Damning Evidence for 9/11 Conspiracy

...But you still seem to ignore the fact that he said it on 2 separate occasions, both were full statements regarding the events of that morning.

The single most devastating "terrorist" attack on US soil and the president of the United States, can't remember where he first viewed the footage, pull the other one, in fact I take it that none of his aids or associates could remember either....

Bushisms tend to be, the wrong word at the wrong time, or a mis-pronounciation.

These were full statements.

It never ceases to amaze me how accepting people are of his "errors"...


[edit on 2-6-2005 by Koka]

perhaps those people who think he just mispoke would like to explain this little news conference of March 13, 2002 (yes, thats only 6 months after the evil mastermind bin laden dared to attack inside america) -

Q Mr. President, in your speeches now you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that? Also, can you tell the American people if you have any more information, if you know if he is dead or alive? Final part -- deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really eliminate the threat of --

THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission.

Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is -- as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide -- if, in fact, he's hiding at all.

So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.

And there will be other battles in Afghanistan. There's going to be other struggles like Shahikot, and I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahikot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly. We're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped. We have a good strategy. We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means.

www.whitehouse.gov...

id really like to hear some americans opinions about what exactly bush said here and how they feel about it - unfortunately each time i bring this up, most seem to go either very quiet or change the subject....

ed to shorten quote and add link provided by member

[edit on 3-7-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by Koka
Is this the footage?

1st Plane

ummmmmm.......Has anyone noticed just before 19 secs into the tape there is a MASSIVE explosion....AFTER the plane hits even after the initial fireball which seemed to make very little sound.

From 17 secs. to 20 secs. Its there but what gets me is its one hell of a blast.

AND watch the bottom left of the screen at just before 30 seconds. SOMETHING flys clear across the screen!!!!!! You may have to slow it down! just keep pausing and playing

WHAT IS IT!!!!!!! YOU can't miss it..........



Please tell me I'm seeing things, it goes from one side of the screen to the other, a small black object......................PLEASE HELP!!

[edit on 30/6/05 by Hunting Veritas]

This thing, if the video is slowed enough you can clearly see an object fly from one side of the screen to the other???

It starts in the bottom left corner.

Another screen shot




Sorry they aren't any bigger.

It is extremely important to now and then debunk the debunkers. We now know the conspiracy against the moonlanding is false. We know Elvis and Tupac arent around so much anymore.

Now I was one of those that thought thinkign naythign fishy about the official 9/11 story is going too far. Then I started doing some research, and the rabbit hole went pretty deep. The top things I think that point to something
really not right is:

WTC 7. Forget that silly pentagon remote control/windowless plane hooey, WTC 7 is the real hardcore smoking gun.

NORAD stood down. EVERY week we hear about air space scares over DC. Whenever a small plane goes even slightly off course, here comes the F-16's!
Why was Norad conducting WTC and Pentagon attack drills in 2002 and the morning of 9/11? Bush and Rice "Well, we never imagined anything like this could happen!"

The pakistani intelligence officer who met with both top level US politicians and wired a lot of money to 9/11 ringleader Atta. Its also widely believed that Osama met with CIA officials months prior to 9/11. Its a fact Taliban officials met at the white house months before 9/11.

The warnings. Many politicians, the joint chiefs of staff, ISrael's Mossad and their workers, etc all knew something was going down on 9/11.

Geroge Bush' brother Marvin ran security for all the WTC complexes, whose contract ended on 9/11.

Firefighters, seizmagraphs, experts, chopper reporters, etc all point to or elude to secondary devices.

Originally posted by 8bitagent
Firefighters, seizmagraphs, experts, chopper reporters, etc all point to or elude to secondary devices.

Re Open 911 PDF ch.6

According to the official version, which the 9/11 commission hardly comments on, the twin towers fell because of the impact of the planes and of the effects of the subsequent fires. The problem is that this is physically impossible, as we will show. The fall of the towers thus depends on some other cause: controlled demolition of some kind is the only possible hypothesis. The key to seeing beyond the official version is to chronicle the
presence of secondary explosions, since these are the tell-tale signs of controlled demolition. When we examine the literature, we find a multitude of references to such secondary explosions.

Louie Cacchioli, aged 51, was a firefighter attached to Engine Company 47, based uptown in Harlem. “We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck,” Cacchioli recounted later. “I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the twenty-fourth floor to get in a position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there were bombs set in the building.” Cacchioli was trapped in an elevator but
was able to escape with the help of some fireman’s tools. (People Weekly, September 24,
2001)

Auxiliary Fireman Lt. Paul Isaac Jr. also spoke of bombs in an interview with internet reporter Randy Lavello. Isaac had served with Engine Company 10 in lower Manhattan during the late 1990s, so he knew the area around the WTC. Isaac said that many New York firemen were very concerned about the ongoing cover-up of why the World Trade Center collapsed. “Many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings,” he revealed, “but they are afraid for their jobs to admit it because the higher-ups forbid
discussion of this fact. There were definitely bombs in those buildings.” Among those suppressing real discussion about what had happened, Isaac cited the neocon heavy James Woolsey, who had been CIA Director under Clinton, who had become the New York Fire Department’s antiterrorism consultant. (Marrs 34)

I know its a long copy-paste, I am only trying to show evidence. These are witnesses to secondary devices.

This is the most damning 'Evidence' I have come across. Actual witnesses saying there were secondary explosions or bombs planted in the buildings.

Peace

What more do you want?

ed to shorten lengthy quote

[edit on 2-7-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]

I don't know if anyone else mentioned this in this thread because I haven't read everything, but the best documentary I've seen is Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police state. The evidence is overwhealming

if you wanna skip straight to the 9/11 conspiracy watch video 2

www.netctr.com...

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas

Originally posted by Koka
Is this the footage?

1st Plane

ummmmmm.......Has anyone noticed just before 19 secs into the tape there is a MASSIVE explosion....AFTER the plane hits even after the initial fireball which seemed to make very little sound.

Uh, maybe it's because the camera was about a half mile or so away?

The speed of sound being somewhat slower than the speed of light means that you would see the explosion before you hear it.

“Many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings,” he revealed, “but they are afraid for their jobs to admit it because the higher-ups forbid discussion of this fact. There were definitely bombs in those buildings.”

B.S.

If you think that the rank and file FDNY fireman is going to sit on his butt if he though that 343 of his fellow firemen (including many blood relatives) were killed as part of a government coverup, then you don't know many firemen.

There is no way in hell they would be "afraid for their jobs to admit it because the higher-ups forbid discussion of this fact."

Get real people. How many of you actually think that this is true?

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas
Another screen shot

Sorry they aren't any bigger.

Dude... Watch the video at full screen please. This is obviously just a bird taking off. You can even see the wings flapping!

EDIT:

Also what you say as being a second explosion, I think you just have to give a few seconds for all the fuel to ignite.


The evidence I haven't seen debunked so far is the pre contact explosion. Look where the plane hits a second before the nose meets the wall...

[edit on 2-7-2005 by ihatescifi]

Any time something questionable happens, the axiom "follow the money" comes to mind. Who has benefited from 9/11?

George WMD Bush has probably been the primary beneficiary. To say he's mediocre as President would be an immeasurable complement. Instead of being a 1 term forgotten bonehead, he's now a 2 term war President with the possibility of dictatorship within his grasp should he choose to take it.

Israel has also benefited in a major way, and could actually be behind 9/11 with Bin Laden in their back pocket (who better to teach a thing or two to his Saudi family that has rejected him than their arch nemesis?). Israel probably has the intelligence infrastructure to have pulled off 9/11, and could easily have recruited end-times oriented Christians within high levels in the US to do their bidding (the President included) under the delusion that Jesus would show up as a result.

I don't think it's a coincidence that Bin Laden has not been found.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
“Many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings,” he revealed, “but they are afraid for their jobs to admit it because the higher-ups forbid discussion of this fact. There were definitely bombs in those buildings.”

B.S.

Why would they say otherwise. In fact why would we even be here discussing the facts if we knew what happened on that tragic day.

If you think that the rank and file FDNY fireman is going to sit on his butt if he though that 343 of his fellow firemen (including many blood relatives) were killed as part of a government coverup, then you don't know many firemen.

There is no way in hell they would be "afraid for their jobs to admit it because the higher-ups forbid discussion of this fact."

Oh really.................................

Do you know how fear works, do you know how fear can change the way you think feel and act. If you keep an animal in fear, you control that animal. Humans are animals.

You have a choice.

Bring justice for those that died on that tragic day to prove the Government was in on it, they rigged the buildings and had foreknowledge. If you done this, you would be doing it on the grounds that you know your family and friends could be in fatal danger.

or

Save the people you know are alive and happy, just trying to get along with your life. By keeping quiet.

So you had buildings 1, 2, 6 & 7. All events happened with anomolies. Yet no one questions. No one stops the Mayor for evidence. No one questions Bush as to how he saw a plane flying into the first tower yet the footage was not release until the following day.

Yeah to theory there. Its fact. GW Bush lied. Mayor Gulliani should be arrested and imprisoned for removing evidence from a crimes scene.

It is 100% unlawful to remove 'evidence' from a crime scene yet one of the biggest attacks known to man has had its evidence removed and thrown to china for immediate recyling. IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.

peace

[edit on 3/7/05 by Hunting Veritas]

Originally posted by HowardRoark

“Many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings,” he revealed, “but they are afraid for their jobs to admit it because the higher-ups forbid discussion of this fact. There were definitely bombs in those buildings.”

B.S.

If you think that the rank and file FDNY fireman is going to sit on his butt if he though that 343 of his fellow firemen (including many blood relatives) were killed as part of a government coverup, then you don't know many firemen.

There is no way in hell they would be "afraid for their jobs to admit it because the higher-ups forbid discussion of this fact."

Get real people. How many of you actually think that this is true?

Watch the video I posted, it goes over the firefighter stuff. Like how the firefighters' tapes suddendly malfunctioned after the event? And on the one tape released you hear the firefighters radioing in that they almost had the fires extinguised.

Also there are interviews of the firefighters on tape talking about how it sounded like bombs going off. Not to mention no modern structure has ever fell from fire. Buildings have burned for DAYS (Winsor building in Spain for example) and had it's structure still hold up. Again just watch the video -- I can't explain it on here as good. Please be open minded

I hope it's ok that I bump this thread again. I have read through it all and nowhere did I see a reference to precisely what I have to say.

Originally posted by Lethys
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.

This is the biggest issue to me. Not only because he should have gotten to work on managing the crisis, though.

The Dog that Did Not Bark

Bush's visit to Booker Elementary School was in the media. It had been announced days earlier and anyone could have known where he was at that time. I believe there was even a film crew there for the photo op, although I'm not sure about that.

Let's assume that he's totally innocent. He gets the news that another plane had hit the WTC and America was under attack. So... America is under attack, there are some unknown number of planes hitting important targets in the US. He's the President! If for no other reason, he should have been taken to safety immediately!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's the Secret Service's job to protect the life of the President. Why didn't they swoop in and whisk him post haste to an undisclosed location? Why did he sit there for 7 minutes?

Many say he didn't want to scare the children. It takes 10 seconds to say, "Well kids, I've got some presidential business to handle. It's been fun. Buh-bye"! He didn't have to stand up and scream, "We're all gonna die"! and run from the room.

Did he just sit there because he knew he was safe right where he was?

I apologize for going off-topic, but alias' post required a response.

Originally posted by alias101
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.

President Clinton's Administration actually did more to combat terrorism than any other in history. In the mid 90's, Clinton authorized funding to directly deal with Bin Laden. A section of the CIA offices at Langley became known as "Bin Laden Row" with over 100 officers dedicated directly to the job of monitoring Bin Laden and his network. Following the bombing of the Cole, it became their job to capture Bin Laden.

Bin Laden Row was dismantled by the Bush Administration in 2000 during the first round of budget and tax cuts.

(Clinton) let the airport security go down, and he also had the chance to capture Bin Landin.

What you are referring to is this: in the mid 90's, a man (whose name I don't have with me here at work, but I will find tonight) appraoched the CIA and said that the Sudanese government had Bin Laden in it's custody and he was willing to work out an agreement. It has always been (and still is) official policy not to deal with individuals when National Security is considered. The CIA contacted Sudan and was told that they didn't have Bin Laden, nor had ever had him.

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.

The morning of 9/11 I was setting up my mom's new computer. She usually left for work around 7:00am, and woke me up when she left, and asked me to get it put together and get AOL instaled on it. At around 8:30 I was in an AOL chat room, messing around with test settings and stuff, when someone in purple writing said "A plane just hit the World Trade Center." I was sure they were mistaken, but turned the TV on anyway just to see. I can distinctly remember the anchorperson saying they were trying to find footage of the first plane hitting, but none existed. I was watching, live, when the second plane hit.

There are so many questions left unanswered, and discrepancies it is overwhelming. It could simply be a product of being such a massive thing that chaos theory applies, and some things are bound to be inaccurate. However, after years of looking at and sifting through the data, something is wrong here.

My feeling is that Bush was trying to talk in a manner that would connect him to the people, after all he is a politician, and that's what they do. My problem with Bush isn't what he says, it's his adamant disposition against admitting when he got something wrong. Someone who believes they are always right is usually wrong about it.

Clinton had a chance to nail Bin Laden and blew it. They had intel as to where and when he was going to be in a certain location in Afghanistan, and they waited until it was too late and fired THREE Tomahawk missiles at the building he was supposed to be in, and hit it after he was already gone.

sorry for the off topic post, but just a little more about Clinton and his anti-terrorism efforts.

Originally posted by RockerDom
My feeling is that Bush was trying to talk in a manner that would connect him to the people, after all he is a politician, and that's what they do. My problem with Bush isn't what he says, it's his adamant disposition against admitting when he got something wrong. Someone who believes they are always right is usually wrong about it.

Yes, he is a true politician, talks but never listens.

Please explain why he made the same "mistake" twice?

My 2 cents worth:

1. Bush needed an excuse to go into Iraq (oil and other needs)
2. Bush and others realize that a US attack will convince people to go to war.
3. 9/11 happens.
4. Bush gets what he wants, an excuse to go to war, and the US, and congress backs him 100%.
5. Bush gets rights to more oil, cheaper prices, rights to land, converts Iraq to a democracy.
6. Mission complete.

7. On to the next middle eastern country.

.... and suddenly www.911inplanesite.com is missing in action.