Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

If 9/11 was a inside job, How many people were involved?

page: 6
3
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 02:18 PM
link   
A simple LIHOP theory would take very, very few people to pull off. If you think about it, MIHOP wouldn't even have to involve the hijackers knowledge of what was actually happening. If you keep it simple.

But this isn't the case in most of the theories that are more prominently discussed here.

Family members with contradicting accounts of phone calls from flight 93 are called liars, there are government disinfo agents all over the internet. ATC at Boston Center, New York Center, DC Center, and Cleveland Center. The multitude of Traycon's along the flight paths and the ATC main control center. If the planes didn't do what they were supposed to all of these people are keeping their mouths shut. Along with FDNY, NYPD and the other multitude of first responders. Eyewitnesses.

While some of these theories wouldn't take a lot of people to "pull off" it would damn sure take a lot of people to shut up about what they've seen or not seen.

Some of you are getting real conservative with your beliefs on this thread.

----------------------------------------------

While I completely agree with the fact that Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen, you really can't compare the two in the this discussion. FDR goaded another nation into attacking us. All this entailed was a policy and a few orders that were kept entirely in diplomatic and military channels. There wasn't a huge contingent of civilian and low-level government employees that were involved. Not to mention the fact it happened on a tiny island a thousand miles off the mainland that wasn't even yet a state. It was a military attack on a military installation. Completely different things.

9-11 occured in some of the most populous areas of the nation in broad daylight on a workday.




posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 03:54 PM
link   
A few things I would like to mention:


The Strategy of Tension in Italy, several false-flag terrorist bombings that took place between 1969-1980 in order to provoke the public to rally against communists. Confirmed by a former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence that NATO (Operation Gladio) with the help of U.S. and foreign special forces carried out this attack. Italy's own government involvement was not outed until the 1990's. Sources one, two & three

The Lavon Affair (Operation Susannah) in Egypt, 1954, agents of an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind "evidence" implicating the Arabs as the culprits. The operation was not outed until the 1980s, where Isser Harel openly admits that Egypt was aware of the operation. This was politically damaging to Israel, especially among Great Britian and the United States. Sources: one, two& three

The Bay of Pigs, 1961. More importantly: please read this _/b] relating to the Bay of Pigs: here. As cited:

a. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered airfraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the slected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted into a drone.
b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendevous south of Flordia. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to a minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its origional status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will begin transmitting on the international distress frequency a "MAY DAY" message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by a destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has hapened to the aircraft insted of the US trying to "sell" the incident.


There is also an article on the 9/11 commission report that you may like to read that names whistle-blowers or intellegence personel that were blaitently ignored: link.


It is a commonplace that "you can't keep secrets in Washington" or "in a democracy," that "no matter how sensitive the secret, you're likely to read it the next day in the New York Times." These truisms are flatly false. They are in fact cover stories, ways of flattering and misleading journalists and their readers, part of the process of keeping secrets well. Of course eventually many secrets do get out that wouldn't in a fully totalitarian society. Bureaucratic rivalries, especially over budget shares, lead to leaks. Moreover, to a certain extent the ability to keep a secret for a given amount of time diminishes with the number of people who know it. As secret keepers like to say, "Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead." But the fact is that the overwhelming majority of secrets do not leak to the American public. This is true even when the information withheld is well known to an enemy and when it is clearly essential to the functioning of the congressional war power and to any democratic control of foreign policy. The reality unknown to the public and to most members of Congress and the press is that secrets that would be of the greatest import to many of them can be kept from them reliably for decades by the executive branch, even though they are known to thousands of insiders.

--Daniel Ellsberg
Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers



If you would like to call me a "9/11 Denier", then so be it. I have no desire to argue with anyone about an informal and silly title you are only using to make yourself feel better about your arguement and mark your opposition as mindless, crazy people. The fact is, I am "denying", as you call it. I refuse to believe the 9/11 comission report is wholly true. I deny our government the satisfaction of swaying me over to their side of the story. It's been proven over and over again through history, not theories, that governments attack their own civillian population as well as destroying property and spreading lies for their own gains. I have included a few examples I saw fit, but I'm sure there are many, many more. How many people do I think it took to pull off 9/11 if it was an inside job? Not many.

It may take years for the truth to be uncovered, if ever.

Research it, look it up. Do your homework, whatever. Give us links and proof of documents and articles. But stop the bickering, being rude and calling eachother "newbies" (that actually sort of made me laugh: Newbie and the alternate spellings are often used for one of two different meanings. Newbie is usually used to refer to a new person who has recently joined a group or board). Be civil, and keep your tinfoil hats on.



edit: spelling ect.


[edit on 14-10-2007 by DarkFlame]



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarkFlame
If you would like to call me a "9/11 Denier", then so be it. I have no desire to argue with anyone about an informal and silly title you are only using to make yourself feel better about your arguement and mark your opposition as mindless, crazy people. The fact is, I am "denying", as you call it. I refuse to believe the 9/11 comission report is wholly true. I deny our government the satisfaction of swaying me over to their side of the story. It's been proven over and over again through history, not theories, that governments attack their own civillian population as well as destroying property and spreading lies for their own gains. I have included a few examples I saw fit, but I'm sure there are many, many more. How many people do I think it took to pull off 9/11 if it was an inside job? Not many.


If it were a small contained operation that involved hijacked planes that flew into three buildings and a field, then ya it wouldn't take many people at all to do it. This is a real possible scenario, and one I tend to believe happened. As do a lot of people that don't buy the more audacious theories.

But when you get a lot of civilians involved in keeping quiet about things that happened that shouldn't have happened, it's a totally different story.

I don't fully understand this thread. We have people that prop up all kinds of theories promoting the most likely, but least fanciful, LIHOP. Some of these scenarios would take many more people than others and they're not being discussed in favor of a small, contained black OP.

If anything, using historical events supports that the government was complicit in the event, but didn't directly do it. Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen by FDR. Woodrow Wilson basically manuevered the US into WWI. They both knew our policies would eventually lead us to war. Much like allowing a planned terrorist attack to happen would lead us to war/war-time powers.

The link to the article from DailyKos war very interesting, DarkFlame.



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi

Originally posted by seanm
Dodging? I was make an obvious point. To help you out, I'll repeat the post:


I read your post. If you were paying attention, you'd know I responded to it.


Obviously, it went clear over your head. I gave you an example and you ignore it. Too bad for you.


Originally posted by seanm
Now, just how many people do you reckon would have to be both in on it OR know something was not right after the fact IF?

Please be specific with numbers. Don't exclude anyone, ok?



So you want me to give numbers, but you won't give proof to your thousands estimate?


You're the one who thinks he knows. Prove me wrong. Demonstrate it. Tell us ALL that would be necessary. Don't sit there and whine about it.

I gave you an example and you pretended to ignore it. It looks like you have a huge problem not being able to tell us how many were involved nor refuting my example. Your display of classic 9/11 denial should be helpful to everyone here and illustrate why you're all stuck in the exact same spot you were six years ago with nothing to show for your efforts.

Wake up to reality, Novus.


Originally posted by seanm
Is that why you can't tell me? Gosh....



I've told you. You fail to listen.


You've told us nothing. You've shown us exactly zero.


Originally posted by seanm
The burden of proof is on you. After all YOU believe it's a conspiracy, not me.

Get back too us when you've got the numbers.




You think 19 hijackers did it. Going by the correct definition of "conspiracy", you believe it's a conspiracy too.

you just blew your credibility.


On the contrary, *SNIP*

What we have is the overwhelming evidence from hundreds of different independent sources that converges on the conclusion that bin Laden organized, financed, and conceived of the conspiracy to attack the U.S. with planes hijacked by 19 adequately trained hijackers to take over the controls and pilot the aircraft.

What YOU 9/11 Deniers have is a conspiracy theory based on assertions, "anomalies" with no meaning, misrepresentation of virtually ALL of the facts, not one piece of hard evidence to support your claims, and you both refuse to address the evidence inconvenient to your "conspiracy theory", and get upset when you are confronted with it.

But don't feel badly. Like you, no 9/11 Denier can make the distinction between a "conspiracy" and a "conspiracy theory." You all so easily fell for the hype of your religious leaders in your "movement."

Mod Edit: General ATS discussion etiquette – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: Courtesy Is Mandatory – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: Posting Conduct… Play The Ball – Please Review This Link.




[edit on 14/10/2007 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi

Originally posted by seanm
Such as no one saw a 757 hit the Pentagon but saw something else or nothing at all - just as is claimed here by other 9/11 Deniers.


Find where in this thread I said that, and maybe you'll be right.

Good luck


No problem. I never said you did.

Better bone up on your reading comprehension, don't you think?



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by seanm

is chartered to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks,


So the 9/11 commission was supposed to complete a full account of the terrorist attacks. I guess building 7 was not a part of the WTC complex and was not damaged by the terrorist attacks as we were told?

The 9/11 commission report also had NIST do most of the reports for them but it did not agree with a lot of material NIST reported.

I have not evaded any question. I can and have provided facts and evidence against the official story. You just do not want to accept them.



[edit on 14-10-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
As for the WTC most of the planes fuel was burned up in the intial explosion outside the building, what was left burned off quickly. ( please check the NIST and FEMA reports)


Yep. And what people fail to realize is the towers DID stand up to the jet fuel, the fires, and the impact.


What people understand is that both towers stood up to the impacts and the fuel explosions. They also understand what you deny since it's a fact inconvenient to your conspiracy theory: both WTC 1 and 2 succumbed to the combined effect of unfought, major fires in the damaged areas of both towers.


The towers didn't collapse when the planes hit, therefore, they accomplished what they were built to do and tested to do, which was stand up to an aircraft impact.


They did more than that since they were designed to withstand the impact of an aircraft approaching for landing at considerably less speed and with less fuel then what happened on 9/11. In essence, they far exceeded what architects and engineers designed it to withstand. Except for massive fires burning out of control in the impact areas.


The towers didn't collapse in the massive explosion during the impact that took up most of the jet fuel, therefore, they stood up to the fire.


Only until they succumbed to the massive fires burning long after the impact.


The towers didn't collapse due to the jet fuel, because as I just said, most of it was taken up in the initial explosion, therefore, it stood up to the heavy amounts of jet fuel.


Irrelevant. They didn't withstand the weakening of the structure from the massive fires burning the contents of the floors in the immediate area of the impacts.


So if it was a combination of all three, the best possible time for it to collapse because of all three would be on impact or very very shortly thereafter. But that's not what we saw.


We saw absolutely nothing that surprises anyone, including architects, structural engineers, and forensic scientists.


Also, these people that claim that it was some raging inferno there in the towers even up until the time of the collapse, for one, fail to provide pictures of this raging inferno. They simply just assume it happened.


I knew you were a newbie. Here:

www.studyof911.com...
www.studyof911.com...

You might want to catch up with the facts.


And two, can't explain why there's no "raging inferno" at the crash sites of Flight 93 and Flight 77 immediately after those impacts, but the ones in the Twin Towers lasted at least an hour.


Most of us know that a) firemen were on the scene at the Pentagon within minutes and fought the fire, b) firemen eventually arrived at the Flight 93 site and eventually fought that fire, and c) the fires in all three WTC towers were not able to be fought in any way whatsoever.

You really need to catch up.



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by katmandu
reply to post by NoOneSpecialHere
 


There is a mountain of evidence that 9-11 was an inside job, or at least a Pearl Harbor false-flag operation that was allowed to continue, unopposed. Less than a hundred people could have made this happen.

Only a handful needed to know the full story. The rest would have been specialist pawns who, due to compartmentalized "need-to-know" status, would never have understood the extent of their betrayal, until it was too late.

As for seanm, why do you people waste your time on the likes of this person or those like him/her? Nuff said.


Feel free to present your "mountain of evidence" but don't get upset when I hold you to it when you don't produce it.

P.S. Let me know when you plan to file charges. Six years of waiting for you guys to put your money where your mouths are is awfully boring.



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by seanm

They also understand what you deny since it's a fact inconvenient to your conspiracy theory: both WTC 1 and 2 succumbed to the combined effect of unfought, major fires in the damaged areas of both towers.

1. What major fires? After the jet fuel burned off all you had was some small isolated fires as reported by firemen who made it to the 78th floor of the south tower. Not the inferno of burning jet fuel as stated by the official story.

2. The videos and photos show the fires burning out well before the buildings collaspe. You see very little flames comming out of the windows, if thier was a big inferno lasting the whole time you would have seen flames comming out of the windows until the building collapsed.

3. None of the fire chiefs present believed the towers would collapse. They were only worried about the upper floors of the towers above the fires might collaspe if the fires would have burned for several more hours (which the didn't)

www.pleasanthillsfire.org...

Excepting the three 9-11 collapses, no fire, however severe, has ever caused a steel framed high-rise building to collapse. Following are examples of high-rise fires that were far more severe than those in WTC 1 and 2, and Building 7. In these precedents, the fires consumed multiple floors, produced extensive window breakage, exhibited large areas of emergent flames, and went on for several hours. The fires in the WTC towers did none of these things.


Please show me the big inferno that you state lasted the whole time in these photos.

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...


[edit on 14-10-2007 by ULTIMA1]


Originally posted by seanm
Feel free to present your "mountain of evidence" but don't get upset when I hold you to it when you don't produce it.

P.S. Let me know when you plan to file charges. Six years of waiting for you guys to put your money where your mouths are is awfully boring.


I am still wating for you to post any evidnece, you are all talk no evidence.

In case you did not know their are lawsuits filed and cases going to court.

Must be new guy to the internet,, welcome.




[edit on 14-10-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi

Originally posted by seanm
Yup, exactly. And 40 years ago to boot.


Yep, keep putting words in my mouth.

Keep up, buddy. It's not hard.


It's not hard to understand what you wrote, Novus.



Originally posted by seanm
So you didn't know when the WTC towers were built? What DO you know? So far, not much at all.



Do you even know what the hell you're talking about?

Point to where I said I didn't know when they were built... Good luck finding that.


I never said you said it. Or even wrote it. So let's review:

seanm: "...planting explosives in the WTC towers."
NovusOrdoMundi: "And what if they were planted during the construction?"
www.abovetopsecret.com...

wsamplet: "The expansive demo teams that planted thermite explosives."
NovusOrdoMundi: "Could have been planted by a few people during construction, or could have been a private contractor team who would keep their mouth shut for the right price."
www.abovetopsecret.com...

seanm: "40 years ago?!! Now, that is REAL planning ahead!"
www.abovetopsecret.com...

For the record, NovusOrdoMundi, tell us why you think explosives, "could have been planted by a few people during construction," when the towers were built between from 1966-1971? Do you have a reason for thinking that is plausible?

Please explain.


Your debate skills are pathetic.


I think everyone knows I am not debating you. I am pointing out the flaws in your logic, reasoning, false claims, and unsupported assertions. Hopefully, you realize the mistakes you are making.



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by seanm
Your display of classic 9/11 denial should be helpful to everyone here and illustrate why you're all stuck in the exact same spot you were six years ago with nothing to show for your efforts.



Perhaps it is people like yourself that confuse and belittle those who refuse to believe the government is what's keeping progress from happening.

I find this thread on a whole to be confusing and disorganized, and it's rather annoying.


Do you choose to neglect the fact that Osama himself clearly said he was not behind the 9/11 attacks on September 12th, 2007 (link), yet the news still reported it several days later? If it was a fake video/incorrect intellegence source then why report it at all? (Source: 1, 2, 3) These are just a few of many, MANY news sources that cite this.

Are you unaware that it's reported that the Neocons in the government have been channeling stolen funds to Al-Queda?


Perhaps two years ago, an "informal" meeting of "veterans" of the 1980s Iran-Contra scandal -- holding positions in the Bush administration -- was convened by Deputy National Security Advisor Elliott Abrams. Discussed were the "lessons learned" from that labyrinthine, secret, and illegal arms-for-money-for-arms deal involving the Israelis, the Iranians, the Saudis, and the Contras of Nicaragua, among others -- and meant to evade the Boland Amendment, a congressionally passed attempt to outlaw Reagan administration assistance to the anti-communist Contras.

In terms of getting around Congress, the Iran-Contra vets concluded, the complex operation had been a success -- and would have worked far better if the CIA and the military had been kept out of the loop and the whole thing had been run out of the Vice President's office.

Subsequently, some of those conspirators, once again with the financial support and help of the Saudis (and probably the Israelis and the Brits), began running a similar operation, aimed at avoiding congressional scrutiny or public accountability of any sort, out of Vice President Cheney's office. They dipped into "black pools of money," possibly stolen from the billions of Iraqi oil dollars that have never been accounted for since the American occupation began.


Source: link

Do you fail to recognize the Iran-Contra affair also?

Do you also think the CIA doesn't have a hand in drug drug trafficking between the middle east and the US?




Please, if you can, answer a question I have: Why would Osama deny behing behind the 9/11 attacks, only change his statement later?



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 09:07 PM
link   
[url=http://www.truthout.org...]

[url=http://www.onlinejournal.org...]

Maybe those links will open up the truth. Note: They are not CNN's version or FOX's version

Enjoy! If freedom of speech an truth is wrong, then as Americans we have not lived up to our position.



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Controlled Demolition was hired without a bid to remove the debris from the 9/11 incidents, they were able to comply instantly with this massive project.

Controlled Demolition was also hired without bid to cleanup the Oklahoma City Bombing.

Bush rolls out a 1,000 page Patriot act a (legal document) before the smoke from 9/11 even cleared.

Jeb Bush had declared Martial Law in Florida prior to 9/11.

Osama Bin Laden (Tim Osman) and the Al Qaeda were projects of the CIA.

Bush family was directly linked to the security of the WTC's by way of Neil Bush. Now Neil Bush is getting his crappy software programs enlisted at the schools of our children "Ignite!,", (these programs are only going to make our nations children dumber then ever). Neil Bush was involved in the 1980's savings and loan scandal and got off scott free and also had cheated on his wife getting another woman pregnant in the process, and oh as a part of his business deals he seems to require that woman meet come to his hotel room to have sex with him.

Marvin Bush seems to like to earn profits from off shore subsidiaries.

The Bush family are good long time friends with Bin Ladens family.

Bush ordered the all of Bin Ladens family members to flown out of the US right after 9/11 occurred.

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and "Condi" have all made so many slip-ups and admissions about 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden that they should all be indicted on that information alone.

People can make a difference, look at We Are Change, this is a group of about 10 guys go out with their camcorder and question these "politicians", imagine if tens of thousands of people started doing this same thing to these same people every day every chance they got! They would all begin snapping like the soulless twigs they are! They are out there confront David Rockefeller, imagine what it would be like to call Davey right out front of his cave?

Look at Loose Change a group of about 6 friends that went and make a little documentary, millions have watched it, sure some of it was wrong, but most of it was dead on, and some of brings you to questioned just what actually did happen.

Little people, the common people can and are making a difference.

You don't believe 9/11 was a GST, guess what you are in the minority! Approximately 85% of the people know 9/11 to be an "inside job".

PNAC, bojingle, Northwoods, Silverstein, Enron, missing planes, unexplained and strange cell phone calls, pyroclastic explosive flows, free fall collapses, human bone fragments found over three hundred feet away on the roofs of buildings, Ghouliani, 2.3 Trillion+hundreds of billions more missing here and there, endless world wars, China, I mean common, what do you want, Bush to knock on your down and say Um, yea ok, I did it, it was all me and Cheney! Umm, and we are both really sorry. Geez.

I really feel though for us to crack upon the secrets of 9/11 we need to first expose the IRS and the Federal Reserve. After we accomplish this then everything else will begin to fall into place, the tumblers will open that door upon their own for us. Then we can get at these sects and cabals. 9/11 is at the top of a long list of continuous quagmires. Please don't be so fixated about arguing over 9/11 or the existence of aliens or UFO's, there will be a time for these things, until that time you might as well just be arguing about the existence of God or the Heavens, (yea and look were that has gotten us). We need to truly ban together and abolish servitude once and for all, then we can get at 9/11, JFK, Waco, these damn wars, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.

[edit on 14-10-2007 by RexxCrow]



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 09:25 PM
link   
I often wonder the same thing. I ran across a site which listed the "potential" list of 9/11 co-conspirators. I started a the thread but apparently my heading was not exciting enough to lure in more discussion. Here is my thread with a link to the list of people. This seems to be remotely plausible, however the list is merely a compilation of suspected people created by someone with either bias or a point to prove.

Take it with a grain of salt, but it is definitely worth a once over.



posted on Oct, 15 2007 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by RexxCrow
Controlled Demolition was hired without a bid to remove the debris from the 9/11 incidents, they were able to comply instantly with this massive project.

Controlled Demolition was also hired without bid to cleanup the Oklahoma City Bombing.

Bush rolls out a 1,000 page Patriot act a (legal document) before the smoke from 9/11 even cleared.


Firstly, who was president when OKC happened? The reason why the Patriot ACT was so easily rolled out was because of this:


Link
The Patriot Act was not a dramatic departure from existing legislation, but can be more accurately described as the extension of laws and the implementation of reforms long recommended by the security and intelligence communities. The key provisions of the Patriot Act are actually incorporated from an anti-terrorism measure proposed by the Clinton Administration and adopted by Congress in 1996. This was the "Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996," which was inspired by the worst terrorist atrocity on American soil up to that time - the April 1995 bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City by Timothy McVeigh, which killed 175 innocent people.


9-11 did not begin on 9-11 or with the Bush Administration. If people can't look past this they can't find the truth. And most people won't look past this fact because they believe that Clinton was inherently a good President.

And the petty bickering doesn't help either.



posted on Oct, 15 2007 @ 01:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
They also understand what you deny since it's a fact inconvenient to your conspiracy theory: both WTC 1 and 2 succumbed to the combined effect of unfought, major fires in the damaged areas of both towers....


What? Didn't you say this earlier in the thread:


Yes, thats why i think a better sceme was to just let it happen. Not much planning.


So essentially you've both stuck up for the no plane at the Pentagon and bombs in the buildings theories. Obviously you don't think that a better scheme is to "just let it happen". In other words, LIHOP.

If you find other theories plausible, that's fine. Questions need to be and should be asked. But don't, in a thread asking how many people were involved, promote the idea that would involve the least amount of people when you don't fully think that's what happened. That's disengenuous at best.



posted on Oct, 15 2007 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by PistolPete

So essentially you've both stuck up for the no plane at the Pentagon and bombs in the buildings theories. Obviously you don't think that a better scheme is to "just let it happen". In other words, LIHOP.



No, we do not know what hit the Pentagon since we do not have the crash scene reports from the FBI and the NTSB.

Ialso said nothing about bombs in the buildings.

All i stated was that it might be easy sceme if the government let things happen on 9/11.



posted on Oct, 15 2007 @ 02:42 AM
link   
Hello NoOneSpecialHere,

I believe there is insufficient investigation so far, on this topic, and on the other hand- no shortage of speculation either. This appears to be a highly polarized and emotionally-charged topic as well, on both sides. Given that assessment, I don't think further speculation or throwing jabs is productive. I would suggest that both sides try to come to an agreement that a more thorough investigation is called for, and move on to focusing on that.



posted on Oct, 15 2007 @ 04:46 AM
link   
The best answer I can interject for you here is as not astounding as some debunkers would hope.
The US Military is a trained group with a definitive chain of command. They drill and drill until all the bugs are worked out and no errors or time is wasted. I'm sure you're familiar with the term "military precision".

So , exactly where did that go on 9/11?

Norad had practiced for the three years preceding the attack , intercepting commercial jetliners used as missiles. Despite the barrage of lies we heard from the WH repeated on the MSMedia.

Here's the Evil Beauty of it.....
On 9/11, fourteen separate military drills and exercises were scheduled to go off as practiced. But suddenly they went " LIVE ". Only a handful of people knew what was really happening, and that was all that was required. Think of the confusion.
Please read , " 9/11 Synthetic Terror/ Made in America" by Webster Tarpley.

Flights 93 and 77 were probably the Global Hawks the USAF cannot account for.
Global Hawks are made of mostly Cellulose with metal landing gear and a 3 ft. in Dia. Rolls-Royce jet engine like the one found at the Pentagon.

The flights that hit the Towers were very possibly remote flown aircraft*. Probably E-10's, Military versions of 757's. ( Seven of the so-called Hi-Jackers,all of whom were Saudi's, were interviewed on the BBC after 9/11. They were mostly students who never set foot out of their homeland and wanted to know how their passports got here.)

*Yes, this has been a practical reality since 1961. Google: "The Joint Chiefs of Staff Northwoods Project ". 'AZTLAN' has the clearest document. Please read pg 13, in particular from author Adm Lemnitzer. Later fired by JFK.

Reports are that flight 77 off-loaded into a NASA hangar in Cleveland, Ohio.

So here you have soldier's doing their jobs faithfully while dealing with real and ghost programmed blips on their screens. What a great cover. See " pilot's for truth.org".

Norman Mineta witnessed Dick Cheney arriving a half-hour before the VP states he did at the WH Bunker, ordering an aide repeatedly to "stand-down" as "flight 77" approached the pentagon.

For some odd reason, the power to strike down any object over DC skies was wrested out of the Military's hands by an executive order months earlier. It was now under Cheney's control , Why? Very peculiar.

Who wired the buildings? Very possibly the Mossad or a US Black-Ops Group or both.
Where did they operate from? Probably Rudy's bunker on the 23rd floor of Tower 7, which he never visited that day.

It had two floors actually, was super-reinforced structurally, including the glass, and had it's own water and air filtration systems. When that building inexplicably came down, all the files on ENRON and Worldcom and other Corporate fraud cases went with it.

Who is this shadow government? Three guesses. The Bilderberg's ( Read the new book
by Daniel Estulin " the True Story of the Bilderberg's ) The Council on Foreign Relations
( read Naomi Klein's new book " The Shock Doctrine") and the Tri-Lateral Commission.
Zbigniew Breszinski's " the Grand Chessboard" (or something like that ) was authored in the late 1970's and will illuminate this connection.

All are controlled by Globalists like The Rothschild's, the Rockerfeller's, etc.

Who in our Gov't?
Check out " The Project for a New American Century" a NEO-CON Think Tank, 1997.

Why? To start perpetual wars or WWlll, destroy our economy , all but the elite class and make Americans submit to "The North American Union" , The 'Amero' and the dismantling of the US Constitution. It's why they don't really fuss about immigration or
real homeland security. We're being fleeced on a scale that is astonishing.

Where is the MSMedia? Playing dead for their masters , the CFR.

The New World Order.
Happy Hunting.... Question is, what are we going to do about it? When ?
If we wait 'til these Bankers collapse us like they did in '29, it will already be too late.



posted on Oct, 15 2007 @ 12:00 PM
link   
with all this fuss about blackwater and private armies I start to suspect that something like this could be done and 1000´s of people wouldn´t be needed, just the right ones...





new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join