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.


Proof the 911 Commission was a joke?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 07:48 PM
Indeed, many individuals are simply asking for a real well funded independent investigation. Nothing more. We had one for a BJ, can't we just ask for the same when it comes to an extremely important historical event in modern american history?

As far as we know, things going from gross negligence to as far as voluntarily allowing and maybe even aiding(information, etc) from elements within the gov. is possible, and actually viable knowing what we know.

A real investigation would clear things up, and provide us with a wealth of data, that could help prevent future such events. It is well worth it.

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 11:30 PM
Yes, we need a real investigation, except this time there needs to be real serious subpoena power, and access to information which has been withheld. Especially those damn 80 or so videos the FBI is holding onto. I believe it was our member Jack Tripper who had done a really great thread about camera angles, and in it he showed that two or three of the cameras would probably have caught on tape what it was that went into the pentagon.

I also think that more information is needed on the gold that was seized at the WTC, so we can follow the money trail. I recall one fireman's story that "as soon as they found the gold, they sicked the police on us, told us to get out, and shut the site down for recovery operations." I want to know where that gold went.

It's too bad that so much of the evidence has been destroyed. I also wonder why the administration not been charged with major destruction of evidence at a national crime scene? Is that not obstruction of justice?

Oh yeah, I forgot, there was no justice.

And WTC7?

Too many loose ends.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 08:05 PM
reply to post by Xenogears

No, we had an investigation that looked into whether or not the President of the United States had committed crimes while Governor of Arkansas. Monica was just a small part of an investigation that eventually led to the impeachment of the President, 15 convictions sending 11 (or 10, its been awhile) people to prison.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 08:14 PM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

On the gold....not quite....the area was secured by PAPD, so that the gold could be recovered and delivered to its rightful owners, the Bank of Nova Scotia.

posted on Feb, 11 2008 @ 05:03 AM
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

Interesting, so is there any evidence that the gold was delivered back to them? I'll see what I can find on that, unless you know of something.

well this certainly supports your statement:

Zack then reiterated the real reason behind Giuliani's action:

"The real reason was that the Bank of Nova Scotia's assets were buried in that rubble, the day they got those assets out of that pile, Rudy shut the pile down, said 'everybody off, we're going to full scoop and dump'... It was gold, it was silver, it was other assets, I've seen a lot of numbers too, I don't have an exact one so I don't wanna give it to you... Our firefighters were on the pile helping excavate the gold as well, our problem is that all Rudy cared about at the end of the day was the gold bricks, not the lives and the memories of those that were the true heroes that day."

At the time, in November 2001, it was reported that $200 million in gold bullion has been recovered from the site. One day later around 50% of firefighters were removed from the job and totally denied access.

Many declared they were being disrespected, that the city was more concerned with gold than people. Others said the city wanted to speed up the removal of debris to save money.

Of course, that's Alex Jone's site, and far be it from me to believe anything he says.

I will keep digging.


Gold and Silver Recovered from WTC Basement Area; Evidence Suggests Attempted Theft

Workers at Ground Zero discover large amounts of gold and other precious metals stored below the ruins of the WTC. As debris is removed they are able to access parts of the 16-acre WTC basement, which drops 70 feet below ground level. Precious metals are stored in numerous vaults within this area. The London Times says the quantity of these “has been a carefully guarded secret,” but estimates $750 million of gold and silver in vaults belonging to the Comex metals trading division of the New York Mercantile Exchange. There appears to have been an attempt, since 9/11, to break into a Comex vault containing $200 million of precious metals belonging to the Bank of Nova Scotia. A government official involved in the recovery work says, “It looked like they used a blowtorch, a crowbar,” but a bank spokeswoman denies there has been any attempted break-in. The banks later states that “All of the silver, gold, platinum, and palladium stored in its vaults at 4 World Trade Center” has been relocated to a depository in Brooklyn. Other gold is discovered in a service tunnel below WTC 5. According to the London Times, this was being transported through the tunnel on the morning of 9/11 (see (Before 9:59 a.m.) September 11, 2001). [New York Daily News, 10/31/2001; London Times, 11/1/2001; New York Times, 11/1/2001; Reuters, 11/17/2001]

[edit on 11-2-2008 by TrueAmerican]

posted on Feb, 11 2008 @ 07:26 AM
A very interesting conversation about the gold here:

A female caller to the Bill Bochiers radio program on WLW, Cincinnati (11-06-04) told of a report from her friend who worked at the WTC. The friend said that on the morning of 9-11 she was on her way to her job at the World Trade Center, along the route she normally took. As she turned a corner at the base of the Center, she saw two large flat bed trucks parked at one of the entrances. One of the trucks had already been loaded and had its contents covered by a large tarp. The second truck was in the process of having its bed loaded with stacks of solid gold bars.

Both sides of the street were lined by black uniformed troops with machine guns who kept an eye on the operation and on the surrounding area.

The bewildered woman kept a distance from the activity and watched as the second truck was loaded, and its contents covered with a tarp. The two trucks were then driven away with the soldiers traveling along as escort.

The woman was so stunned by what she had seen that she turned around and did not report to work that morning, which, as it turned out, most probably saved her life when the towers were attacked and destroyed only about an hour later.

And another from that same thread:

The panel I was on were stunned speechless after my presentation. The woman to my left, Kristina Borjesson, stood up and looked at me, "Jesus Christ, I had no idea".

I am not one of the conspiracy theorist. Our facts came from RICO cases being prepared, hard evidence. DoD insiders watched the clean up and there were cameras set up discreetly for that purpose - to see if anything went missing or was intentionally covered up. The black boxes are on record, video record. The gold was there, was not recovered during the clean up.

Those facts fit with something we know about WTC 7.

Get a copy of TREASON, INC, at and pay very close attention.

Hmm, anyone have that video, or have a link to it? Seems to be little known. I searched youtube, and nothing came up. Google has references to it, but can't find anywhere it's on line.

What I am wondering is why the heck the 911 Commission didn't follow the money trail all the way to the highest levels of government and the Fed. I suppose we all have to do that for them too.

posted on Feb, 11 2008 @ 07:56 AM
The standard declaimer before I am decried as a "debunker": this is my opinion and nothing more.

I would interject the following: always follow the money and always follow the politics.

The money: wild claims to promote a book that will make the author money. That part is easy and simple. In this case – from what I have seen – there aren’t ‘wild claims’ but rather “wild characterizations”. The implication is clearly the White House was manipulating, controlling or subverting the outcome of the 9-11 Commission. By doing so you guarantee sales to rabid Bush haters and truthers. My assertion is they are one in the same, although they do overlap each other. That is, not all truthers hate GB and not all far left GB haters believe in the “Truth Movement”.

The politics: it’s no secret that Mr. Rove has been vilified and demonized by those on the left desperately trying to relive the 60’s far left political movement of protests, “facisim”, etc, etc. I don’t think he has personally done anything to deserve this, other than serve as a punching bag and an easy target. This is a political book, as described by the OP’s external source quotes, wrapped in the tragedy of 9-11.

When the book launches, my hunch is there will be no revelations about 9-11 but rather, yet another evvvvvviiiiiiiillllllllllllllll [impersonating mini-me] book about how evvvvvvviiiiiiillllllllllll those darn republicans are, specifically Mr. Rove.

Again, the “Truth Movement” has nothing to do with the truth or 9-11. It’s a far left political movement that uses 9-11 as a rallying cry. That’s why truthers can’t separate a clearly political book from one actually about 9-11. To them, it’s all one in the same.

Just look at some of the statements in this very thread.

You don’t have to like me or my belief that 9-11 happened just the way we think it did but, the state of the current 9-11 “Truth Movement” is sad. The Truth Movement is it's own worst enemy.

Standing on a corner with a bullhorn acting like a bully doesn’t mean anything you have to say is true. It just means you’re louder.

EDIT: I am in a hurry to get to work, so aplogies if this has been said elsewhere:

The 9-11 Commission did not investigate ANYTHING. It brought together the works of hundreds of smaller agencies, investigations, reports and testimony and coalesced all that data into one report..

Again, the commission was not an investigative body.

[edit on 11-2-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]

posted on Feb, 11 2008 @ 08:18 AM
reply to post by bsbray11

How silly! They 'picked a date ', then they picked an airline or two and they picked exactly right every time!1 Amazing! The Saudi's in a cave can get LUCKY enough to not only randomly pick a date that has EXACTLY the same type drills that were needed to cover the plot. No games , no success. This was planned by experts down to the last detail...nothing was left to chance, and only unexpected events could trip up the perps planes. These are called anomalies, and there are hundreds of them associated with these events.

Who could really believe that the date was random? No way. Random makes no sense, but planned does. The whole thing was a giant psy op planned to be a part of the games, but infiltrated and controlled by the Neocon perps, using the games as a way to forestall any fighters helping...but the stand down took care of that. We KNOW for sure that Cheney stood down the Pentagon defenses intentionally, that is fact. So what else is needed? traitors in the USA, using Israeli help, brought the WTC complex down for Silversteins sake, as well as the psy op potential for the new wars..the new Pearl Harbor they needed so badly.

This plan was obviously an inside job, and only those with blinders on cannot see that.

posted on Feb, 11 2008 @ 08:38 AM

Originally posted by eyewitness86
This plan was obviously an inside job, and only those with blinders on cannot see that.

And it appears that the closer anyone gets to the sore spots, the more they come out in droves. Maybe I should start looking into investing in leather. The demand for blinders has got to be hitting record highs.

posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 01:58 PM
Update: The comments are already coming in on amazon- the book is riveting.

The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation

The prospective reader must note that, evidently due to his extensive investigation, Shenon writes from a definite standpoint on the events 9/11. He believes that the Bush Administration is guilty of criminal negligence (not conspiracy) - allowing, either by incompetence or some other motive, a security breakdown - and that its representatives, when they found they could no longer avert a public investigation (they managed to delay it for over 400 days - it took only 4 to start investigating Pearl Harbor), made every move possible to promote and maintain damage control, from the selection of key members of the Commission and its staff (he draws out a fantastic array of bit players, a number of whom I was wholly unfamiliar with, who distinctly influenced the course of the investigation), to what was discussed in the actual hearings, to what lines of questioning were pursued, and what paths of inquiry were not. "Rove began rewriting the strategy for Bush's 2004 reelection campaign literally the day after 9/11. He knew that Bush's reelection effort centered on his performance on terrorism; almost nothing else would matter to the voters. If the commission did anything to undermine Bush's anti-terrorism credentials - worst of all, if it is claimed that Bush had somehow bungled intelligence in 2001 that might of prevented the attacks - his reelection might well be sunk."

Shenon deftly traces the political lineages as the intertwine with the crucial testimony given and not given. By discussing the character, motives, and felt obligations of the main figures involved, we get a much deeper perspective on where the Commission went astray and why. Much of the discussion centers of the role of Phillip Zelikow, whose extensive ties to central members of the Bush Administration, might give rise to a further investigative Commission.

All in all, a notably balanced rendering of a topic that will surely be discussed for decades to come. For those with an interest in the future of democracy, without question, the read of the season.

Mr. Shenon of the New York Times has written a reinterpretation of the work of the 9-11 Commission. Spell-binding to read, the narrative traces the public and private resistance of the Bush White House to the 9-11 Commission. He documents the private compromises that the Comission made itself to the White House, and then to the other Commission members to have a unified Commission. Instead of naming embarrassing names, the final report points fingers at various beaucracies. This is a book that the reader will not put down.

Others will give their opinions on this book based on their political leanings or previously held opinions about 9/11. I would urge you to buy and read this book with an open mind. And I would tell you that it is absolutely impossible to put down. This is not a dry recitation of facts and dates, this is a well told, engrossing story that will raise your eyebrows and yes, anger you at points. It may also bring you close to tears as you read about what was known and not acted on up through and even after 9-11. Highly recommended.

With this important new book, the growing 9/11 Truth Movement will finally be going mainstream.

I wonder if the book will ever be in the public library system. Somehow I think not.

[edit on 12-2-2008 by TrueAmerican]

posted on Feb, 16 2008 @ 05:04 PM
Another document found on the 911 Commission, written by Sibel Edmonds & Bill Weaver:

The following Veteran National Security experts were turned away, ignored, or censored by the 9/11 Commission, even though they had direct and relevant information related to the Commission’s investigation (for the PDF version Click Here):

John M. Cole, Former Veteran Intelligence Operations Specialist; FBI - Mr. Cole worked for 18 years in the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division as an Intelligence Operations specialist, and was in charge of FBI’s foreign intelligence investigations covering India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Mr. Cole had knowledge of certain activities that directly related to the terror attacks on September 11, 2001. He notified the 9/11 Commission during its investigation, but never received a response. His name and contact information was provided to the Commission as a key witness by other witnesses, but he was never contacted or interviewed.

John Vincent, Retired Special Agent, Counterterrorism; FBI - Mr. Vincent worked for the FBI for 27 1/2 years before retiring in 2002. He worked his last 8 years in counterterrorism in the FBI’s Chicago Field Office. Mr. Vincent, along with Robert Wright, exposed inefficiencies within the FBI in working counterterrorism cases, and certain warnings they had tried to pursue prior to the 9/11 attack that were directly related to Al-Qaeda’s financial network and money laundering activities. Although he was granted an interview, the commissioners’ investigators refused to let him provide them with information related to his case and the 9/11 terrorists network; they insisted on limiting the interview to only administrative and irrelevant questions and issues.

Robert Wright, Veteran Special Agent, Counterterrorism; FBI - Mr. Wright is a veteran special agent in the FBI Chicago Field Office Counterterrorism Unit. He had been investigating a suspected terrorist cell for three years, when he was informed in January 2001 that the case was being closed. Agent Wright, along with Mr. Vincent, exposed inefficiencies within the FBI in working counterterrorism cases and certain warnings they’d tried to pursue prior to the 9/11 attack that were directly related to Al-Qaeda’s financial network and money laundering activities. Three months before September 11, Wright wrote a stinging internal memo charging that the FBI was not interested in thwarting a terrorist attack, but rather "was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred." The FBI refused to allow Wright to testify before the 9/11 Commission, however, the Commission did not insist or attempt to subpoena Wright; despite the fact that it had subpoena power.

Sibel Edmonds, Former Language Specialist; FBI - Ms. Edmonds worked for the FBI’s Washington Field Office as a language specialist with Top Secret Clearance performing translations for counterterrorism and counterintelligence operations dealing with Turkey, Iran, and Turkic speaking Central Asian countries. She contacted the 9/11 Commission in May 2003 and requested a meeting to provide them with information directly related to the terrorist attack. The Commission investigators refused to meet with Edmonds and informed her that due to their limited resources and time they were not going to interview all witnesses. She was able to provide the commission with information and documents only after certain 9/11 family members intervened directly. Ms. Edmonds’ testimony was completely censored by the Commission.

Behrooz Sarshar, Former Language Specialist; FBI - Mr. Sarshar worked for the FBI’s Washington Field Office as a language specialist with Top Secret Clearance performing Farsi translations for counterterrorism and counterintelligence operations dealing with Iran and Afghanistan. He had first-hand information of prior specific warning obtained from a reliable informant in April 2001 on the terrorist attacks of September 11. Mr. Sarshar contacted the Commission directly but was refused. He was given an interview with the Commission investigators only after 9/11 family members intervened directly. Mr. Sarshar’s documented testimony was completely omitted from the commission’s final report, despite his case being publicly confirmed by Director Mueller’s Office.

Mike German, Special Agent, Counterterrorism; FBI - Mr. German served sixteen years as an FBI Special Agent and is one of the rare agents credited with actually having prevented acts of terrorism before it became the FBI's number one priority. He contacted the Commission in the spring of 2004, but did not receive a response. In 2002 he reported gross mismanagement in a post 9/11-counterterrorism investigation, which included serious violations of FBI policy and federal law. Mr. German contacted the 9/11 Commission during its investigation and requested that he be given an interview session in order to provide them with certain domestic counterterrorism investigations that he’d pursued. According to Mr. German there were links between certain domestic and international counterterrorism related to the September 11 attacks. The 9/11 Commissioners refused to acknowledge his request and never interviewed him.

Gilbert Graham, Retired Special Agent, Counterintelligence; FBI - Mr. Graham worked for the FBI’s Washington Field Office Counterintelligence Division until 2002. In February 2004 his name and contact information were provided to the Commission as a key witness with information pertinent to the Commission’s investigation. The 9/11 Commission refused to follow up and never contacted Mr. Graham.

Coleen Rowley, Retired Division Counsel; FBI - In May 2002, Coleen Rowley, as the Division Counsel at the FBI Minneapolis Office, blew the whistle on the FBI’s failure to pursue Zacarias Moussaoui’s case prior to 9/11, despite all attempts made by the Minneapolis division counterterrorism agents. She reported that FBI HQ personnel in Washington, D.C., had mishandled and neglected to take action on information provided by her division. Despite her high-profile case the commission chose not to interview Ms. Rowley. According to Ms. Rowley, no one from the FBI Minneapolis Office (several Agents had direct information) was ever asked to provide testimony, information, to the 9/11 Commission.

Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Shaffer, DIA - Colonel Shaffer provided the Commission with detailed information on intelligence and pre warning information obtained by his unit’s data mining project, Able Danger. The 9/11 commission staff received not one but two briefings on Able Danger from Mr. Shaffer and his former team members, yet did not pursue the case, did not follow up on this documented report and refused to subpoena the relevant files. Mr. Shaffer’s testimony, together with other witnesses who corroborated his testimony and information, were censored by the 9/11 Commissioners and never made it to its final report.

Dick Stoltz, Retired Special Agent; ATF- Mr. Stoltz, a veteran undercover agent with the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, had played an important role in Operation Diamondback between 1998 and 2001. The sting operation involved a group of Middle Eastern men living in New Jersey who were caught on tape in an ATF weapons sting conspiring to buy millions of dollars of weapons including components for nuclear bombs. The case came to a screeching halt with the arrest of only a handful of suspects in June of 2001 even though there was ample evidence that some of the people who were attempting to buy these weapons had connections with the Taliban, Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden himself. The 9/11 Commission refused to contact Agent Stoltz despite all attempts made by several witnesses from the intelligence & Law Enforcement Communities, and the 9/11 Family group, Jersey Moms.

Bogdan Dzakovic, Former Red Team Leader; FAA - Mr. Dzakovic had worked for the Security Division of the Federal Aviation Administration since 1987 as a Special Agent, as a Team Leader in the Federal Air Marshals, and from 1995 until September 11, 2001 was a Team Leader of the Red Team (terrorist team). Mr. Dzakovic had tried for several years prior to the 9-11 attacks to improve aviation security in the face of the ever-increasing terrorist threat. He provided the 9/11 Commission with his testimony and documented reports. His testimony and report to the Commission was completely omitted from the final report.

Linda Lewis, Retired Emergency Programs Specialist; USDA - Ms. Lewis worked for 13 years evaluating and coordinating federal, state and local preparedness for nuclear, radiological and chemical weapons emergencies. Prior to September 11, 2001, she had reported numerous inadequacies and dysfunctions in emergency preparedness, including a culture of intimidation that discouraged federal evaluators from reporting inadequacies in state and local plans and preparedness. USDA officials had thwarted her efforts to bring in terrorism experts to help the agency prepare for attacks on federal buildings, including bio-weapons attacks such as the anthrax attacks of 2001. In vain, she had urged FEMA officials to develop a national emergency communications plan and require interoperability of federally funded emergency communications equipment. In the absence of these preparations, New York City firefighters and police officers were unable to communicate critical information on September 11 at the World Trade Center. Ms. Lewis contacted the Commission and offered to provide information regarding dysfunctional government preparedness, but the Commission never responded.

Mark Burton, Senior Analyst; NSA – Mr. Burton served as an all-source threat analyst in NSA’s Information Assurance Directorate (IAD) for most of his 16-year career. He was the editor of IAD’s premier threat document; the 300+ page ISSO Glo...

And the list goes on.

posted on Feb, 28 2008 @ 05:04 PM
UPDATE: FBI documents contradict 9/11 Commission report

Hijacker had post-9/11 flights scheduled, files say

Newly-released records obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request contradict the 9/11 Commission’s report on the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and raise fresh questions about the role of Saudi government officials in connection to the hijackers.

The nearly 300 pages of a Federal Bureau of Investigation timeline used by the 9/11 Commission as the basis for many of its findings were acquired through a FOIA request filed by Kevin Fenton, a 26 year old translator from the Czech Republic. The FBI released the 298-page “hijacker timeline” Feb. 4.

The FBI timeline reveals that alleged hijacker Hamza Al-Ghamdi, who was aboard the United Airlines flight which crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center, had booked a future flight to San Francisco. He also had a ticket for a trip from Casablanca to Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia.

Not only does this further the notion of the OP, but it also ties into my latest leanings that the hijackers were seduced by rogue elements of the CIA/Mossad into committing the crime, under false promises of big payoffs for them and their families. Note that they had post 911 flights scheduled.

That is a pretty strong statement. They went to great trouble to keep financial expenditures to a minimum, with few exceptions. They even sent back all money in excess of the needs of their operation. Could it be that they were expecting the big payoff right after the crime?

posted on Feb, 29 2008 @ 03:33 AM

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Doesnt matter, the 9/11 Commission was a waste of my money and the Governments time.

Yes, investigating the ineptitude of our elected and government personnel is a waste of time and money. We should just stop questioning anything they do and roll over and take it. [/sarcasm]

Oh, BTW, let me ask you if it was a waste of time and money investigating Clinton's extra-marital affair in the WH?

[edit on 2/4/2008 by Griff]

Well, yes, it's obviously a waste of time and money if the 2% of the population the conspiracy theorists comprise won't recognize it. But... there again.... the only way you will recognize a report is if it agrees with your own preclusions.... so it's a waste of time, energy, life, and money to debate with the tin-foil hat club.

I do it simply because I'm bored and need the comic relief.

The 9/11 Commission was sent in to investigate the actions of our elected officials and evaluate how well they adhered to contingency plans, and also the effectiveness of those contingency plans.

It wasn't sent in to try and uncover pork&barrel politics, conspiracies, etc. It was simply there to evaluate how well our government had responded to the 9/11 crisis, how efficient we were at it, and how things might be improved.

I'm an engineer, I work for and with the Federal Government - I know the routine. When stuff like that happens, it's standard practice to create a committee to evaluate the procession of events, the decisions made, and their impact on the outcome. We have the same thing - "Board of Inquiry" in the Navy to evaluate the actions of individuals and determine whether or not they behaved according to their training, and whether or not their decision, or lack thereof, constituted a criminal act. Entire commands are subject to such investigations when the incidents are severe enough.

Entire carriers have been held up in port and the crew confined to the ship over rape cases - and it stays that way until the Pentagon is done shoving the "big blue weenie" up everyone's anus they possibly can.

When a jet crashes, and the evidence points to defective synchro system for the control surfaces - you don't want to be the last guy who signed off on that system; stating it was functioning properly. Even if you're genuinely innocent.... you're in for a bad week or two.

Obviously - when a foreign socio-political entity is capable of orchestrating an attack on American Soil and accomplishing it..... there's good reason to make sure that everyone is doing their job, and doing it well.

posted on Feb, 29 2008 @ 03:55 AM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

And maybe AQ promised to pay him, as well, and he booked the flight in anticipation of the payment..... or maybe Mickey Mouse promised to pay him.... not exactly a strong link, there.

But we will assume the CIA did .... what would be their motive? Why kill thousands of American Civilians? What potential gains would cause them to stoop to such levels?

War for Oil? Why go all the way to the other side of the planet to some God forsaken hell-hole when we could just go take the untapped reserves in Canada? What are they going to do about it?

Using paranoia to gain power over the general population? Well, maybe.... but we already have Global Warming and cries for Federalized Healthcare to accomplish that. And Echelon has been around since well before 9/11, as well as other surveillance methods - so it's not like they need the threat of terrorism to use it.

And with support for the War and the Bush administration (who was supposedly behind it all, even though Bush is supposedly a stupid monkey) failing, and it being an election year.... why not just orchestrate a number of other terrorist attacks to justify their actions? I mean... hell, they managed to pull off one of the most original and unique terrorist strikes in all of history - a simple truck bomb should be pretty easy to conjure up, don't you think?

If the control is so complete, then why "didn't" we find WMDs in Iraq? (we did - go check back through the publicly available records published jointly by the Coalition countries - but it's less dramatic than finding stockpiles of nuclear weapons and nerve gas or small pox; so the media decided that we just didn't find anything) C'mon now... if we had such a cooperative relationship with various terrorist organizations in the middle east... then giving them a few vials of nerve gas, a menacing looking missile-doohickey for the pictures, and telling them to put it in some random bunker and await further instructions shouldn't be hard at all.

Or is it that the 9/11 Conspiracy movement has the administration scared? Have they been caught red handed, and fearing the droves of angry teenagers that will come by the dozens (as opposed to the millions who show up for 'equal rights' issues) to picket the White House to spread the truth of their lies?

C'mon... what gives... what's in it for them? It must be something pretty darned powerful if they are willing to kill thousands of their own countrymen (some of them even killing their own family)..... I'm not seeing any known physical rewards here of any significance... so it must be some mystical power! Do tell! I can't wait! (I bet they all get that ultra-cool version of the Sharingan eye for killing their own countrymen, don't they! They can then catch people in their glare and torture them for thousands of hours in the real-time equivalent of a second!

But, seriously - it can't be something as petty as a business merger or a 5% stock increase. These guys really went out on a limb for this conspiracy - there had to be some sort of huge payoff.

posted on Feb, 29 2008 @ 04:24 AM
reply to post by Aim64C

You lost to a member of the "tin-foil hat club". Remember this thread..

What happened there? Where'd you go?

"I do it simply because I'm bored and need the comic relief."

I doubt you were laughing in that thread.

edit: Or can you prove LaBTop wrong?

[edit on 29-2-2008 by Silly]

posted on Feb, 29 2008 @ 05:16 AM

Originally posted by Silly
reply to post by Aim64C

You lost to a member of the "tin-foil hat club". Remember this thread..

What happened there? Where'd you go?

"I do it simply because I'm bored and need the comic relief."

I doubt you were laughing in that thread.

edit: Or can you prove LaBTop wrong?

[edit on 29-2-2008 by Silly]

I do actually have a real life that requires me to fulfill certain duties aside from trying to fulfill and ill-placed messiah complex by protecting the world from some imaginary conspiracy.

Either way - I'm back now - thanks for reminding me of that thread. Care to discuss what I posted, or are you going to try character assassination? If you're not going to contribute to meaningful discussion, then please leave, this board is filled with enough spam from illegitimate individuals.

posted on Feb, 29 2008 @ 01:01 PM

Originally posted by Aim64C
Obviously - when a foreign socio-political entity is capable of orchestrating an attack on American Soil and accomplishing it..... there's good reason to make sure that everyone is doing their job, and doing it well.

Not trying to get off-topic (if there still is one), but how do you reconcile this rant on a military grunt's world with the fact that nobody was punished for slipping up and letting 9/11 unfold as it did? In fact, many people were promoted after 9/11, or given awards, despite individuals within the intelligence community saying that we had scores, if not hundreds of fore-warnings, even from foreign governments, that no one in the departments would act on or follow up?

At the very least you have to admit that your view of military discipline only applies to people in the military. Particularly what I will call grunts. Unless you mean to tell me you actually think you know as much about what goes on as all the chairs sitting around the Pentagon. You and every other person that's served in the military that I've talked to, and no doubt even most of the whole hundreds of thousands of you. It's just that mentality I guess.

[edit on 29-2-2008 by bsbray11]

posted on Feb, 29 2008 @ 03:00 PM
reply to post by Aim64C

Nope, I was just reminding you and I didnt like the little "tin foil hat" bull#

Thats it.

posted on Mar, 1 2008 @ 03:44 AM

Originally posted by bsbray11 do you reconcile this rant on a military grunt's world with the fact that nobody was punished for slipping up and letting 9/11 unfold as it did?

Yeah, that's a good question. One that seems to continually be brushed aside by people at the highest levels of government. Heads sure rolled over the B2 bomber/nuclear incident. Many people were relieved of duty. And in that case, no one died, except for after the fact when several military people involved on the project faced coincidental deaths.

But what happens when several elements fail at once (according to the story), allowing 19 hijackers to get through and kill nearly 3,000 people? They make a commission for recommendations on what went wrong, and how to fix it. Yeah well great. It still doesn't excuse either those who failed us, or any other people involved. Where are the heads rolling?

They should be rolling in both places. Why are we only getting one out of two here?

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in