99% Undeniable Conclusive Evidence That 9/11 Was An Inside Job

I am not yet allowed to post new threads, so I am posting it here.

How many actually believe that the 2001 Anthrax attacks, perpetrated one week after the September 11, 2001 World Trade Center attacks were the work of one man, Bruce Edwards Ivins, acting alone as claimed by the FBI on August 6, 2008, a few days after the person "committed suicide" on July 27, 2008?

Anyone who pretends to believe that, as I doubt anyone can actually believe it, it has taken FBI years to come out with a suspect's name for a substance that was under government control with the number of people having access to it being less than a hundred, while they came out with positive identification of the perpetrators of World Trade Center attacks, can of course, pretend to anything.

There are no informed people who believe the September 11, 2001 attacks were NOT perpetrated by the US government, there are only pretenders to such. And of course, nothing can be proven to pretenders.

reply to post by TupacShakur


911 was an inside "false flag operation", arranged and carried out to allow the American Government, an excuse to begin invading the Middle East. This one single "inside operation" manipulated the American Public by fear to yet condone another war.

no s*it.

People do not like to be driven out of their comfort zone.

By and large taking that red pill is a true *itch.

Once you wake up and realize our government (as is most world governments and people in power) are corrupt to the core, life becomes scary.

You, me, all of us want to, need to, believe that the voting system is just and correct and that those that really are running the show have our best interest at heart....................but those at the very top play by totally different rules than most of us, the common 9-5 person either can't or won't accept the deep ruthlessness of some people because basically most "common folk" are decent and can't comprehend the shear madness and lust for power other humans have and to what extreme they will go to, to acquire it.

I live in a very nice (not ritzy but nice) suburban neighborhood. Everyone I live around bar none, are very super nice, good hearted, kind folks. All my neighbors are helpful, kind and morally upstanding people (got lucky I guess). Pretty much, they are very helpful but mind their own business and live and let live. We struggle to survive but not at each other's expense. We are the common folk of Midwest America. Hardworking and kind.

While working in offices for 20+ years however I quietly watched who accumulated power and who didn't.

It's a game, not always won by the person who has the best solutions, the best interest of the people at heart. Again, it's a big friggin bs game folks.

All of our presidents since JFK have been puppets. Sorry, President of the almight United States of America, isn't the highest office................it is in name, but in acuality, it's only a title and there remains "a power behind the throne / or oval office desk high leather back chair), unseen, remaining in the shadows, calling the shots.

You either dance to the strings that are pulled by those corporations that contribute campaign money (bribes) or you end up with the back of your head blown off (or a suicide/accident/ or your reputation messed over) because that is how the game is now played.

There is a old saying, "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" and I have found, with my own personal experience that saying to be very true.

I've read perhaps 100 books on many theories of the why, how, and what happened on that fateful day, September 11, 2001.

In my opinion, as I watched the towers collapse, to me, it looked like a controlled demolition.

Again, my hobby is collecting data, reading, watching videos over and over and over again. I live to analyse what affects all of us in order to gain some sort of "big picture" of what the hell is really going on.

I could read at a third grade level my first day of first grade and have read like a banshee eversince.

Math, I'm not so smart in but reading and remembering what I read and compiling data, yes, I'm very good at this. I'm hard to live with, cranky, lazy, like wine a little too much, I have many vices and faults, but I'm very good at accumulating information, retaining it and putting puzzle pieces togeather.

There are two books I highly recommend, "9/11 The Ultimate Truth" by Laura Knight Jadczyk and "Political Ponerology" by Andrew M. Lobaczewski.

No, I'm not having another "senior moment". In many of my other posts, these two books stand alone as two of my top recommended books.

Why?

9/11 gives a very indept analyst of the why, how and what (I think happened). the inner workings and motives behind 911.

Political Ponerology gives one a keen insight into how many (not all but most) of our political leaders (or anyone with real power) operates on a mental level. And this book alone is scary, much more so than any fictional novel you could pick up and read because this book alone shows how cold hearted, with no moral compunction our learders are.

No, sorry folks, particularly the American Government does not have the common voters best interest at heart.

Our voting system is a sham at the moment, perpetuated to give the people the illusion of free choice where in actuality, our Presidents, Surpreme Court Judges, Senate and Congress - in short all those that decide our "laws" have been bought off.

For the People and by the people is an illusion.

When you allow either religion or corporations to get involved in government, to go to bed with government, you end up with problems such as we now face.

Namely where true loyalities lie.

Now, consider for a moment you yourself are a canidate for President, Governor or some other really high ranking office and John Doe contributes $500.00 (which my husband contributed to Barack Obama)

And now consider that Monsanto contributed $5,000,000. towards your campaign...............where in sam hell do you think your loyalty is going to lie?

Come on..............human nature.

And Bush - don't even get me going on the entire Bush clan. They have been liars, cheaters and thugs since before WWI.

In my mind, and I have done extensive research on this family - they make Tony Saprano look like a wussy boyscout............tip of the ice berg.

A real mafia owns and operates our government and the common people, unknowingly have been dumbed down, distracted and divided in order to maintain control.

9/11......................was a inside, false flag job.

We were warned, decades ago and yet, it is so easy to ignore and go along with our mundane lives, distracted, dumbed down and divided.

It is time to come together and demand accountability and truth.

I have lived 58 years in America, and over the last 40 years this, my beloved country has changed so much, it's not even the same country.



--- WARNING --- Graphic if you don't like seeing the truth of where your tax monies are going don't watch.

Originally posted by TheUniverse
not to mention that George bushes cousin operated and owned the security business for the WTC's

Why do you keep posting lies like that here? George Bush's cousin had nothing at all to do with security for the WTC, he neither owned nor operated the company that did.

This is why truthers are treated as such a joke, they keep telling lies about what actually happen on 9/11!

reply to post by spoor

Bush, Enron, and Bin Laden
Connections Within Connections
by William Pitt




Bush Cronies Guilty of High Treason and Murder?
The Enron Story thus far is nothing less than astounding: A company valued in the billions on Wall Street suddenly filed for the largest bankruptcy claim in the history of the known universe. Four thousand employees were abruptly shown the door after having been barred from dumping the company stock, meant to fund their retirement, while it was worth something. Meanwhile, Enron executives in the know were able to dump the stock, back when it was the gold standard on the Street, for a cool $1 billion.


So What's New, You Ask.
Well, apparently, although Enron was ailing for around the last 4 years (to be defined exactly in the courts), the aforementioned executives were able to maintain the mirage of financial viability by stuffing the debt into what are called “off-balance-sheet partnerships.” In essence, each of the executives built personal banking bunkers and hid what has been revealed to be staggering Enron debts within them, keeping the fact that the company was hemorrhaging money off the publicly displayed balance sheets. This maintained the company's credit rating, and allowed it to continue doing business.


Kenneth Lay was perhaps the best financial friend George W. Bush has ever known.
The fact that this went on for four years means several things:
most of the Enron executives were aware of and/or actively participating in this highly criminal and irresponsible activity
the stockholders, including 4,000 loyal Enron employees, were lied to
the executives probably knew the stock value was doomed when they bailed out and cashed in several months ago
they let their employees lose the retirement funds they believed were growing within their Enron stock portfolios
a lot of people got screwed by a pack of sharp operators who didn't give a damn about anyone but themselves.
So What's New, You Ask Again!!!!
Well, what's new starts to emerge when the umbilical political and financial connections between Bush and Enron are illuminated. Enron's capo, Kenneth Lay, was perhaps the best financial friend George W. Bush has ever known. He and a number of Enron employees essentially bankrolled Bush's 2000 Presidential campaign, even lending Bush an Enron corporate jet for trips between whistle stops. And long before Bush got White House stars in his eyes, he worked very closely with Enron on energy policy in Texas.
This close connection led to the Bush administration's hiring of a number of influential individuals within Enron's orbit for important government positions:

THOMAS E. WHITE, Bush's Secretary of the Army, had been Vice-Chairman of Enron Energy Service, and held millions in Enron stock.

KARL ROVE, Presidential Advisor, owned as much as $250,000 of Enron stock.

LARRY LINDSAY, Economic Advisor, leapt straight from Enron to his current White House job.

ROBERT B. ZOELLICK, Federal Trade Representative, ditto above.

HARVEY PITTS, SEC Chairman, was handpicked by Kenneth Lay for the position, due to his notorious aversion to governmental regulation of any kind.

DONALD RUMSFELD, Defense Secretary, together with 31 Bush administration officials had a line item for Enron in their stock portfolio. The woebegone corporation held, and continues to hold, enormous influence over the day-to-day machinations of Federal government policy. Was Bush's recent gutting of the Clean Air Act, a decision designed to improve the fortunes of companies like Enron, the brainchild of people with deep connections to the energy industry?

DICK CHENEY, Vice President, admitted recently to six separate meetings with Enron executives while formulating the Bush administration's energy policy. Cheney, a former executive of the Halliburton Petroleum interest, was in charge of creating this policy. For reasons soon to be exposed by subpoena, Cheney refused to detail the specifics of the creation of this policy, which included the multiple Enron meetings. The General Accounting Office was preparing to sue Cheney to reveal this information when the September 11th attacks took place. Those subpoenas may be dusted off and mailed within a month.

In the meantime, the Justice Department is preparing a serious criminal investigation into the collapse of Enron. The democratically controlled Senate is planning hearings on the matter as well. Columnist Robert Scheer has referred to the Bush administration's involvement in the Enron debacle as “Whitewater in spades.” One wonders if “Watergate” would be a more appropriate comparison.



Bush Makes Bundle, Everyone Else Gets Shafted
Bush's own dealings within the energy industry carry a disturbingly familiar echo to the Enron situation: Once upon a time, he was a high-ranking officer of a petroleum interest called Harken Oil. On June 22, 1990, a week before Harken announced a $23.2 million loss in quarterly earnings, making its stock lose 60 percent of its value over the next six months, Bush made $848,560 by selling his Harken stock, earning him a 200% profit. Bush made a bundle while the other investors lost millions. Harken was Enron in miniature.
Some say that Daddy tipped little George off about Saddam's impending invasion of Kuwait which was the reason for the sudden fall in value. Now I wonder which oil companies specifically have profited from replacing Mullah Omar by a CIA guy? Somebody care to dig out the records?



All Right, But Where's the Treason and Murder?!
There's a school of thought, espoused primarily by Republicans, that any investigation into potentially dishonorable or illegal actions by the Bush administration is tantamount to treason. We are at war, undeclared though it may be, and Bush must be free to prosecute this war vigorously.
However, if reports recently aired on CNN have any credence, Bush and his cronies may well have to answer for actions that make the Enron catastrophe look like a jaywalking offense, actions that led directly to the incredible carnage in New York and Washington, D.C!

In 1998, during the Clinton administration, the U.S.-based energy concern Unocal canceled plans to exploit massive natural gas deposits in Turkmenistan by running a pipeline from there to Pakistan, where the natural gas could have been processed for Asian and Western energy markets. The idea was scuttled after Clinton ordered the cruise missile bombing of Afghanistan in response to a terrorist attack upon U.S. embassies in Africa which were planned and executed by Osama bin Laden.

The pipeline would have had to pass through Afghanistan, and Unocal was given the message in Technicolor by Clinton's people that Taliban-controlled Afghanistan was not to be given any sort of financial boon.

The Bush administration found no moral dilemma in dealing with the Taliban to get to the gas. Immediately upon their arrival in Washington, a vigorous courtship of the Taliban was undertaken. In fact, if former U.N. weapons inspector Richard Butler is to be believed, the Bush administration had a vested interest in strengthening and stabilizing the Taliban regime, because a stable regime would enable investors to revive the Turkmenistan natural gas pipeline deal. The Taliban, demon of the moment, was the Bush administration's idea of a “stable” government. Stable enough, anyway, to see the pipeline through.



The connections between Bush and the Taliban became so close that the Taliban went so far as to hire an expert on U.S. public relations to smooth the way between the two regimes.
The connections between Bush and the Taliban became so close that the Taliban went so far as to hire an expert on U.S. public relations named Laila Helms, so as to smooth the way between the two regimes. Meetings between the two nations continued at a high level, the last of which occurred in August, scant weeks before the September 11th attacks. All of these actions were taken to exploit the vast energy reserves in Turkmenistan for the benefit of American energy corporations.



Former FBI Deputy Director John O'Neill stated, “The main obstacles to investigating Islamic terrorism were U.S. oil corporate interests, and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it.”
The cozy relationship between Bush and the Taliban frustrated the investigative efforts of former FBI Deputy Director John O'Neill. He was the FBI's chief bin Laden hunter, in charge of the investigations into the bin Laden-connected bombings of the World Trade Center in 1993, the destruction of an American troop barracks in Saudi Arabia in 1996, the African embassy bombings in 1998, and the attack upon the U.S.S. Cole in 2000.



If these allegations carry even the faintest whiff of credibility George W. Bush and members of his administration stand in taint of high treason and murder.


Source; www.loompanics.com...

The Bush's are all so connected with oil/911 and the intentional planning of the Middle East it's not even funny.

reply to post by TheUniverse


There was resistance, in the beginning. It didn't all come down at once. It clearly had a failure, which then lead to what looked like resistance-less collapse. And once again, that is because each individual unity could only support the mass of the unit, not above it. It would be like making your rib support your entire rib cage. Not a wise structure.

There is no contradiction here. You added that straw. Plus you switch back and forth between the towers and WTC7, so yea, they both came down that way though, so it really don't matter.

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

This doesn't mean they demoed it. It means they pulled the building down. What that means is still unknown. They demoed it after 9/11, so he was probably referring to that. We do know they evacuated the building first. Which is a contradiction to the idea that they had a plan to blow up the towers and kill everyone in it. Where we go from that is pure speculation and assumption. What we do know is nobody died from it, except I think that one poor soul on the street corner, and the fire was, indeed, out of control.

Oh btw in your post you seem to be referring to the WTC 1 and 2 I'm talking about WTC 7 So you might want to avoid Dodging my question.

So now we are back to WTC7? Cause you said towers in your last post. I am simply going by your most recent post. If you lie and switch back in forth, exchanging straws, that is your own fault. I don't get confused by it though.

I never once regarded anything toward the collapse of WTC 1,2 i'm specifically talking about WTC 7 so no... I'm not pertaining to the collapse of those towers.

And yet you said towers. idk, maybe you edited that. Not really a concern of mine, I already explained why WTC7 came down too, guess you're going to lie and say I didn't, but that's your thing it would seem.

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
The Bush's are all so connected with oil/911 and the intentional planning of the Middle East it's not even funny.

Why did you reply to me? There was nothing in your post about
"not to mention that George bushes cousin operated and owned the security business for the WTC's"?

reply to post by spoor


In England, you can find plenty of inter-related works of rich people.

Simple fact is that wealthy families ARE in those many places.

Originally posted by Gorman91

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

This doesn't mean they demoed it. It means they pulled the building down.

They didn't demolish the building they just pulled it down???

Doesn't this mean the same thing?

Essentially you said the building was intentionally destroyed.

You are saying a 47 story building was rigged to be "pulled down" in less than 8 hours by a fire brigade while a "fire is raging".

Originally posted by Observer99

Originally posted by TupacShakur
-- WTC 7 collapses to the ground in under 7 seconds, the official explanation is that falling debris from the North tower created a series of fires inside the building. If this is true, it would be the third steel-framed skyscraper in history to completely collapse from damage and fires, the first two being the World Trade centers.

-- video evidence shows large amounts of molten metal visible falling from the towers prior to collapse

Fixed it for you.

Those are the top 2 pieces of evidence and all you really need. Building 7, and plainly obvious thermite spraying (SPRAYING!) from the corners of the towers. Both on video, thus very visually obvious and impossible to dismiss. 9/11 was an inside job just from those alone. Making a 10-page post just makes people fall asleep and/or think you are arguing based on 500 pieces of circumstantial evidence. Just stick to the few smoking guns like above.

edit on 24-6-2011 by Observer99 because: emphasis

Have you, or has anyone considered that maybe this is just it? Perhaps the government were knew these attacks were coming, they had at least an vague idea of who would commit them, when they would come, and how.

Rather than dutifully taking their knowledge to safeguard against it, the government, also itching to go back into the middle east for whatever reason. So they instead, used their knowledge to plan ahead, to ensure a great little thing called Maximum Effect, the government loves it, and their good at it too.

Maybe they plant the thermite through something as inane as "regular maintenance", over the course of months or year(s). They learn all the vantage points for quick containment. Who knows what they did to WTC 7.

Meanwhile at the Pentagon, maybe they start renovations to increase the durability of the structure, (the attacks could be the proof they need that, the reno's will help minimize future damage, save lives, make money, etc). Not to mention Rumsfeld's comments on the trillion or so missing money coins, and the death of both accounting and auditing personnel, and they destruction of financial documentation, giving lots of potential motivation.

reply to post by ToFarGone


It sure does solve a lot of problems and achieves a lot of goals all in one day doesn't it?

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by OMsk3ptic

 

Not really. When a very experienced person says something, it's not as likely to be correct as when an entire university's worth of experienced people say the opposite. One experienced person doesn't make it right. A consensus of experienced people does.

edit on 24-6-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

Well you have a consensus of people who are experienced in being lied too telling you you are being lied too. lol

It is absolutely obvious that anyone who believes the official government story has not taken the time to view all of the evidence. The inconsistencies are staring everyone in the face, and you would have to choose to ignore them if you still believe that bin Laden orchestrated 9/11, as well as the other lies the government spoon-fed the public.

When I first read the thread title, I was planning on coming in and bashing the op for using the word proof, but after actually reading the entire thread, I will stand behind the statement that what is provided in the op is actually proof. When there are so many professional architects, engineers, demolition experts, et cetera, who are saying this is impossible, how can anyone believe that it is possible? I have seen none of these professionals come out in support of the government's claims, but rather the ones who have come out to speak have said that there is something completely wrong with the official story.

And they aren't claiming it was an inside job, or that it was some big conspiracy, even though it was...All they are saying is that the impact of the airliners and the subsequent fire were not enough to bring down either of the towers, especially building 7.

There are too many things that went "right" for this to be anything other than a conspiracy, and they are listed in the original post. My personal favorite inconsistency is that documentation condemning the "hijackers" was found at both crash sites. How convenient!!!

And wouldn't you know that there wouldn't be an actual investigation into the matter, and no one who was an independent party was allowed to examine the evidence, which is compelling evidence that there was a cover-up of some kind.

With all things considered, again, I cannot believe that anyone would buy the official story, which is based entirely on fabricated evidence and ideas, as well as the complete lack of independent confirmation, and the failure to release any of the important evidence.

reply to post by Samuelis


When I heard they had a deadline to remove and replace all the firepoofing in both buildings, it clicked, if that was a possible job, wow the time and money involved would be higher then those buildings. Unless you believe that firepoofing just falls off when a plane hits it, , you have alot of work. INSURANCE anyone? Maybe they should have reconsidered the Code update to the buildings who ever was pushing that issue. The whole thing starts to make some sense, say you restore a old car. In the end if done right your car usually worth more, but If you knew you were gonna spend 1 or 2 or who know how many more times the money than your gonna have on your assets worth, to end up in the same place. Would you do it, or burn it and collect what money you have invested back? Two 110 story buildings just require a complex plan. Sadly they had it, from selling the steel FAST for scrap metal, to the illusion of the planes being the reason they fell, who the finger was to be pointed at for blame. Is the little people who really paid. The ones who happend to work there, the firemen, the police, and all the taxpayers really. But someone had to make that decision knowing people would die, thats the sad part.


As far as the 99% lets bump that to 100 with a couple statements.

The PENTAGON only has 1 video camera that saw 5 frames none in which anything like an airplane is shown. It dont matter what major intersection I choose within a half mile radius of my house, theres at least FOUR..... release all the videos, show the plane, simple.

If you could go to Vegas and put everything you own on a bet that The same day four planes are hijacked and flown into those building and the pentagon, there would be drills involving the same exact events in a exercise using the jets, that would be called upon to help otherwise. What would be the odds of that bet? With no prior knowledge of course. Better yet would you bet that hijackers did it on the day of the milatary exercises or vise versa? Im going on someone planned something.

Nope now that I think of it jet fuel from hijacked planes leveled 3 buildings and they should give the 911 commision a bonus

reply to post by ToFarGone

Click here to learn more about this warning.

An amazing and informative thread. Interesting, detailed, and great summary by op.
I will definitely check out vid

Originally posted by TupacShakur
The 'Loose Change Final Cut' which is available on YouTube completely debunks the official 9/11 story from top to bottom, leaving almost no room for question at the end of the film.

You "forget" that all of Avery's films have been debunked - why does he keep changing his story?

What happened to the jets carrying pods, the B-52 that hit the Empire State building, that flight 77 had Pratt & Whitney engines etc.

Here is his latest attempt debunked.

screwloosechange.blogspot.com...

screwloosechange.blogspot.com...

www.lolloosechange.co.nr...

However the truthers once again will ignore these, as they show how silly Avery's videos actually are.

Nothing but 11 pages of garbage - all of which should be disposed of the same way they disposed of the 911 trash.

You people have done nothing but re-hash the same old garbage....I want to puke my guts up.

This "truether movement" can't get off the page...It began on the internet and will die on the internet......

The king moron - dylin avery? or whatever his name is, was a looser before he came up with this and is an even bigger looooser today.....

blah, blah, blah........yawn, yawn, yawn.....

The only thing proven here is all you fools still by this crap.

reply to post by Wotcher


No, I am saying that they demoed what was left of that building and others in the days and weeks after. The context of Silverstein's word's do not say when they demoed it, only that they gave up trying to save the building, and instead evacuated everyone. Everything beyond that is assumption and speculation.