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.

 

911 conspiracy theory on CNN

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 12:08 AM
link   
Anderson Cooper has a segment on the 911 conspiracy theories that are going around the internet if anybody wants to tune in.

He's checking to see if they are true, and if not then why are people continuing to spread them.

Check CNN right now it's 223am

He will be "debunking" the theory about how explosives brought down the wtc and how it was a plane that brought em down.

After commercial he will be taking a "hard" look (already filled with bias before the commercial was even on...


It wasn't a strong interview and the debunking wasn't really all the debunkful.
At the bottom of my second post you can read the debunking from popular mechanics and other peoples views ect...


[edit on 22-2-2005 by TrueLies]




posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 01:22 AM
link   
what did he say?...im curious



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 01:35 AM
link   
It was an ad that started it

1888investigate was the number you were to call or go to the reopen911.org

said the 911 commission book was a joke because it didn't mention the theories.

They say the 911 commission book is incomplete, and the investigation needs to be re opened.

Walter something started the ads, put out newspaper ads, 66% of people questioned the 911 report.



Popular Mechanics put out an article called 911 Lies, jimmie walter said " there is no smoke coming out of building 7 if there was a plane that went in there would be smoke coming out of the basement, the debunking? "people have childlike views, they don't just topple over, where are the "experts" that support that view? there is no proff, building 7 was a very unusual structure, the damage was more extensive then previous thought, the diesel was what made it collapse...

theory 2:

"the holes were too small to be made by a boeing"

answer: "hundreds of people saw the plane hit the building, it's silly to think the plane would make

"plane broke up before it hit the ground"

answer: only paper was found and little debrie before the crash scene. No people were found like the theorits claimed.

answer: nothing was found a mile and a half before the crash scene, theories don't acknowledge the facts but will keep going"


www.popularmechanics.com...
letsroll911.org...
reopen911.org...




sorry, I was trying to type as fast as I could so it might sound screwy...

Q “A steel building survived fires in experiments with extreme temperatures beyond the range possible with jet fuel.” – Cardington fire tests.
Q No steel building has ever been destroyed by fire – Fire Engineering Magazine
Q “The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time.” Federal Emergency Management Administration. Chapter 5 Page 31 May 2002
Q The investigation of the WTC “is a half-baked farce.” - Fire Engineering Magazine. Jan 2002
Q All of the important evidence from the disaster was destroyed, illegally, and before the investigation was even concluded, some before it began! – Fire Engineering.
Q $600,000 was spent investigating the WTC collapses vs. $40 million on Clinton’s sex life. The entire 9/11 Commission only spent $15 million while all expenditures on Clinton’s indiscretion exceed $65 million.
Q The South Tower (Building #2) fell after 1 hour; the North Tower (Building #1) fell after 2 hours. The Meridian Plaza burned fiercely for 19 hours and never collapsed.
Q Building 7 at the WTC, 47 floors, steel, and constructed differently from the twin towers, fell at 5:30 but it was never hit by an airplane, had no significant fire!
Q Jet fuel burns at too low a temperature to significantly harm steel. The black smoke means that the fire did not reach the maximum temperature for jet fuel.
Q The fires were not long enough (only 1-2 hours) to harm the steel.
Q Yet days later, there were “hot spots” in the building that still exceeded the maximum temperature possible from jet fuel – but not from explosives.
Q The gusting wind on the towers had at times been greater than the impact of the airliners. Neither tower was bent nor did they creak or groan at any time.
Q The buildings collapsed at the maximum speed of gravity – impossible without explosives! (Each floor hit would have slowed the fall some, more at the beginning.)
Q The concrete was encased in a steel framed pan yet clouds of finely pulverized concrete and steel beams came shooting out of the buildings for up to three times the width of the building at hundreds of miles per hour - only possible with explosives.
Q If the force of the falling building is strong enough to pulverize concrete then the bolts and rivets would have to hold beyond that force – and then give way. Yet the force to pulverize concrete into fine powder is greater than the force that sheers or stretches steel bolts and rivets. It cannot be both ways.
Q Both impacts and fires in the Twin Towers did not hit the center of the buildings. That means that only two sides of the building were harmed at most and two sides were structurally sound. Building 7 had no impact or significant fires. Yet all three collapses are perfectly straight down. Only the tops of the Twin Towers should have fallen over, not the entire building fall straight down, just like a controlled demolition.
Q “I’m still to this day amazed that he [alleged pilot on Flight 77] could have flown into the Pentagon," according to the hijackers pilot instructor. "He could not fly at all." Yet, “The steep turn was so smooth, the sources say, it's clear there was no fight for control going on. And the complex maneuver suggests the hijackers had better flying skills than many investigators first believed.”
Q NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED STATES, Public Hearing, Friday, May 23, 2003: Mr. Mineta: “There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane [Flight 77] is 50 miles out…. 30 miles…10 miles out” – Cheney knew this plane was coming at Washington and the Pentagon and yet no planes had been scrambled to protect Washington after over 1 hour since the WTC was attacked. Even at 400 miles per hour, it takes over 7 minutes to travel 50 miles, more since the plane was at altitude. Cheney knew the plane was coming when it was even farther away since Mr. Mineta had not been present when Flight 77 was first reported to Mr. Cheney. They had known this flight was missing for over an hour after the first plane crashed into the North Tower. There should have been an umbrella of F-16 and other aircraft over Washington, DC. An F-16 fighter can travel 50 miles and destroy a target in less than 2 minutes. Moreover, pictures released by the Pentagon show anti-aircraft missiles firing at an aircraft much smaller than a 757. Everything failed! Incompetence, if not guilt. Read how the alleged hijackers used top secret information to find holes in our Radar Defenses.
Q NORAD successfully intercepted off course and suspected hijackings 100% of 67 times during the year prior to 9/11 (AP, 8/13/02), each time in under 20 minutes. An Air Force F-15 “scrambles” to 29,000 feet in 2.5 minutes, normally intercepting in 15 minutes. Yet on 9/11 they were four failures for over an hour each -- three after they knew the planes were high-jacked and intended mass murder. Please read, “Crossing the Rubicon”, by Michael Ruppert, which indicts Richard Cheney for his involvement in the war games that diverted our interceptors from stopping the high-jacked airplanes. Contrast this to Condoleezza Rice's statement from her May 16, 2002 press briefing, “I don’t think anybody could have predicted that these people would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile”. “Condoleezza Rice was the top National Security official with President Bush at the July 2001 G-8 summit in on Genoa. This was where U.S. officials were warned that Islamic terrorists might attempt to crash an airliner into the summit, which prompted officials to close the airspace over Genoa and station anti-aircraft guns at the city's airport".


source: reopen911.org


[edit on 22-2-2005 by TrueLies]



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 02:02 AM
link   
CNN is just doing they're job of clearing their name from any kind of connections with the 911 conspiracy.Well,that's what I think they're trying to do.



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 02:24 AM
link   
but didn't popular mechanics debunk the whole 911 conspiracy thing already..shouldn't that have been it??
funny how these two objective news media source come out with this around the same time. are the real facts of 911 starting to make an impact??? so now the hard core disinformation comes out to quell the sheeple.... hearst corp doesn't own cnn ..does it??????????


SMR

posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 02:31 AM
link   
Found the SHOW TRANSCRIPT

COOPER: Tonight we want to look very closely at a conspiracy theory that is exploding on the Internet and on the airwaves. A California millionaire has spent a lot of money running TV ads, suggesting that we don't really know the full facts of what happened on 9/11. Why World Trade Center building number 7 collapsed even though it wasn't hit by a plane. Why the hole in the Pentagon was so small.

In a moment you will meet the man behind the ads, an investigators who says there are answers to all those questions. But first here's Deborah Feyerick with a look at the ads, and the allegations.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The two ads suggest a government conspiracy and coverup, raising questions like why did a building two blocks from the World Trade Center Towers seem to implode?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was not hit by aircraft. It had no significant fire and no explanation for its collapse has been given.

FEYERICK: Another ad asking why plane parts at the Pentagon seem to have disappeared.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The photos show no cabin, no engines, and no tail.

FEYERICK: The 9/11 commission requested eyewitnesses to both events. A spokesman saying the official report, which makes no mention of any government conspiracy, speaks for itself. But the ads, paid for by California millionaire James Walters, are taking on a who killed JFK-like quality. And they're fueling efforts like 9/11 Citizenswatch, asking New York's attorney general to launch a criminal investigation into what they believe is a government coverup.

KYLE HENCE, 9/11 CITIZENSWATCH: I think there's clear evidence for convening grand juries, and examining the bodies of evidence that the independent community of researchers, and others -- family members, have brought forward.

FEYERICK: Even those who dismiss the more outlandish conspiracy theories say the 9/11 report is incomplete.

(on camera): Many people in the rest of the country probably think there's closure on this. Is there?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not really, because there's still a lot of unanswered questions.

FEYERICK (voice-over): Glenn Corbett is helping investigate the collapse of the Towers for the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

GLENN CORBETT, JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE: The ads seem to implicate bombs and explosives, and the use of missiles on both the Pentagon and the World Trade Center complex. And the evidence, really, just doesn't support that from what we've found so far.

FEYERICK: Not only did Walters shell out 3 million for the TV ads, which got a lot of air time before the presidential elections, he also bought newspaper ads, and helped bankroll a Zogby Poll. The results of which he found 66 percent of those requested want the 9/11 investigation reopened.

Deborah Feyerick, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Joining me from Los Angeles, the man behind the advertising campaign, Jimmy Walter. And in Miami, lawyer and investigator, Gerald Posner, author of "Why America Slept: the Reasons Behind Our Failure To Prevent 9/11."

Appreciate both of you being on the program.

Jimmy, let me start off with 2 things. You talk about the Pentagon and Tower Number 7. Let's talk with the Pentagon. If Flight 77 didn't crash into the Pentagon, as you claim it didn't, what did and what happened to the 64 passengers who have died?

JAMES W. WALTER, CREATOR OF REOPEN911.ORG: Well, I don't know. And I am not the person to ask this, I don't have the best evidence. I do know that in 1962, the United States military joint chiefs of staff commissioned a program called Operation: Northwoods, in which they planned to have military personnel dress up as civilians, get on a civilian aircraft, land it secretly, take off a drone, shoot the drone down and blame it on Cuba as a pretext to invade Cuba.

COOPER: So you think this was a pretext, to what, invade Afghanistan and Iraq?

WALTER: I'm just saying that the United States military has done it before. To ask me what happened is absurd. I don't have the evidence. And the Pentagon refuses to release the tapes that would clearly show what hit the Pentagon. Why, if they are not trying to cover something up, won't they release the tapes to prove it one way or the other?

COOPER: All right. Gerald, let me bring you in here. A lot of the conspiracy theorists on this say that there was a small hole. And that there was no large hole from the wings of the plane that hit the Pentagon, therefore, there was no plane that hit the Pentagon. You're explanation.

GERALD POSNER, AUTHOR, "WHY AMERICA SLEPT": You know Anderson, everything about this, they use evidence, they misconstrue evidence. They say, well, the hole was very small. And they show you a picture from the top, an aerial satellite photograph for the top Pentagon that looks like a small hole.

They don't show you the front of the building, which is absolutely devastated through three different layers when that plane hits. And the plane does exactly what you expect it to. It's coming down, it hits the ground at 250 miles an hour. It's 100 tons of debris. It's hitting the Pentagon, which has these 6 and 12 inch steel girders. It largely disintegrates.

But you ask the key question, what about the 64 victims on the plane? Body parts were found there at the Pentagon. They were comprised through dental records and X-rays. Do we expect that somehow the government fired a missile into the Pentagon, then took the 64 bodies that dropped down on a plane somewhere in the United States, nobody saw this happen, drop the body parts in the Pentagon, so somehow we should feel that we should invade Afghanistan? Let me assure you, after the World Trade Center Towers were hit, we did not need the Pentagon as another target to have the American people feel they should go after Afghanistan.

COOPER: Jimmy, your other major assertion is that the World Trade Building Number 7 was detonated from within. And in your commercial, you say that there's never been any public explanation given for why the building collapsed. What is your theory or belief on that?

WALTER: The building is brought down by explosives. Clearly if you look at Larry Silverstein in a movie he claims he told the fire department of the city of New York to pull the building. That's a construction industry specific term to bring down a building with explosives. Larry Silverstein is not an official of the government. He does not represent every person...

COOPER: He's the man who helped police on the World Trade Center. Gerald, let me bring in you here because I've read, this commercial said there's no evidence ever publicly been given. I've read evidence that there was diesel fuel inside the building, being stored there. What do you know about building number 7, why it collapsed?

POSNER: Building number 7 is one of the clearest examples, it's actually a slam dunk in terms of engineering. That's how it came down. I don't even know why this one is a mystery at all and I'll tell you why. It happens to be built over two electrical substations owned by the old electrical utility Coned (ph). It's an unusual design. It has a crosshatch of steel girders that are literally holding it up and after it was built, not the original designs, they stored 45,000 gallons of diesel fuel there, that was used for emergency fuel for generators, for Mayor Giuliani's emergency operations and for the Secret Service.

When that caught fire after the World Trade Center was hit and some of the damage is done to the fire retardant materials in that building there's a fire for five to seven hours. Just the opposite of what you heard in the ad. It slowly burns through those steel birders, fueled by the diesel fuel, and if you watch the tape that's on that ad, 30 seconds before the building implodes, you see the actual mechanical room crash through exactly where you expect it to. There's a clear engineering explanation for that building.

COOPER: We're going to have to leave it there tonight. Gerald Posner, appreciate you joining and Jimmy Walter, as well, thank you very much.

WALTER: It's totally wrong.

COOPER: Well, I know that is your theory and you have been airing those commercials.

(AUDIO GAP)

COOPER: Right. And I think what he is saying is that the wings disintegrated while hitting the ground. That's what I heard him saying. But people can go to your website, they have seen your commercials and you have spent $3 million propagating this. And we appreciate you joining us. Thank you very much. We are going to be doing a special series on conspiracy theories after thanksgiving, and we'd like to hear from you. What's the big story that you think has been covered up that you want us to look into. Email us now. 360@CNN.com

Source - 911Truth.org
edit to add source

[edit on 23-2-2005 by SMR]



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join