It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Damning Evidence for 9/11 Conspiracy

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on May, 19 2005 @ 05:23 PM
Here's the clip of him speaking about the plane:

I think he meant to say 'I saw that an airplane hit the tower'.

posted on May, 19 2005 @ 05:31 PM
Koka nice thread.... I actually have a copy of 911 In Plane Site on DVD. I have watched it about 3 times. And each time I watch it the more frightened I get. This movie itself is not scary in a sense. It is the sense at which it is presented. Questions are asked, yet there are no answers given for them.

If you want to watch it you can find it easily online, or if you are having trouble finding it. u2u me and I will gladly give you a copy of it.

posted on May, 19 2005 @ 06:58 PM

Originally posted by Koka
As I have mentioned previously, THIS IS DAMING EVIDENCE, if this be true, the President of the USA knew full well this was going to happen.

I don't know if it would be damning evidence of anything, except his poor memory. To say he 'saw' film of the first plane strike before going into the classroom is wrong by my memory, because I'm pretty sure there was no film at that point, and I recall Bush saying he "was told by an aide that a plane had hit the north tower" before he went into the classroom. I also remember that nobody was reporting it as an intentional act until the second plane hit and it was clearly no accident.

A slip of the tongue or a deliberate lie, it still isn't evidence of any plot. Now, if he'd said "I saw the first plane hit on my secret live video feed from the WTC that was setup to watch the joint Mossad/CIA false flag operation that would be used to launch a holy war against Islam andf enslave the American population.", you might have my attention..

posted on May, 23 2005 @ 02:24 PM
Sorry for taking a little time getting back, I've been a little busy.

Thanks Ace of Base, good find...

Here is a verbatim transcript of the two references he makes regarding the watching of the plane hit

Ace of Base' video link above
"I was sitting outside the err **stutters a bit** classroom waiting to go in and I saw an airplane hit the tower **stutters a bit** the TV was obviously on, I used to fly myself, I said there is one terrible pilot and err it said it must have been a horrible accident"

In Plane Sight - Statement
Student: What was the first thing that went through your head when you heard that a plane crashed into the first.....**kid mumbles**

Mr Bush: Well, I was sitting in a school house in Florida, I'd gone down to tell my little brother what to do, and er **audience laughs** just kidding Jeb, **audience laughs** and err, it's the mother in me, anyway err, I err, I was sitting there and my chief of staff - well first of all when we walked in the classroom I had seen this plane fly into the first building, there was a TV set on, and err, you know I thought it was pilot error


I've found a well detailed timeline of Mr Bush' movements on 9/11, which makes reference to the aforementioned statement, giving links to each of the references. .

Complete 911 Timeline: Bushs movements and sayings on 9/11

The main mention of our statements reference appears at 9:01am.

Timeline Reference - 9:01am

I now need to confirm the dates the two statements were made.

posted on May, 24 2005 @ 03:43 AM
Now, we have numerous accounts of Bush saying he was in the classroom when he heard of the second tower being hit

Quote from Boston Herald
"THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Jordan. Well, Jordan, you're not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. (On Sept. 11, Bush was visiting the Booker Elementary School to promote literacy programs.) And my Chief of Staff, Andy Card - actually, I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower - the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident.

"But I was whisked off there, I didn't have much time to think about it. And I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my Chief of Staff, who is sitting over here, walked in and said, `A second plane has hit the tower, America is under attack.' ''

What did Bush see and When did he see it?

So, it appears that he definitely watched footage of a plane hitting the tower prior to going into the classroom and he was definitely told about the second plane hitting the second tower when he was sitting in the classroom.

So, what exactly is Bush hiding from the public?
Did he have prior knowledge of the "surprise attacks"?

What footage was he watching prior to entering the classroom, that no one else has managed to view as yet?
This remains the only real question I want answered.

I believe I have given sufficient evidence to show that Bush is highly questionable in this area and that there is indeed a web of lies being spun, not very well might I add, and that the truth about 9/11 is being withheld, to protect those involved and there ultimate motives.

Personally, I found certain areas of "In Plane Sight" inconclusive, ie. the plume of smoke/debris that appeared prior to the towers coming down and the pod attachment which was apparently under the fuselage of the second plane.

I do however question what exactly hit the Pentagon, allegedly Flight AA77, and where exactly was the debris of the downed flight UA93?

posted on May, 29 2005 @ 03:15 PM
Unless someone knows better, I can quite safely assume that what I have spoken of in this thread is so close to the truth that even you guys cannot debunk it..?

For those in the UK, interested, there is a documentary on Channel 5 at 10pm tomorrow - 30th May 2005.

Documentary providing a minute-by-minute reconstruction of what happened on board American Airlines Flight 11, the first of four planes hijacked on September 11th 2001. Using actual recordings and transcripts, the extraordinary efforts of the crew on that fateful day are recognised and understood for the first time.

I don't believe it has anything to do with the conspiracies, but mitght prove to be an interesting programme.

[edit on 29-5-2005 by Koka]

posted on May, 30 2005 @ 12:57 AM
I agree that the phantom footage sounds suspicious, but I tend to agree with the posters that have suggested that Bush may well have simply misspoken or misremembered the events.

I remember seeing the second plane hit live on CNN, and, if my memory is correct, they had some footage of the first plane hitting. Later on, they found footage from the training video shoot that showed the first impact.

To just for a moment give the benefit of the doubt, I would say that it's possible that Bush is honestly unclear about the order of events on that eventful morning. As I recall, reports were flying about carbombs on the steps of the House of Representatives, threats to Baltimore Washington Airport, and a strike on the White House. In addition to all of that information, true and false, emerging, the President must have been positively overloaded with information from various sources.

What has made me curious over the intervening years is how quickly we came to the conclusion that Osama was behind the attacks. Given that I have not devoted a great deal of time to researching the question (I frankly find the subject too painful for a lot of study) but I have not yet seen any real evidence that would have been available on that day that was firm enough to release to press agencies that there was already a chief suspect. Honestly, that whole aspect had me thinking about Dallas, and how quickly the police had their suspect, knew that he was alone, and had a full dossier on him to release to the press that very day...

posted on May, 30 2005 @ 05:56 AM
So, you will forgive him these mispoken words, rather than question the validity of his statements, thats plural.

Mispoken words they are indeed, as he should not have divulged the order in which he saw events take place that day.

Two separate occasions, thats two, he claimed to see footage of a plane or the first plane hit the tower prior to going into the classroom. Now you believe that one of the most powerful men in the world was not told, between statements, that he was in error, and that not one of his aids worked out that he had in fact seen no footage prior to going into the classroom?

Watcher_Don i'm not sure you've read or understood the thread, as we have found zero footage, other than the Naudet Brother's footage that shows the first plane hitting the first tower. Others on this thread have also made claim to seeing the first plane footage that morning, but have conceded to being mistaken, realising that the footage they saw was in fact that of the second plane hitting the second tower. See if you can find some, let me know and I will consider removing my claims regarding these statements.

Also, get yourself a copy of "In Plane Sight" and listen to the statement made by Bush and tell me if he sounds confused, then check out the other statement, and tell me if he can make that mistake twice.

I can understand your claims to him being confused, but lets be serious, we are all a little confused regarding him still being the president.

posted on May, 30 2005 @ 12:54 PM
I understand the thread topic quite well, and I am not questioning the validity of the question. I do, however, think that memories, particularly memories of traumatic events, tend to conflate and change over time, until people can convince themselves that they saw or experienced certain things they did not. I am merely voicing my own opinion that this "evidence" might...and I DO say might, and not is, but might be evidence of nothing more than a man of limited intelligence elaborating on a confused memory of a very fluid and traumatic experience. I have heard many, many persons claim that they saw the first plane hit live on TV, and when reminded of the fact that there was no live coverage of the first impact, they typically retreat from the position and say that they must have seen the second plane live, etc.

posted on May, 30 2005 @ 01:00 PM

Originally posted by Koka

Two separate occasions, thats two, he claimed to see footage of a plane or the first plane hit the tower prior to going into the classroom...Others on this thread have also made claim to seeing the first plane footage that morning, but have conceded to being mistaken, realising that the footage they saw was in fact that of the second plane hitting the second tower. See if you can find some, let me know and I will consider removing my claims regarding these statements.

Koka, just to be clear, I am not suggesting that you should remove any claims. I am expressing that I do not necessarily find the claims conclusive, and for exactly the reasons you yourself state. Others have been confused about what they saw that day, and yet that does not prove that they saw hidden footage or had access to material that was not made public - they misspoke.

posted on May, 31 2005 @ 12:30 AM

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
@ koka,
I think NBC was showing the recordings after the inital attack, since they old that tday show or whatever there in the AM.. Then ABC, FOX and others started the 2 weeks of nonstop onslaught of 9/11

The ones who 1st broke the 1st attack up close by them brothers is i think CBS.. and from what I understand those 2 guys got a #load of cash for that lil piece of tape.

Bush knew the attack was going to happen, however he knew damn well Terrorists weren't going to carry it out.

This part is a intese dsicussion about what went wrong that day. We can look at alot of diffrent things about that day and see what happened.

Norad didnt intercept the planes.

The plane that hit the pentagon.....
From what we understand here is that the pilots that took the plane over were morons when it came to flying. and how the plane supossively did a 270 degree spin to hit the pentagon is still a mystery. Considering many Flight instructors amd pilots have said that is an impossible feat.

Now we get into the actual buildings.

We all know from years of hisory that no building has ever colapsed due to any type of fire, unless it was some kinda house or something..

Now we have 1 not 2 BUT 3 buildings that fell over because of such case. People say that it was jet feul that cause them to fall, fine I will go wit that this 1 time. What about WTC7?????? This building was nowhere near the other 2 towers when they fell and after a fire in it for a few hrs it falls..

Anyway this is just what we saw........

There are other things to consider like Ashcroft warned before 9/11 not to fly, that satanic guy was Banned on 9/11 also warned to fly. There is a money trail that leads to Bush/Bin Laden for 9/11. Usama Bin Laden is a known US CIA Asset, He was seen weeks before 9/11 in a hospital talking to CIA operatives.

Anyway this should get your boat running on here..

and to think I only came on this site to learn why flight 93 was shot down....

//ed quote, please see your u2u//

[edit on 17-5-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]

Add to your list even more DAMING damage:

Marvin P. Bush, youngest brother of the president.... was a principle in the company that:

1. Handled all security for the WTC.
2. Handled all security for United Airlines (the planes that got "hijacked")
3. Handled all security for Dulles International Airport. Which meant they had first hand knowledge of all security information for all other airlines.

It's been recently found Wirt D. Walker was also a principle in the same company, along with Marvin Bush. The Walker family are direct relatives with the Bush family. The current presdent was named "Walker" as a show of their closeness in bloodlines, and money.

[edit on 31-5-2005 by OpenSecret2012]

posted on May, 31 2005 @ 05:24 AM
Watcher_Don, may I ask if you have watched the footage and listened to the audio of both statements?

I have yet to ascertain when the "In Plane Sight" audio recording of his statement was made, but the video of him making the statement was made 3 months after the event. More than enough time for your average Joe Bloggs to have run over the events of that day numerous times.

Now, remembering that this particular Joe Bloggs is President of the USA and talks to people on a national and global scale, do you really believe he is capable of reciting his version of events, incorrectly, on 2 separate occasions?

More importantly, this sequence of events has been recorded in the mainstream media, he watched footage before going into the classroom and was told about the second hit whilst in the classroom.

What worries me about this topic, is the large amount of posters who are willing to dismiss his comments based on the fact that he is rekonwn for saying the wrong thing at the wrong time, many of which seem to be content with having this man as their president....

OpenSecret2012 interesting information, I'll look a little deeper into that.

posted on May, 31 2005 @ 06:01 PM

posted on May, 31 2005 @ 06:12 PM

Originally posted by NWguy83
Conspiracy nuts read this

I'm sorry, but that has been debunked many a times. The truth of the matter at hand is.. there is a conspiracy regarding 9/11. Plane and simple.
If you do not believe this then either you are too ignorant to care, too stupid to think for yourself, or a disinfo agent working for the government.

posted on May, 31 2005 @ 06:45 PM

Originally posted by NWguy83
Conspiracy nuts read this

Plenty of people here have seen that, and even if all of their explanations were accurate, it still doesn’t discredit a conspiracy.

It is interesting how he changed/confused those events, but I think the bigger issue, as I’m sure others have thought is, WHY DID HE STAY THERE. Surly under the event of a possible attack, the president should immediately get to work to manage the situation. Does his inaction just show him panicking and thinking that the puppet masters will take care of it, or was he through inaction, trying to ensure the towers got hit.

If what he said about seeing the first tower get hit, then that makes his inaction even more inexcusable. I admit that it is possible for him to confuse it maybe a little, or decided that this is the version the press would here. But still…

posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 08:04 AM

Originally posted by NWguy83
Conspiracy nuts read this

1: Are you aware of the 1 line response rule?

2: Could you please provide a direct link to the "Popular Mechanics" site where they discuss and debunk the claims regarding the topic in hand i.e. Where Bush claims on 2 separate occasions to have watched the plane hit the tower prior to going into the classroom.

3: Your link is quite informative and am quite willing to accept certain areas remain inconclusive and I agree with some of what they say. I do not accept there explaination regarding the 75 foot hole that the plane initially created on hitting the Pentagon, they refer to a report which has a great many discrepancies in it and was not produced independantly. I have seen footage and photographs showing the building prior to collapse but after impact, what ever hit the Pentagon did not produce a 75ft hole, that space only occured after the collapse. It's also quite surprising to see that they claim the windows were blast proof, which I have no problem with, but I do question the 9ft of reinforced steel concrete which did give way, I am amazed that glass can be made to withstand a greater blast than reinforced steel concrete.

4: When responding, lengthen your answers. What we are actually looking for are answers, that lead to the truth, whether that truth contributes to the conspiracy or not, so cut the quips about conspiracy nuts and respond in a dignified manner.

posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 08:29 AM
Just bc he was President at the time, doesn't mean its his fault. It partial President Clintons fault. He had plenty of chances to stop all of this from happening but he didn't. He let the airport security go down, and he also had the chance to capture Bin Landin. But he didn't. I don't understand what the big deal is about Bush watching the video of the North Tower being hit. I mean we saw it on t.v. right after it happened. This is probably what happened with bush. Someone came and told him what happened. He probably then watched the footage, or it could possibly be he watched it on the plane flying back home.

posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 08:54 AM
I remember in December of 2001, getting into an argument with a co-worker who claimed that he saw the first plane crash into the first tower LIVE. Now I have no doubt that he saw the live footage of the aftermath and the second plane crash. But we all know that the first crash was not live and was not shown until later. Yet to this day he still adamantly believes that his memories of the events are accurate.

Memories are not infallible. My own family has memories of the same event that differ from each other. Yes, I believe that there was probably some complicity on our leadership's part. But I don't base it on someone's faulty memory.

posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 10:56 AM
To the last 2 posters -


posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 05:04 PM
Are you implying that I did not read the first post because I didn't jump on the Bush Bash Wagon and agree with you? People in the spotlight say stupid things. It doesn't always mean that it is what they had intend to say. Most of these people can't say anything intelligent without their scripts. Google Bushisms and see how many hits you get.

I think that he made a mistake, just like my co-worker did. Either he has a faulty memory, or he screwed up trying to be witty. Either way it doesn't prove that he knew or was complicit.

Was our leadership complicit in 9/11? Probably, but you will have to come up with something better than what GW said about a televised news program to convince me.

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in