It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Either 9/11 Was An Inside Job Or Complete Morons Ran Our Country

page: 9
53
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Swills

LOL its 2015...Bush is no longer in office and, in fact, has been gone for almost 8 years.

Re-hashing old news. I go with allowed it to happen for obvious reasons.

Now it's time for all the aged, tired, worn conspiracy theories to be rehashed, argued about.

Perhaps more productive would be a discussion around who the next president will be? This discussion is about as productive as talking about the grass growing in my yard....wait...that would be more productive simply due to the fact that I can (and probably will) overseed with a different grass this spring. There! Change is in the air!




posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
This war on terrorism is bogus


First, it is clear the US authorities did little or nothing to pre-empt the events of 9/11. It is known that at least 11 countries provided advance warning to the US of the 9/11 attacks. Two senior Mossad experts were sent to Washington in August 2001 to alert the CIA and FBI to a cell of 200 terrorists said to be preparing a big operation (Daily Telegraph, September 16 2001). The list they provided included the names of four of the 9/11 hijackers, none of whom was arrested.


Whether you believe in an inside job or not the facts remain, the US and 11 other nations were well aware of a big attack coming but the US did nothing to prevent it.

Intelligence warnings
My father in law was deputy director of us space and missile defense office in the pentagon during 9/11. Trust me not an inside job.



The 9/11 Commission Report states that "the 9/11 attacks were a shock, but they should not have come as a surprise. Islamic extremists had given plenty of warnings that they meant to kill Americans indiscriminately and in large numbers."[29]




The US administration, CIA and FBI received multiple prior warnings from foreign governments and intelligence services, including France, Germany, the UK, Israel, Jordan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Morocco and Russia.[5][31] The warnings varied in their level of detail, but all stated that they believed an Al-Qaeda attack inside the United States was imminent. British Member of Parliament Michael Meacher cites these warnings, suggesting that some of them must have been deliberately ignored.[32] Some of these warnings include the following:

March 2001 – Italian intelligence warns of an al-Qaeda plot in the United States involving a massive strike involving aircraft, based on their wiretap of al-Qaeda cell in Milan.

July 2001 – Jordanian intelligence told US officials that al-Qaeda was planning an attack on American soil, and Egyptian intelligence warned the CIA that 20 al-Qaeda Jihadists were in the United States, and that four of them were receiving flight training.

August 2001 – The Israeli Mossad gives the CIA a list of 19 terrorists living in the US and say that they appear to be planning to carry out an attack in the near future.

August 2001 – The United Kingdom is warned three times of an imminent al-Qaeda attack in the United States, the third specifying multiple airplane hijackings. According to the Sunday Herald, the report is passed on to President Bush a short time later.

September 2001 – Egyptian intelligence warns American officials that al-Qaeda is in the advanced stages of executing a significant operation against an American target, probably within the US.




After 9/11 the Bush administration said they never imagined terrorists would fly planes into buildings.



The Failure to Defend the Skies on 9/11



In his May 2003 testimony, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta stated to the Independent Commission, “I don’t think we ever thought of an aircraft being used as a missile. We had no information of that nature at all.” [Norman Mineta Testimony, 5/23/03] FAA Administrator Jane Garvey said, “I was not aware of any information about (planes) being used as weapons that was credible.” [UPI, 5/22/03 (B)] Mineta and Garvey were merely repeating the same claims many Bush administration officials have made since 9/11.


Terrorists hijacking airliners goes together like peanut butter & jelly but the Bush administration wants us to believe no one ever thought of this. NORAD has done many exercises prior to 9/11 dealing with hijack planes and American airspace. Now NORAD didn't have drills that went down exactly as 9/11 but they definitely had drills of airliners being used as weapons. Bottom line is, while the Bush administration can play ignorant the fact is many, many warnings about a big attack were well received and not a god damn thing was done to stop it.

Let's fast forward to present day since 9/11. The US alone spends $250,000.00 a minute funding the wars in the Middle East and what have we accomplished? Are we any safer, and not just the US but the world? What progress has been made in the fight against terrorism?

Who has gained from the war on terrorism? Who & what has been lost from the war on terrorism?

So a simple question always needs to be asked, was the US run by a bunch of monkeys f****** a football on 9/11 or did they allow the attack to happen to pursue their Middle Eastern agenda?

This war on terrorism is bogus


We now know that a blueprint for the creation of a global Pax Americana was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice-president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), Jeb Bush (George Bush's younger brother) and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences, was written in September 2000 by the neoconservative think tank, Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says "while the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

The PNAC blueprint supports an earlier document attributed to Wolfowitz and Libby which said the US must "discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role". It refers to key allies such as the UK as "the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership". It describes peacekeeping missions as "demanding American political leadership rather than that of the UN". It says "even should Saddam pass from the scene", US bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently... as "Iran may well prove as large a threat to US interests as Iraq has". It spotlights China for "regime change", saying "it is time to increase the presence of American forces in SE Asia".


For me the simple question boils down to this, did enemies within the US gov't plan the attack or did they use it to their advantage? I don't believe that anyone was blindsided. If the Bush Administration allowed this attack to happen then it was an inside job.

Another troublesome act of the Bush administration after 9/11 was their testimony to the 9/11 Commission, or lack there of.



My vote says 9/11 was an inside job.






My father inlaw was deputy director of us space and missile defense office at the pentagon during 9/11. Trust me not an inside job.
edit on 13-1-2015 by Xstokerx because: Left my comment out some how



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

Mate, i noticed that you claimed this earlier.


The person making the claim has to back that claim up


Based on your own logic (The person making the claim has to back that claim up). Can you back up your claim.

Im just interested to see where it actually states that on a conspiracy forum 'The person making the claim has to back that claim up'.



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: HumanPLC
a reply to: hellobruce

Mate, i noticed that you claimed this earlier.


The person making the claim has to back that claim up


Based on your own logic (The person making the claim has to back that claim up). Can you back up your claim.

Im just interested to see where it actually states that on a conspiracy forum 'The person making the claim has to back that claim up'.

I've already backed it up. He hasn't though.



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 01:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xstokerx

originally posted by: Swills
This war on terrorism is bogus


First, it is clear the US authorities did little or nothing to pre-empt the events of 9/11. It is known that at least 11 countries provided advance warning to the US of the 9/11 attacks. Two senior Mossad experts were sent to Washington in August 2001 to alert the CIA and FBI to a cell of 200 terrorists said to be preparing a big operation (Daily Telegraph, September 16 2001). The list they provided included the names of four of the 9/11 hijackers, none of whom was arrested.


Whether you believe in an inside job or not the facts remain, the US and 11 other nations were well aware of a big attack coming but the US did nothing to prevent it.

Intelligence warnings
My father in law was deputy director of us space and missile defense office in the pentagon during 9/11. Trust me not an inside job.



The 9/11 Commission Report states that "the 9/11 attacks were a shock, but they should not have come as a surprise. Islamic extremists had given plenty of warnings that they meant to kill Americans indiscriminately and in large numbers."[29]




The US administration, CIA and FBI received multiple prior warnings from foreign governments and intelligence services, including France, Germany, the UK, Israel, Jordan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Morocco and Russia.[5][31] The warnings varied in their level of detail, but all stated that they believed an Al-Qaeda attack inside the United States was imminent. British Member of Parliament Michael Meacher cites these warnings, suggesting that some of them must have been deliberately ignored.[32] Some of these warnings include the following:

March 2001 – Italian intelligence warns of an al-Qaeda plot in the United States involving a massive strike involving aircraft, based on their wiretap of al-Qaeda cell in Milan.

July 2001 – Jordanian intelligence told US officials that al-Qaeda was planning an attack on American soil, and Egyptian intelligence warned the CIA that 20 al-Qaeda Jihadists were in the United States, and that four of them were receiving flight training.

August 2001 – The Israeli Mossad gives the CIA a list of 19 terrorists living in the US and say that they appear to be planning to carry out an attack in the near future.

August 2001 – The United Kingdom is warned three times of an imminent al-Qaeda attack in the United States, the third specifying multiple airplane hijackings. According to the Sunday Herald, the report is passed on to President Bush a short time later.

September 2001 – Egyptian intelligence warns American officials that al-Qaeda is in the advanced stages of executing a significant operation against an American target, probably within the US.




After 9/11 the Bush administration said they never imagined terrorists would fly planes into buildings.



The Failure to Defend the Skies on 9/11



In his May 2003 testimony, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta stated to the Independent Commission, “I don’t think we ever thought of an aircraft being used as a missile. We had no information of that nature at all.” [Norman Mineta Testimony, 5/23/03] FAA Administrator Jane Garvey said, “I was not aware of any information about (planes) being used as weapons that was credible.” [UPI, 5/22/03 (B)] Mineta and Garvey were merely repeating the same claims many Bush administration officials have made since 9/11.


Terrorists hijacking airliners goes together like peanut butter & jelly but the Bush administration wants us to believe no one ever thought of this. NORAD has done many exercises prior to 9/11 dealing with hijack planes and American airspace. Now NORAD didn't have drills that went down exactly as 9/11 but they definitely had drills of airliners being used as weapons. Bottom line is, while the Bush administration can play ignorant the fact is many, many warnings about a big attack were well received and not a god damn thing was done to stop it.

Let's fast forward to present day since 9/11. The US alone spends $250,000.00 a minute funding the wars in the Middle East and what have we accomplished? Are we any safer, and not just the US but the world? What progress has been made in the fight against terrorism?

Who has gained from the war on terrorism? Who & what has been lost from the war on terrorism?

So a simple question always needs to be asked, was the US run by a bunch of monkeys f****** a football on 9/11 or did they allow the attack to happen to pursue their Middle Eastern agenda?

This war on terrorism is bogus


We now know that a blueprint for the creation of a global Pax Americana was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice-president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), Jeb Bush (George Bush's younger brother) and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences, was written in September 2000 by the neoconservative think tank, Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says "while the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

The PNAC blueprint supports an earlier document attributed to Wolfowitz and Libby which said the US must "discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role". It refers to key allies such as the UK as "the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership". It describes peacekeeping missions as "demanding American political leadership rather than that of the UN". It says "even should Saddam pass from the scene", US bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently... as "Iran may well prove as large a threat to US interests as Iraq has". It spotlights China for "regime change", saying "it is time to increase the presence of American forces in SE Asia".


For me the simple question boils down to this, did enemies within the US gov't plan the attack or did they use it to their advantage? I don't believe that anyone was blindsided. If the Bush Administration allowed this attack to happen then it was an inside job.

Another troublesome act of the Bush administration after 9/11 was their testimony to the 9/11 Commission, or lack there of.



My vote says 9/11 was an inside job.






My father inlaw was deputy director of us space and missile defense office at the pentagon during 9/11. Trust me not an inside job.
there is nothing to say he had any part of it or knew about it. There is no reason anybody would admit to having a hand in either.



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 02:02 PM
link   
It was a inside job as well as a outside job and joint effort by the Saudi government in tandem with the UK and Israel. All being complicit working in tandem with the media propaganda machine. This not including press being in the know they just read what is on the teleprompter. It is the writers of that teleprompter that are involved just as the writers behind what the puppet POTUS says in his state of the union adress.

Its all as fake as pro wrestling folks, politicians playing trivial roles. Owned by the highest bidder , campaign contributors the lobby the corps the banks are your government. It is not a mass conspiracy it is a compartmentalized conspiracy. Yet so many find it hard to swallow or even fathom these chain of events were orchestrated by people you never met or know but have only seen with fake smiles on tv. Peole you think were elected by you lol.

Want to know who was behind 9-11 ? Simply follow the blood money. Those who profited from it, those who gained exectutive power. Those who passed bills over night raping and pillaging our rights under the false pretext of terrorism.

These people are not inept at all, they are sociopaths and manipulators that do not value human life or hold regard for our way of life over thier personal gain. To assume most people in power are selfless is a logical falacy. They are in power because they craved power to begin with. Used car salesmen telling you everything you want to hear. "You are either with us or against us" meant subvert to the new world order as slaves or you will be enemy of the state hence mass surveillance.

See

Operation Northwoods

And

"Pull it"

I wont even dabble in the imposilbiities that occured tha day, planes puling g's and and angles commercial pilots cant do, steel frame buildings falling in thier own footprints due to small fires, planes turning in to confetti in fields while bandanas and terrorists id cards remain unscathed nearby, the evidence or lack thereof. It has been exposed in many levels over and over but many still embrrace the great lie from the 911 comission report, NIST ect. Either you accept the real reality or choose to live in a bubble. It is what it is. Nothing is what it seems.

And be sure to dispose of the evidence, hide it in a pinapple under the sea next to Davey Jones locker. As a show of respect to Bin Laden and his faith ummm... yeah give him a proper burial . Apples are oranges, the sky is green the grass is blue. And 3 buildings were destroyed , pentagon hit with an airliner with hijackers with box cutters all master minded by a hide and seek champion in a cave that use to work with the cia in Afghanistan. Seems legit lol.

True story
edit on 13-1-2015 by DarthFazer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: bbracken677 Re-hashing old news.


this particular piece of 'old news' should be rehashed every single day. this 'old news' was the worst kind of societal game-changer. it was subterfuge, deceit, cowardice, fraud, murder and lies from the top down. it created the nightmare of paranoid governmental subversion of civil liberties we see today. it changed EVERYTHING. for the worse.
this news will never, and should never, be old. the bad taste it left in my mouth is as fresh today as it was then.
the catastophically oppressive, draconianly censorial ripple effects from 9/11 assumed tsunamic proportions only years later. those waves are still breaking now.


surf's up!



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Letting our "enemies" attack us in order to justify going to war is nothing new. FDR had advanced warning of Pearl Harbor and did nothing to try to prevent it. The Gulf of Tonkin is another example of deception leading us into war.

Yeah, our country has been run by morons for a while now. Either that or the MIC has politicians in their pockets. Maybe it's a little of both.




In war, truth is the first casualty.

-Aeschylus


Truer words have never been spoken.


No, FDR DID NOT "have advance notice of Pearl Harbor." That is utter garbage and there is not one shred of credible evidence to back that statement. Not one.



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

I've started to believe the same thing of people writing articles believing it was an inside job.

Most governments are full of morons, and the larger the government grows the more morons it employs. Then the government needs more morons to keep it in power, so it passes social programs so the morons in the public won't pay attention to what the morons in government are doing. The most moronic thing is all the people who continue to vote for them, praise them in the public, and then praise them on created stats that all the morons in the government and public can spout as successes!



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 03:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: everyone
Skip to 2hr 13 mind 40 sec and watch the segment there. It explains it better than I am.

This is pretty damning!


Not really, i asked for a FBI source for the 2 video's, which you seem unable to supply - funny that. Where is the evidence that the FBI released 2 films, one flipped....the filmaker of that video probably have flipped them!
edit on 13-1-2015 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 04:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: everyone
Skip to 2hr 13 mind 40 sec and watch the segment there. It explains it better than I am.

This is pretty damning!


Not really, i asked for a FBI source for the 2 video's, which you seem unable to supply - funny that. Where is the evidence that the FBI released 2 films, one flipped....the filmaker of that video probably have flipped them!
my mistake it was the DOD who released them. Either way it's irrelevant. Those are the pieces of footage released through official channels and one thing they certainly do not show is an airliner hitting the pentagon.

Conspiracy or not a hijacked airliner (apparently) was flown for around 300 miles to its target without being harassed, stopped or intercepted. It is at best gross negligence that cost lives. Heads should have rolled and they didn't. Promotions were handed out and billions of dollars in insurance money was collected.

If I insured my house against fire and two weeks later it burnt down under suspicious circumstances that would be investigated. I certainly wouldn't get to say 'oh you know I insured the garage next to it I want a payout for that too' and actually receive the payout. In a court of law that is called a motive. If I went back to the house and removed a fuel canister with my prints on it that would be tampering with evidence. In some cases if you know a crime is going to happen and do nothing to stop it you are also guilty. It's called aiding and abetting. It's a complete farce. What is even more of a farce is the fact people don't seem to think the events of that day were suspicious and swallow the bulls**t they are spoon fed and ask for seconds.



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: jaffo

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Letting our "enemies" attack us in order to justify going to war is nothing new. FDR had advanced warning of Pearl Harbor and did nothing to try to prevent it. The Gulf of Tonkin is another example of deception leading us into war.

Yeah, our country has been run by morons for a while now. Either that or the MIC has politicians in their pockets. Maybe it's a little of both.




In war, truth is the first casualty.

-Aeschylus


Truer words have never been spoken.


No, FDR DID NOT "have advance notice of Pearl Harbor." That is utter garbage and there is not one shred of credible evidence to back that statement. Not one.

Well following that train of thinking there is no evidence that he didn't know about it either.



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 06:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xstokerx

My father inlaw was deputy director of us space and missile defense office at the pentagon during 9/11. Trust me not an inside job.


Why would anyone trust you on that. You have 2 posts on ATS and in your second post in you claim this.
Not to forget that if the Deputy director of U.S Space and Missile Defense knew anything about anything pointing to serious insider information (or was a part of.) i very much doubt he would tell his son in law.

Or even his wife and children.


It is not my intention to sound rude but i find everything about you non-trustworthy after that claim so quickly and easily, coupled with the suggestion that you would be "in the know" because of your marital status.. , i think you get my meaning.




edit on 13-1-2015 by everyone because: 2 typo's



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 07:15 PM
link   
a reply to: DarthFazer

That has got to be the greatest logical summary of 9/11 as well as politics in general I have ever seen good sir!

The fact that people believe that these people could simply be inept is priceless, this right here is my favorite part of your post "It is not a mass conspiracy it is a compartmentalized conspiracy" in these 11 words you summed up how they are able to control virtually everything through their various board of directors/NGO's

I would give you far more stars than 1




posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

So just to recap and simplify things:

The US was sufficiently warned of an attack
The US did nothing to prevent said attack
Having intelligence & not taking action means what?
It means the US allowed it to happen at best, were part of it at worst

Given the dozens of inconsistencies, counterintuitive actions taken by all the US gov, facts revealed by witnesses and studies, and obvious conspiracies involving cash-money....

OBVIOUSLY IT WAS AN INSIDE JOB!



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596



On Sept. 10, NEWSWEEK has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns.
Newsweek: 9/23/01

Brown received the call from airport security. Leaks from them said the warning came from Rice's office. Believe it or not, the call was placed.



FOR Mayor Willie Brown, the first signs that something was amiss came late Monday when he got a call from what he described as his airport security -- a full eight hours before yesterday's string of terrorist attacks -- advising him that Americans should be cautious about their air travel. The mayor, who was booked to fly to New York yesterday morning from San Francisco International Airport, said the call "didn't come in any alarming fashion, which is why I'm hesitant to make an alarming statement." Exactly where the call came from is a bit of a mystery. The mayor would say only that it came from "my security people at the airport."


I am asking for a full investigation. The Bush Administration initially resisted the formation of the Commission, and subsequently obstructed and impeded its progress. Even Bush & Cheney refused to testify under oath or to be questioned separately by the Commission. Why?

Less money was reportedly spent investigating the 9/11 attacks ($15 million) than on the Whitewater/Lewinsky investigation ($40 million). Why?

I can understand someone buying into the U.S. Gov't's claim of a conspiracy but I cannot understand why theirs is any more valid than any other. Unless you believe they always tell us the truth. In which case, you are on the wrong website.



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 11:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: HumanPLC
a reply to: hellobruce

Mate, i noticed that you claimed this earlier.


The person making the claim has to back that claim up


Based on your own logic (The person making the claim has to back that claim up). Can you back up your claim.

Im just interested to see where it actually states that on a conspiracy forum 'The person making the claim has to back that claim up'.



I think what he means is: You cannot prove a negative, therefore the positive has to have proof. If you make a claim of some sorts, often proving the negative is impossible, hence the prove the claim part... Did I make that clearer or did I just confuse everyone? lol



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: six67seven


Semantics, for sure.

To me an inside job means more than just the govt "allowed" it to happen. An inside job, by my perception, would mean that the whole thing was set up by our govt.

As I said...semantics.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Lets not forget the Commission report that was done to gather all the data together so we can see what, when, where and how everything has happened. The first thing they did was blanketed the truth. The commission report was never about finding out the truth, it was designed to cover up the truth. George Bush Jr classified 28 pages of that report Top Secret. Whatever that was in that report was so embarrassing and so damaging it had to be kept secret.

This is coming from the same people who take oaths and talk about government transparency. The point of voting for a president is to have that person inform us and represent the republic of what's happening in our government. Instead we get smoke and mirrors, house of lies. If you tell the truth you go to jail policy. What a bunko operation.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Beaux

Yes, as I have already stated there was an updated State Department notice warning about travel to the Far East. Condi Rice, did not call Willie Brown to say, "Willie don't fly on Tuesday." Odds are, she was probably not overly aware the notice was in place since her official travel was via the 89th Airlift Wing.


Then back to the blue dress investigation....... The FBI by itself spent more money investigating 9/11 than was spent on Billy Boy's behavior. Then there was the money spent by ATF, CIA, NSA, INS, FDNY, PAPD etc...... THEN there was the 15 million spent by the 9/11 Commission.


And finally George Bush and Cheney not being under Oath. We have this little thing called the Constitution, and it has this concept of separation of powers. As much b#etching as truthers do about the damage done to the Constitution after 9/11, you would think that they would know enough about it to know that it would be UNcOnstitutional for the Congress....a separate branch of the US Government to be able to put the head of another branch of the US Government under Oath.
edit on 14-1-2015 by cardinalfan0596 because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
53
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join