Wait a second?... How is it that I'm the one that's crazy, insane, delusional, and brainwashed?

reply to post by esdad71

See last post for proof. This shows you there were terrorists. The FBI used international records to verify the dead.

Please there you go again drinking to much Government cool aid. Our Government has failed the people in this Country THEY TELL LIES including the FBI there is no PROOF!

PROOF! that our Government LIES! WMD! There is nothing more to say!

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Do you at least agree that the majority of truthers are young? Do you think there is any coorelation?

Yes I agree the majority are young, and thus easily led, as I believe many have been misled and present the half truths they've been sold by people like Alex Jones as evidence. That in itself is immaturity.

But lets not be unrealistic here. "Truthers" aren't the only immature ones in the 9-11 discussion. Both sides could do some growing up.

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
2- Really? I'd like to read this news article that says this.

I apologize for not wishing to do your research for you. You are more than welcome to find it if you wish to read it. You use the same Internet I do. Simply search for news articles regarding the power downs and maintenance weeks before 9-11.

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
BTW, is this from the MS media - you know, the ones that lie, or is this from one that agrees with your predetermined conclusion?

This is nothing more than an attempt at baiting and you know it.

If I say mainstream media, you will assume you know all of what I believe about the mainstream media, and you will say something to the effect of "I thought they lie about everything" or "oh so the mainstream media tells the truth when it fits your agenda."

If I say it is from an alternative source, you will say what you just said about my "predetermined conclusion", as if you know what my conclusions and beliefs are, and you will discredit the source.

No matter what I say, in your mind, you have won the argument. So to solve this, you go find the article and you determine if it is mainstream or alternative, and you let me know.

Nice way to play both sides, by the way. You should be a politician.

reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi

You should be a politician.

To be a good politician one must learn to lie very well and to play ball the way the corrupt system is set up now.

Originally posted by cashlink
reply to post by esdad71

 

See last post for proof. This shows you there were terrorists. The FBI used international records to verify the dead.

Please there you go again drinking to much Government cool aid. Our Government has failed the people in this Country THEY TELL LIES including the FBI there is no PROOF!

PROOF! that our Government LIES! WMD! There is nothing more to say!

Sorry, I didn't drink the kool aid either.

Is there any way cashlink that you can provide argument or some proof rather than simply ranting?

Our government failed us by having a pissing contest prior to 9/11 with agencies not sharing information. This is in the commission report as well as a dozen other books. We are now in a digital age where the DHS can cross reference to help to prevent future terror attacks 7vyears down the road.

PS the only kool aid I ever drink has a little vodka in it....

reply to post by Doomsday 2029


reply to post by Doomsday 2029


Doomsday I am not a debunker, but after much research, and even though I have unanswered question I do not believe what you do, and that is ok. What I do believe is that our intelligence services failed us and in order to have some accountability that investigation needs to be reopened, especially since far more facts have come to light since the 9/11 commission released its findings.

I bid you to not give up on your research and offer you a piece for you to study that is imperative to anyone researching the 9/11 event

the title is The Shadow Factory by James Bamford and chronicles the events leading up to 9/11. It is a book about the NSA, which also for your information was never questioned by the 9/11 post commission, the book one as it is called gives detailed information that will be useful to your research. It may not change your beliefs but it will definately give you a multitude of new questions and can even awnser some question that have been vague and unawnserable. I highly recommend it.

To all if you are a true investigator of 9/11 weather truther or conspiracy type, a book that in its first hundred pages gives details imperative to your investigation.

Once again the books name is The Shadow Factory by James Bamford (DoubleDay books) it details verifiable information from phone numbers, addresses, times and dates and cables intercepted by the NSA, which was not investigated by the 911 commission. It is worth a look no matter what side of the street your on.

If you decide to ignore this book then IMO you should cease whatever argument it is that you are in favor of. This book is one of many, but is a definate must read and critical to research.

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi

1-Yes I agree the majority are young, and thus easily led,

2-Simply search for news articles regarding the power downs and maintenance weeks before 9-11.

3-No matter what I say, in your mind, you have won the argument. So to solve this, you go find the article and you determine if it is mainstream or alternative, and you let me know.

1- so then you DO see a coorelation between the young people being led by half truths, cuz of their less than mature frontal lobes. Good for you. This is why i argue with truthers here. Kids are led down by this path by the very charlatans that you yourself recognize.

2- but you said that articles wrote about the explosives being planted. This is wrong. This is your interpretation of what could have happened during this time. They are not the same thing.

3- it ain't about trying to shoot you down. What I'm doing is showing you the dishonesty within the truth movement. When they disagree with what a MS article says, then they're liars. When you agree, they're ok. What this is, is a conveniebt "out" for all truthers - they use this lame avenue to exclude what they want, when they want, without really giving a good logical reason why to exclude it. Now, if you want to say - this article is wrong because xxxxxxxxx, then that's a good, valid way to argue your point. Try doing THAT if you want to have any credibility.....

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
2- but you said that articles wrote about the explosives being planted.

No, I did not. You're welcome to point out where I said articles were written about explosives being planted. What I said was there were articles regarding the power downs and maintenance. There's no need to put words in my mouth.

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
When they disagree with what a MS article says, then they're liars. When you agree, they're ok.

Let me ask you this...

Do you believe the mainstream media all the time, or do you see them as liars all the time?

Hopefully your answer is neither. Hopefully it is neither because you recognize that each individual report made by any source should be analyzed individually, meaning you should not take one instance of truth telling, or one instance of lie telling, and assume that everything that source says is either fact or fiction.

Logically, and I'm sure you understand this, the truth can always be found in the middle. So logically, the mainstream media does at times lie, and does at times tell the truth. And logically, if you were to examine each article individually, as you should, then you could find yourself calling them a liar sometimes, and defending their reporting as the truth other times.

Everyone does it. This isn't unique with "truthers".

reply to post by Doomsday 2029
hey man i totally agree with u, but do u mind sending me the proof that u have about this, i would love to see it, plus i want to prove my friends wrong. send it to this email address, [email protected]. and for the subject put 9/11 info. thanks

Originally posted by esdad71
Our government failed us by having a pissing contest prior to 9/11 with agencies not sharing information.

I hear you guys admitting this all the time. I have to wonder though. Is this acceptable in your view? And then further, is it acceptable to cover up and lie about it?

reply to post by esdad71

Sorry, I didn't drink the kool aid either.

Is there any way cashlink that you can provide argument or some proof rather than simply ranting?

Our government failed us by having a pissing contest prior to 9/11 with agencies not sharing information. This is in the commission report as well as a dozen other books. We are now in a digital age where the DHS can cross reference to help to prevent future terror attacks 7vyears down the road.

PS the only kool aid I ever drink has a little vodka in it....

Speaking of Rants what do you call your post? (A rant!)
No there was no pissing contest, there was a lying contest!

Our government failed us by having a pissing contest prior to 9/11 with agencies not sharing information

Really! Who was not sharing information? Please show proof, and site your sources. However, I don’t think you can..

This is in the commission report as well as a dozen other books

FACT! The 911 Commission report was nothing but a white wash not worth the paper it was printed on. All LIES!

We are now in a digital age where the DHS can cross reference to help to prevent future terror attacks 7vyears down the road.

Yes we are much more advance than we where before 911 we didn’t have a big Home land security as we do now. However, in my opinion, it took a false flag operation to happened, so the Government could get their huge Homeland security program. How else would they get it? Congress was not going to give billions of dollars to an agency unless there was a serious demand for it. Terrorists! Yes, the Terrorists! Are coming to get us!


Mod edit: Fixed quote.

[edit on 1/1/2009 by Hal9000]

Originally posted by TravisT
I'm not going to lie when I say this, but I haven't followed ANY 9-11 conspiracies. Hell, I don't really know if there is even one. I'm not here saying I watch FOX, CNN, NBC, and all the other news on TV, or believe every word of it. I understand every station is biased, and has a certain agenda/audience to uphold.

Now, if this was such an inside job, and this big of a coverup, then why aren't they trying to cover up any of these youtube videos, or conspiracy books/authors from revealing the truth? What your saying is, the government killed MANY people over 9-11, but they aren't willing to "silence" these authors of books or producers of youtube videos? Kind of weak if you ask me. Maybe thats why I don't believe just yet. Things don't seem to add up to you, but the easiest people to "silence" or "coverup" haven't, and that to me doesn't even come close to adding up.

[edit on 30-12-2008 by TravisT]

They do not need to expose themselves by attacking the truth movement. They rely instead on people who believe the official story. That way they guage just how much more #e they can pull off.

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Raytracer

 

So, now we are talking about using wireless commands to detonate a building? For a building the size of one of the towers, you are talking thousands of charges, each with its own detonator, all placed with no one else in the building knowing that they are there.

Yes, but I don't know how you could be so sure you would need thousands of charges. I was thinking maybe hundreds.

And then being able to ensure that your signals arrive at each charge at the proper time to do its job? Lets see...cell phone repeater on the one tower, radio/tv transmitters, all the cell phones...it would be an RF nightmare to try to "Wirelessly" demolition a building.

A software can precisely time the signals to be sent to the correct detonators.
To avoid RF interference you could use a low traffic (or reserved... by the military for example) bandwidth instead of using public or commercial frequencies, right?

The chances of it going right would be so small as to be statistically impossible,

Ok, if you say so!
Considering no modern steel structure has ever totally collapsed due to fire, I would say it's statistically impossible for 2 skyscrapers, being struck at different heights and angles by 2 airliners, to collapse in an hour or so due to fire in the exact same manner and at nearly the maximum velocity a free fall would grant.
Remember: the official story is the towers went down due to fire, not due to the impact with the planes (after all the towers were designed to bear multiple hits from the biggest airliner of their time).

unless you want to start considering encrypted signals, but then you also need extra equipment to decrypt the signals...and again that would be for each of the thousands of charges.......again, I have a better chance of seeing pigs with wings than I do that being pulled off as well.

Encryption doesn't require big and expensive hardware, and isn't jamming proof, so I'm sticking to private or reserved frequencies to be the best case.

Anyway I'm not advocating this is how they did, I'm just pointing out it's not that impossible to achieve, and the "miles of wires" theory goes down the drain.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by esdad71
Our government failed us by having a pissing contest prior to 9/11 with agencies not sharing information.

I hear you guys admitting this all the time. I have to wonder though. Is this acceptable in your view? And then further, is it acceptable to cover up and lie about it?

Now you've gone and done it. .

There is a reason for this not just letting it go. These inept neocons are responsible for national security.
Opps, they just farted and 3000 innocent people died. Then the panicked herd allowed the PA I and II; plus an avalanch of other infringements and erosions of our constitution, and the gutting of Posse Commitatus.

So, my answer to your question is, these folk find Bill Clintons Sex Scandle far worse and more damaging than the ineptitude that cost the lives of so many Americans, not to mention Iraqi children by the thousands.

Trial by fire, death by hanging is too good for the Real Terrorists.

Considering no modern steel structure has ever totally collapsed due to fire, I would say it's statistically impossible for 2 skyscrapers, being struck at different heights and angles by 2 airliners, to collapse in an hour or so due to fire in the exact same manner and at nearly the maximum velocity a free fall would grant.

I have always wondered why people always mentioned "no modern steel structure had ever totally collapsed due to fire" argument. No other modern steel structure had ever been hit by a fueled, high speed airliner EITHER. It wasnt just the damage and it wasnt just the fire, it was BOTH. How hard is that to understand???

As for the "software comment" you just do not get it. But keep adding details that make it more complicated of a scenario. Does not change the fact that your idea is too technically complicated to be sure of success.

WHAT WAS GAINED FROM THE FALSE FLAG OPERATION KNOWN AS 9/11????

Nothing. A rant, Look, I have not begun to rant because I am trying to simply provide facts and have a nice debate. OK, so instead of pissing contest, how about if I explain it like this.

Due to a communication breakdown between government agencies specific information regarding planned terror attacks that occurred on 9/11 was not presented nor was it investigated in the proper manner.

This is detailed in the 9/11 commission report as well as about a dozen other books that detail the 'years' of planning that were taken to make sure that the US was hit and hit hard. It is not my job to provide links as if you are coming to a debate such as this one you should have your fact together so if someone does not believe you, they can research it. Also, I have attempted to list books to read in these forums and have been attacked by others for spreading propaganda so I apologize.

I do not consider those who feel that 9/11 was a false flag or a black op as crazy, insane, delusional or brainwashed until they start to declare that there were NO planes and NO hijackers and that the people aboard those planes are held in a secret facility in Ohio. This is fodder. That Bush somehow benefited from this and ushered in a new age of civil liberties rape. That there will be tanks in the street and Cheney will where a Darth Vader mask and delcare all liberals enemies of the state. How can anyone take you seriously at that point.

I started to believe that those who promote the truth movement was a false flag to keep people from investigating and looking into Flight 93. This is where people need to look.

DHS is needed to ensure there are no more terror attacks, domestic or foreign in nature, to provide security to us, American citizens, so we can go to Wal Mart everyday and drive our SUV's and watch HDTV. Please tell me how it is not accomplishing that? It gives the sheep unknown security that in the end we will be grateful for.

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself...so if there is no fear, we can live in comfort.

Sorry, not going to play juvenile games with you, you'll have to find some other fool to do that if that's what winds your clock.

Someone posting on this board has nothing in common with the other eyewitnesses who saw a plane collide with the Pentagon. The eyewitnesses are from all walks of life, they are simply people that were in the area when this occurred.

I'm just stunned that anyone can with a straight face, say that every single person who claimed to have seen a jet, or saw it fly into the side of the Pentagon, is lying or delusional. That really is amazing to me. What would all these people have to gain by lying? Why would they ALL make up identical stories?

It's also ironic that seeing a passenger jet flying low is one of the key selling points of proving that this was a conspiracy, for another group who claims it's all a government cover-up. The interviewed several witnesses who supposedly saw it flying a different flight path, than the "official" version stated.

Which is it? No plane? Plane off course? Explosion? Flyover? Missile?

And that alone is only one aspect of the thing that reeks. People claiming that not one single person would question or see agents placing wreckage ONTO the lawn immediately after the crash, astounds me. People are not as stupid as you folks give them credit for. People are nosy and interfering by nature, and they WANT to get involved, and see what's going on.

It's like the collapse of the WTC buildings. For those who see the windows being blown out who are of the mind this is an act of government, this could ONLY be explosives. They won't even accept the possibility that it's simply a heck of a lot of air being forced out of a collapsing building, that has a lot of air inside of it. They dismiss anything that might interfere with their beliefs. Or like in your case, make fantastical claims that dozens of witnesses were either lying or delusional.

Also consider this: Of those who saw the event unfold, NONE came forward and said "I was watching the building, and I saw it explode, but I didn't see a jet at all when it happened." Wouldn't dozens have seen the actual unfolding of events? Why would NONE report the truth?

Dear _javascript:underline(ALL) The resion you think 9/11 was hosted by england & usa (i dont disagree[Please don't correct my spelling]) because we are all controled by the media. This conspirace first aravied on cnn news hmm i woulder.

Back the over thooughts building 7 fell avter the bbc reported it. Just before one of the planes hit one of the towers a wing fell off hmm.
There is a lot more like this.

Originally posted by esdad71
Due to a communication breakdown between government agencies specific information regarding planned terror attacks that occurred on 9/11 was not presented nor was it investigated in the proper manner.

Again. Is this acceptable? If a fellow engineer told me prior to the construction of one of my buildings that it was unsafe and I didn't listen, do you think I could use the old "communication breakdown" excuse if my failure resulted in 3,000 + deaths?

This is detailed in the 9/11 commission report as well as about a dozen other books that detail the 'years' of planning that were taken to make sure that the US was hit and hit hard.

And why weren't those who were supposed to keep track of these things fired then? If the people in the right positions aren't held accountable for their failures, where does that leave us?

I have attempted to list books to read in these forums and have been attacked by others for spreading propaganda so I apologize.

Anyone who promotes anything around here gets called one thing or the other. It goes with the territory.

I do not consider those who feel that 9/11 was a false flag or a black op as crazy, insane, delusional or brainwashed until they start to declare that there were NO planes and NO hijackers and that the people aboard those planes are held in a secret facility in Ohio. This is fodder. That Bush somehow benefited from this and ushered in a new age of civil liberties rape. That there will be tanks in the street and Cheney will where a Darth Vader mask and delcare all liberals enemies of the state. How can anyone take you seriously at that point.

I like this rant because I feel the same way. In my opinion it goes far beyond Bush, Cheney and the neocons. Remember that the Dems are right in the mix too. That's why no one wants to investigate this. Because there is no political advantage to a real investigation. Sad really, IMO.

DHS is needed to ensure there are no more terror attacks, domestic or foreign in nature, to provide security to us, American citizens, so we can go to Wal Mart everyday and drive our SUV's and watch HDTV. Please tell me how it is not accomplishing that? It gives the sheep unknown security that in the end we will be grateful for.

What's to say the DHS won't become as corrupt and have pissing matches with the other 3-letter agencies? Although, I agree they have done a good job so far.

My point being. If the other 3-letter agencies are so corrupt as to allow 3,000 + deaths, then why are we not overhauling these agencies? Instead we just throw more money at a "new" agency and that's that.

[edit on 1/1/2009 by Griff]