The simple reality of 9/11, what we know and what we don't

First, I'd like to mention that I have nothing to gain by opposing the OS. In fact, it brings me great sadness and imposes many more sacrifices than I have already given and more hardships that I would ever want. You see, I have much more invested in 9/11 than the average person and it would actually serve me well to believe in and promote the OS, as I'll explain below. I have looked at the issue every which way from Sunday and I can truly say that I have objectively weighed the evidence that we have in regards to 9/11. I have looked at the truther issue with an extremely skeptical eye in an effort to prove to myself that the OS at least has a chance to be correct, yet I can honestly say that I do not believe in the official conspiracy theory. In fact, it's not that I believe the OS to be wrong, I'm absolutely convinced of it. The more I look into the matter, the more convinced I become. Also, when evaluating new evidence in regards to this issue, I retain my skepticism, as many here on ATS already know. My goal is only to find and follow the truth, wherever that truth leads me. I had every reason to believe in the official conspiracy theory (OS) and oppose most "truther" theories, as I'll explain below.

I have given a lot for my country in response to 9/11 and now I'm a disabled veteran because of it. It was not easy for me to come out against the OS because I had sacrificed my blood, body and spirit for the opportunity at revenge in the name of my country. My unit was the first unit called to make Al Qaeda answer for the atrocities of that day. Even after I was injured, my satisfaction came in knowing that not only was I called upon by my country, but I was also given the opportunity to seek retribution and payment in blood for what had occurred in NY, PA and DC. I have also lost many friends in the subsequent wars and because of the sacrifices that we all have made, many of my comrades couldn't fathom the idea that the OS could be wrong. To admit something like that, would be to admit that everything we gave, everything we saw and everything we did, was not for the righteous cause that we were led to believe. It would mean that the horrors we inflicted and were subjected to were not done in the name of all that is good and right but rather all that is evil. If the OS isn't true, I am basically implicated in the evils that were cast forward with the attack and its subsequent response.

It's so much easier to believe that what we were told was nothing but the truth as it allows us to convince ourselves that our sacrifices were not in vein and our actions were for the good of the world. To commit an action against the laws of nature for the betterment of man is one thing, but to do the same thing for a cause not draped in the same royalty, is something entirely different. Needless to say, I have lost relationships with many of my brothers because of their unwillingness to accept that what we had accomplished and sacrificed, could have been under false pretences and not for the valiant reasons that gave us the power - and excuse - to do what we did or give what we gave.

By accepting that the OS is a lie, I'm also accepting that my disability and actions in theatre were not heroic but rather oppressive and wrong. It makes my valor retreat and my glory the remnants of a past nightmare, not too soon forgotten. My injury and the deaths of my brothers has made life difficult to say the least and life as I knew it before, is only a distant memory so to come to terms with the idea that these sacrifices were all because of lies, was something that caused me great turmoil and anguish, yet I just couldn't close my eyes to logic and reason. Unlike many of my brothers, I refuse to lie to myself in an effort to savor the taste of glory. My integrity and personal values shaded the light that once bathed my soul in valor. To just accept what we all have been told, would have been the easy path, a road to a life filled with satisfaction and sacrifices well worth given, though also a road of ignorance. I was called a hero, a patriot, a warrior for freedom and I could have ran with it, soaking everything up and making life pleasant in spite of my current circumstances. Instead, my analytical mind just wouldn't allow me to ignore the obvious and my values wouldn't allow me to deny it, even to myself, irregardless of the consequences. This is why I was extremely hesitant to believe anything other than the OS, the official theory that excuses my past and values my sacrifices. This is why I have been trying so hard to prove that the OS is true or at least that it could be, yet I have not been able to do so. With that being said, I'll get to the point of this thread.

I don't know how many times I have heard OCTs (Official Conspiracy theorists) who say that "truthers" are wrong because they can't prove anything, meaning that conspiracy theories about 9/11 have not been proven, thus the OS must be correct. However, they fail to realize that not only is the OS a conspiracy theory but it too has not been proven. In fact, there have been very few things proven about the events of that day, with most of the things that are, not really pointing to the OS. While I admit that I don't know what happened, I also know that neither does anyone else who didn't plan or carry out the attacks. Because none of us know what happened and not much has been proven, it is paramount that we have a truly independent investigation, one where the results are transparent as well as the method of investigation.

In this thread, I'll list what has been proven and what we know actually did happen. Please keep in mind that I won't add conjecture or speculation and I'm not going to provide any theory as to what I or anyone else thinks happened, except when referring to the official theory, though it will be evident as such. Rather, I'm only going to list what has and what hasn't been proven about the events of that day. It is up to the reader to come to conclusions based upon what we know, as opposed to what we believe. I'm not saying that it is wrong to have beliefs based upon conjecture or circumstantial evidence, only that it is absurd to suggest that the official conspiracy theory must be correct because truther conspiracy theories have not been proven. The following list, is what has been proven. This is what we do know about the events that either happened on 9/11, as result of 9/11 or leading up to 9/11:

Four (4) passenger jet airliners took off from their expected places of departure and none of them landed at their expected destinations.

Two (2) planes flew into two (2) sky scrapers in Manhattan, though three (3) sky scrapers were pulverized, with the third being quite a distance from the first two. They weren't simply knocked down either, they were pulverized into dust and molten metal.

Advanced engineered pyrotechnic material (nano-thermitic) has been found in several dust samples of the WTC buildings. A peer reviewed scientific paper has been published about this discovery and it's analysis. Anyone in Academia knows the rigorous standards sets for
peer review publishing of scientific papers. Why it was there and who put it there are up for debate, though it's difficult to debate that it was there. Furthermore, many scientists believe that these particulates couldn't have been from anything other than the towers, before they fell, because of the way that this particulate matter was evenly distributed through out the WTC dust.

The Bush administration and the 9/11 commission gave us the OS, yet want us to trust them that they are telling the truth, as they have not provided evidence to substantiate their claims. We are simply asked to trust that what they are telling us, is correct.

The Bush Administration opposed an independent investigation and then when popular support for such an investigation was overwhelming and thus out of their hands, the administration tried to undermine it through funding, appointments and refusals to cooperate. In fact, the independent investigation into the adulterous affairs of Bill Clinton received a considerably more generous amount of funding, than did the "independent" investigation into the largest attack on American soil. To put into perspective, the Challenger investigation received $175M, Columbia investigation $152M, Clinton-Lewinsky investigation $30M, 9/11, the largest terror/murder attack ever on US soil originally only $3M, though after political arm-twisting, the budget was bumped by another $12M.

Different elements within the government lied on several occasions to the 9/11 commission, to the point where they were contradicting each other. For one department or agency to be right, the other would have had to lie. In fact, their accounts had changed on multiple occasions and it is arguable that their stories changed to accommodate each other.

Continued Below...

[edit on 30-7-2010 by airspoon]

...Continued from Top

Bush and Cheney had at first refused to even meet with the 9/11 commission. Then, after political arm twisting, they agreed but only if it wasn't recorded, wasn't under oath, wasn't done in public and only if they both could meet together. We have no reason to believe that they were doing anything other than thumb-wrestling while behind closed doors with the commission.

"Bush and Cheney are not testifying before the panel -- they are not under oath and there will be no recording of the session, nor a stenographer in the room. The two members of the White House counsel's staff will take notes during the session, and the commission members will be allowed to take handwritten notes as well. That means there will be no verbatim account of the question-and-answer session, but Gonzales said, "information will make ... its way into the report in some fashion or another, I suspect." (CNN.com,29 April 2004)

Source: www.cnn.com...

The "independent" investigation wasn't so independent after all. Most of the board members were either tied in with the defense industry, military industrial complex or the airline industry. The Executive Director, Philip Zelikow, was a former member of the Bush Administration and even helped him win Florida in the 2000 elections. Mr. Zelikow was also a close friend and business acquaintance with Condi Rice, having co-authored a book with the then National Security Advisor (2001-2005).The Executive Director was the position that decided what would or would not be investigated. Mr. Zelikow was allegedly known to other Commission members as the "White House Mole".

One member of the 9/11 commission, Max Cleland, quit the investigation after stating, "The White House is playing cover up".

Some other notable quotes from Max Cleland:

"As each day goes by, we learn that this government knew a whole lot more about these terrorists before September 11 than it has ever admitted." -- Senator Max Cleland, member of the official National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States quoted in the New York Times, October 27, 2003

"If this decision stands, I, as a member of the commission, cannot look any American in the eye, especially family members of victims, and say the commission had full access. This investigation is now compromised." -- Max Cleland, Former Senator and member of The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States referring to White House policies regarding the sharing of presidential briefings with the commission.
Source: portland.indymedia.org...

It's also important to note, that then President Bush, offered a lucrative appointment to serve on the board of the Export-Import Bank, to which he accepted. Whether he was offered this job to get him off the panel or keep him quiet after the fact, is debatable.

Bush initially tried to appoint Henry Kissinger as Executive Director of the commission, but when family members of the victims challenged his appointment and made a condition that he disclose his business partners in the Middle East who might pose a conflict of interest, he quickly declined the appointment.

The energy industry had it's eye on Afghanistan. They even went as far as to invite the Taliban to Texas, back in the mid to late 90s when Bush was Governor. The purpose of the invite, was to schmooze the Taliban into allowing the pipeline to go through their controlled territory. The Taliban refused the pipeline on religious grounds, in a snub to UNOCAL and other industry stalwarts. You see, the only other routes that this potentially lucrative pipeline could take, is through Iran or China, both not viable options.

Of course the oil industry could have easily forgave and forgotten while chalking up their losses. They could have respecting the Taliban's wishes. The attack on NYC, PA and DC could have just been a huge coincidence that it originated in Afghanistan and the oil industry could have gotten lucky on that one.

Larry Silverstein had just leased the WTC complex (though he already had a lease on Building 7, the third building to be knocked down) just weeks before the attacks and took out an unprecedented insurance policy that wound up giving him an almost $5B return on his initial $14M investment. The lease was worth $3.2B but he only needed to front $14M. Furthermore, Mr. Silverstein tried to get over $7B from the insurance payoffs.

Al Qaeda or Osama Bin Laden didn't claim responsibility directly after the attack. In fact, he denied having anything to do with it. What's the point in a terrorist attack, if you aren't trying to get your message out? Usually, after a terrorist attack, terror groups are climbing over each other to claim responsibility. This didn't happen here. Why commit an attack and then pretend like you didn't do it? From the beginning, Bin Laden denied he had anything to do with this attack, instead saying that it was "the government within the US government" or something along those lines.

The only evidence that we have of Bin Laden admitting to the attack, is in a video that was released by the Bush admin, several months after the attacks, called the “Jalalabad Video”. The video was allegedly found in a house in Pakistan (how convenient) and shows what appears to be Bin Laden talking with some visitors about the 9/11 attacks. The British and Canadian media immediately called into question, the authenticity of this video, yet the American media never even posed the question. This video was/is widely disputed, with many experts believing the figure in the video to be only a look-alike. There are many differences between the real Bin Laden and the man on the film, along with many other discrepancies about the video.

In a report from the BBC, titled "Could the Bin Laden Video Be a Fake?”, the report said, “Washington calls it the ‘smoking gun’ that puts Bin Laden’s guilt beyond doubt, but many in the Arab world believe the home video of the al-Qaeda chief is a fake.”

In another instance, the Guardian article titled “US Urged to Detail Origin of Tape.”, writer Steven Morris says, "The White House yesterday came under pressure to give more details of the video which purports to show Osama bin Laden admitting his part in the September 11 attacks".

There are many, many more, though only quoted two for brevity's sake. I suggest everyone do their own research if interested.

Continued Below...

...Continued from Top

Bush and his administration was caught lying on several occasions after the attack, sometimes even about the attack, such is the case with Iraq. If he would lie about that, why would we assume that he isn't lying elsewhere?

Israeli nationals working for a Mossad front company, were stopped on or near the GW bridge with traces of explosives allegedly detected in their van. Several concerned citizens had noticed that a group of Middle Eastern looking men had set up a camera trained on the towers from the opposite side of the Hudson. They were witnessed to have been congratulating each other when the planes hit. The concerned citizens who witnessed this event, quickly called the police and they were subsequently arrested. Later, it was discovered and reported that these guys were Israeli nationals, working for a Mossad front company in the metro NYC area and they were quietly and quickly released. Although their arrest made headlines, their release didn't. These agents did however become quasi-famous back in Israel, going on the talk-show circuit in their country. On one of these talk shows, the men denied that they were happy and instead, to account for their congratulants, they said "The fact of the matter is we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event." Document the event?

Were these Israelis involved or was this just a huge coincidence? Could the traces of explosives been detected in error? Could they have just gotten lucky by being in the right place, at the right time to be filming the attack? Could they have been giving each other high-fives out of confusion and after seeing a spectacular event? Is this benign or is it pertinent?

Those are some of the few facts that we know about that day and the surrounding circumstances. Please note: I have left out several pieces of evidence that I personally believe in due to circumstance but because those pieces of evidence aren't proven facts, I have refrained from posting them here. Please excuse me if I have over-looked any.

To believe the OS or official conspiracy theory, you basically need to take the word of authorities, which is fine if your satisfied with that, however you would then have no right to claim that truthers have it wrong because some of their evidence or theories have not been proven. The truth of the matter, is while the OS isn't proven and for the most part, doesn't need to be proven due to the standards set by society, truther evidence does need to be proven and is, generally speaking. Really, it is only the theories of truthers that aren't proven (with the exception of a few), but then again, what theory is proven? Once it is proven, it is no longer a theory.

The thing about the OS, is not only do you have to take their word for the theory itself, but you are also asked to take their word for most of the evidence, which is disputed anyway. Most truthers aren't asking you to take their word for anything, they simply want you to look into yourself and evaluate the evidence that many people have uncovered and come to a conclusion on your own, whether that conclusion is that you simply don't know in which case a real and independent investigation is warranted or that you think authorities are trying to cover something up, in which case an investigation is warranted.

You see, none of us really know what happened on that day and seeing how we are paying such a hefty price based on what we are told happened, it would make perfect sense to investigate the events of that fateful day. What's so wrong with a new and real investigation, if for nothing else than to shut the truthers up? I have always said that it doesn't matter whether a truther's theory is accurate, as it only matters whether or not the official conspiracy theory is accurate. If it isn't, then we obviously have something wrong and we need to investigate in order to get to the bottom of it, serve justice and make adjustments accordingly, whatever those adjustments may be.

Another common misconception is that only truthers are conspiracy theorists as it pertains to this issue, while believers in the OS aren't. Hopefully you have noticed throughout this thread, where I have been using the term "official conspiracy theory" to refer to the OS. I use that term because it is exactly what it is, a conspiracy theory. No matter what you believe happened on that day, you most likely believe in a conspiracy theory. Whether you believe that certain members of the government conspired together to pull this off or you believe that 19 Arabs conspired together to pull this off, you believe in a conspiracy theory. If you are like me and have not yet concluded as to who is responsible, you still most likely believe that it was a conspiracy because it obviously took planning and cooperation with at least 4 or more people.

As far as what I believe happened on that day, as I've said before, I don't know, nor do I claim to know. I also don't believe anyone who does claim to know, unless I have proof of their involvement or access. What I do know however, is that the OS can't be correct and the more I research in an effort to prove that is could be correct, the more firm my current conviction becomes. I have tried for many years to debunk truthers and I will continue to do so however I can no longer deny the obvious. Again, I'm not claiming to know what happened on that day, rather I am claiming that everyone else is in the same boat, irregardless of their claims (with the exception of a very few). For this reason, it is paramount that we get a real and transparent investigation. I am simply not willing to take anyone's word for what happened, especially because the price is so large.

The reason that I listed these "known facts" is not because I thought people haven't heard of them. I realize that most people know about them, however I was simply using them as an example in an effort to distinguish fact from belief. Out of all the evidence, theories and conjecture floating around the internet, in regards to 9/11, very little of it are actually established facts and that goes for not only the truther side, but the official side of the argument as well. Sometimes we have to look at the fundamentals, get back to the basics if you will, in order to see reality and get to the truth. When there is so much BS and far-fetched details, it becomes hard to stay focused, interested and convinced of the real truth. I feel that this may be the reason for people who "used" to be truthers.

If you have made it this far, thank you for reading through this entire thread. No matter which side of the fence you are on, it shouldn't mean that we can't come together for the purpose of denying ignorance because after all, I'm only looking for the truth, where ever that truth leads me.


--airspoon

Please note: I have only linked to one source for the instances that I believe need to be supported by a source (for credibility) but every single one of those instances are sourced throughout the internet and printed literature. Just because I only used one source for each, doesn't mean that it is coming from only that source. If your thinking, "Your source isn't credible because this is coming from CNN and we can't trust CNN", please just know that everything linked can be sourced from many other outlets and it only takes 10 seconds on google to find an outlet more suited to your liking.

With that being said, just because something has a "source" or even multiple sources, doesn't mean that it's a fact.

Also, I have only sourced only the things that I feel needed to be sourced for credibility. If you don't believe anything within this thread that is posted by me, either research it yourself or simply ask me for a source. I will take all serious requests seriously.

The End.

[edit on 30-7-2010 by airspoon]

Thank you for your honest, heartfelt and full OP. I hear you. I hear the pain of realising things may not be what you thought - things you were willing to sacrifice your life for.
I admire your courage in being willing to face your questions and I believe that your experience is incredibly important and valuable for people to hear.

Thank you



.

Bravo!! Well put. I need more time to read all your links and thoroughly sift through it, but I would say you did a great job piecing what is known and fact in order.

After reading your personal introduction I decided to respond before I finished reading the information you present.
Airspoon, you did what you did with the best information you had at the time, something we all do everyday. The only difference was the amount of impact your choices would make to others and for yourself.
You trusted your superiors to use your skills, mind, and body wisely and for a cause worthy of deploying the US military in. A good soldier obeys orders and you had no reason nor information that conflicted with WHY you were sent to hunt down terrorists.
Thank you for your service and sacrifice for our country, sir.
If wrong was done it may have been done through you, but not by you. Your commander in chief must answer for that and answer alone, if not in this life then the next.
Remember that life is fickle and can disable you for no reason. I had no accident nor illness definable by medicine yet my spinal cord is swollen and I can no longer work ( or do a lot of other things ). I take pain meds constantly that really don't work that well and have numbness from the chest down. I often wish I had a "reason" for what heppened to me but there is none. Sometimes. crap happens.
Don't spend another moment of your life wondering if you could have done anything differently, it can only distract you from the NOW which is the only thing any of us actually have. Live for tomorrow and live for the now - the past is done. You sound ready to let go and I would encourage you to do exactly that.
I've enjoyed many of your threads and this is by far the most personal. I appreciate you sharing with us all something that close to you. Perhaps this is just another part of the process of moving on for you.
I'll read the rest of your thread in the morning, too tired now to ingest any real information).
Big star and flag for you Airspoon.
Good on ya keeping it real!

respectfully, ATA

It is true that only those who carried out the attack, and those who were complicit in it KNOW what really happened.

I think you make an important point about both sides of the argument being, in essence, consipracy theories - which is completely reasonable given that some sort of conspiracy definitely did take place.

The problem is the prevailing attitude perpetuated by the MSM, that the truth seekers are the only conspiracy theorists in this scenario, and they are constantly mocked and maligned by the MSM, for no good reason.

But I would like to add that this is the case in many criminal trials where the accused pleads not guilty. In those circumstances, as we all know, the evidence is presented and evaluated by Judge and Jury. And in a criminal trial the jury is asked to consider all the evidence, the qualit of the evidence, and weigh up the probability and if they believe there is no reasonable doubt with regard to the case for the prosecution, they find the defendant guilty.

As long as the defendant pleads not-guilty, the jury has no way of KNOWING, they just balance the probabilities based on the evidence available.


In the situation ref 9/11the government has presented little or no evidence, except the tesimony of a witness who was waterboarded 183 times before 'confessing'.

On that basis, and on the basis of the masses of evidence which is available from the 'truthers', much of which is totally verifiable, I would have to say that any reasonable jury would have to find the government guilty. The mass of evidence available online for the truthers is enormous and in many cases, in my opinion, pretty conclusive.

We can't know - so we have to assess probability and quality of evidence.

The 'truthers' evidence can never be veriried legally unless an investigation is held. Until that time, if it ever comes, it is up to us to weigh up the evidence available and make our own decision.

You've done a great job of putting lots of the pieces down on paper. Yet there is more, so much more evidence also available - so much evidence now available that it would take one or two thick books to print it all out.

And I agree, an investigation is more than necessary. I don't believe they will ever agree to that - for reasons which I believe to be obvious. IF they had any real, reliable evidence themselves they surely would have made it public to squash the case for the 'prosecution'. Their silence is deeply frustrating and also, I believe, very telling.

I also believe the international community should be pusing hard for an eenquiry to be carried out.

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Thanks, I have no regrets and have come to terms with everything quite some time ago. I was merely pointing out that I have nothing to gain from looking past the OS and in fact, lots to loose. Also, I think my own initial feelings concerning the OS are indicative of a lot of other people, only they fail to realize their motives or even that they have a motive to begin with. The human mind is a complicated thing and it's its own best con artist. One's own mind can make a fool out of even the most common sensical.

--airspoon

reply to post by airspoon


Good read, as is par for the course with you generally.
911 for me makes not much sense.
If there was 1 thing that wasn’t right I would smell a rat, but there were several things wrong with the day, this tells me there is outright treason.
I care not if it was the person who crashed the plane or if you were on the investigation committee, if you withhold evidence you are just the same as to blame.
If someone killed one of my family and the cops said ok we investigated and it’s no biggie, I would probably go off the deep end.
911 holds lies to me and nothing more.
But thank you for your service either way as you did so with a good intention, and in the end that is all that matters.

First, thumbs up for the thread.

It should lead to some good posts.

The main thing I have noticed about 9/11 and you allured to it is that many people are asking us to take their word on how 9/11 played out.

IMO, the official story is a mix of truth and lies. I just feel that the government was aware of the threats. Possibly was following the threat, but ultimately reacted too slowly when it was time to shut it down.

I think that too save face they have had to lie. Everything just worked perfectly to the hijackers advantage. Even China and Russia with all their technology couldn't have had this much success.

One thing for sure, we will never know what truly happened and why so many from all sides have been killed, injured, or maim because of what took place on 9/11.

I personally think all terrorist actions & groups are funded by governments to achieve the Govt Agenda.

With 911, think for a moment about this. A true terrorist group who wanted to truely undermine a government would only have to aim those 4 planes at four major power stations instead of 'shock value' targets.

That never happens because of the more potential damage it would cause.

Petrol unabled to be pumped at gas stations,
hospitals running on limited resourses.
trafiic lights/street lights causing chaos.
cash registers/atm out of action.
and worst of all... disrupted financial transactions.

Govt run terrorism is there to scare the sheeple into compliance.
The ones who make money from these events are behind the events.

reply to post by CitizenNum287119327


A terrorist group could have targeted the IRS for maximum affect. Not only could it bring a country to its knees by stopping revenue, but it wouldn't piss off the public either. In fact, their "image" would benefit and might even win over a good percentage of the population. Instead of having the public condemn them, many people would probably adore them.

--airspoon

reply to post by wcitizen


Thanks for your input. It is strikingly painful to see the contradiction between the handling of crimes. Why aren't people holding this crime to the same standards? You would think that we would, since it is one of the biggest violent crimes committed against Americans in our history. I think the deciding factor here, is the MSM and this just goes back to people lacking critical self thinking skills. It is so frusterating to see how dumb my fellow citizens have become. I'm embarrassed for my species.

--airspoon

Great thread OP! S&F for ya! You are right there is alot we don't know for sure about that day we pretty much have that list you just posted and for the rest we are expected to take the government's word for it and a white wash commission's word as well.Meanwhile,the 1st responders are being left to rot like lepers by the very same government makes you wonder why they seem so eager for them to die off...

I agree with all of your links. I even question the whereabouts of Bin Laden even before 9/11 and after it. hell he could be the president himself because we don't know what bin laden looks like shaven. Hell, Clinton had a chance to assinate the man in the early 90's I believe and was told not to kill him.

I also believe what is strange that cheyney could of let loose the Jets early, but didn't do it till the planes hit the towers. 9/11 story has so many holes in it more than swiss cheese itself.

S&F for you.

S+F

I hope that soon Mr Assange has a ton of documents which absolutely proof that 9/11 WAS an inside job. I hope this truth blows the ones currently in power out of their seats.

They say Mr Assange has blood on his hands. And what would that mean for them? They literally SWIM IN BLOOD!!!!!!

God - please let the truth come! We deserve it.

Airspoon I usually never do this, but I applaud you for serving your country with honor and respect. The reason I applaud is because you are at least doing some sort of research into the subject before jumping the gun. You did what you had to do, you had no choice.

As for 9/11, the only thing I can say is:

a) Part of the government had something to do with it
b) The government knew and didn't stop it to justify wars with Iraq and Afghanistan
c) Your government is truly dumb (believe me they are not)

It is easier to get away with things when you play incompetent.

I believe it is a mixer of A and B. If you follow all of Bush's cronies, you will see how sinister they truly are. A bunch of rich kids trying to complete daddy's work.

reply to post by airspoon


Thank you for your well put together post. It is one of the most clear and concise posts for 9/11, that I have read. You have sources with all of your points, which is so helpful for anyone who is just now looking into the 9/11.
Hopefully this post won't be riddled with useless posts that contributes nothing to the post.
Thank you for all you have done and your courage to look for the truth.

reply to post by airspoon


Firstly, kudos to the OP for your sacrifices in the name of our country AND for your continued courage in posting your thoughts concerning this subject matter DESPITE the risk of some maybe thinking you to be sounding like a conspiracy theorist.

Now, my own opinion concerning the horrific events of 911 is simply this: There are, seemingly, LOTS of things which simply don't add up for me with respect to the official story disseminated by the MSM and whoever may be playing the role of their puppet master(s). You, me and countless other ATS members have, obviously, arrived at similar conclusions after weighing what we have chosen to interpret as the "facts of the matter".

Your own presentation of these "facts" has been accomplished in an orderly, comprehensive and even "quiet" manner which, to me, along with what I consider to be your own high level of credibility adds immeasurably to the overall flavor of your thoughts and, perhaps, infers a lack of hidden agenda bias of the presentation itself.

I won't argue any of what have now become almost "moot" points concerning the probable participation of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Atta, bin Laden and whoever was, or is, pulling their strings within those events simply because that damned horse was beaten into a bloody pulp long ago.

This post is simply to offer up a sincere "Thank You OP" for your continued service to US.

Best Wishes To You And Your Family My Friend.

Mindpeace

Airspoon, great research and thread. It's amazing that anyone still believes in the government's Official Fairy Tale.

Originally posted by mrMasterJoe
I hope that soon Mr Assange has a ton of documents which absolutely proof that 9/11 WAS an inside job. I hope this truth blows the ones currently in power out of their seats.

Don't hold your breath. Julian Assange has been quoted as saying, “I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.”

Did you see Wikileaks publish the leaked German external intelligence agency report from the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) that concluded 9/11 was carried out by the U.S. and Israeli governments through the CIA and Mossad? Gee, I wonder why not?