several hundred other planes still in the air that were off of their planned routes because of the situation that were being watched by the FAA and the military for possible hijacking.

Next question?
(again, choose wisely, my attention span for responses is prolly round 3 or 4 more questions and I have no doubt that other people will join in and mire the whole thing up...)
P.S. You have nine minutes to respond to this question, which is the maximum time that the military had advance knowledge of a given hijacked plane. Let's see if you can beat their response time for the fun of it.

quote Originally posted by The Poopsmith: I would also like to add that the Twin Towers were in fact rated to be able to take a hit from an airliner at the time they were built. They were built to be able to withstand a direct hit from a 707 from its day which I don't know but am pretty sure is bigger that a 737. But I do keep in mind that the structural codes for the air plane hit were not to be assumed that it would be hit at full speed. Daniel

I don't know where you came up with 737s.
The airplanes that hit the towers were 767s, I believe. Much bigger than 707s. They were also being flown at faster than "redline" speeds.
The two other airplanes were 757s.
All airplanes are listed as having "crashed", and are out of service, according to the records at the company where I work (Boeing).
I wish you guys would just stop with this weird conspiracy crap.

This gives the good conspiracies a bad name... hey maybe that's the conspiracy! To deflect attention from other plots by the boy sprouts and the gnomes of zurich.