This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Anniversary of 9/11
Don't want to hear this?
Tough. Grow up.
9/11 Commissioners:
- The 9/11 Commission's co-chairs said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements (free subscription required)
- 9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says "I
don't believe for a minute we got everything right", that the
Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions
about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue
- 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said "We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting"
- 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now compromised"; and "One
of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11
issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover
it up"
- 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that "There
are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to
what we outlined in our version . . . We didn't have access . . . ." He also said
that the investigation depended too heavily on the accounts of Al
Qaeda detainees who were physically coerced into talking
- And the Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) - who led the 9/11 staff's inquiry - recently said "At some level of the government, at some point in time...there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened". He also said "I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described
.... The tapes told a radically different story from what had been
told to us and the public for two years.... This is not spin. This is
not true." And he said:
"It's almost a culture of concealment, for lack of a better word.
There were interviews made at the FAA's New York center the night of
9/11 and those tapes were destroyed. The CIA tapes of the interrogations
were destroyed. The story of 9/11 itself, to put it mildly, was distorted and was completely different from the way things happened"
If even the 9/11 Commissioners don't buy the official story, why do you?
Senior intelligence officers:
- Former military analyst and famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said that the case of a certain 9/11 whistleblower is "far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers".
He also said that the government is ordering the media to cover up her
allegations about 9/11. And he said that some of the claims concerning
government involvement in 9/11 are credible, that "very serious
questions have been raised about what they [U.S. government officials]
knew beforehand and how much involvement there might have been", that
engineering 9/11 would not be humanly or psychologically beyond the
scope of the current administration, and that there's enough evidence
to justify a new, "hard-hitting" investigation into 9/11 with subpoenas
and testimony taken under oath (see this and this)
- A
27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and
personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan
and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials
(Raymond McGovern) said “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke”
- A
29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and
former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis
(William Bill Christison) said “I
now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September
did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would
have us believe (and see this)
- A
number of intelligence officials, including a CIA Operations Officer
who co-chaired a CIA multi-agency task force coordinating intelligence
efforts among many intelligence and law enforcement agencies (Lynne
Larkin) sent a joint letter to Congress expressing their concerns about “serious
shortcomings,” “omissions,” and “major flaws” in the 9/11 Commission
Report and offering their services for a new investigation (they were
ignored)
- A decorated 20-year CIA veteran, who
Pulitzer-Prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh called
"perhaps the best on-the-ground field officer in the Middle East”, and
whose astounding career formed the script for the Academy Award winning
motion picture Syriana (Robert Baer) said that "the evidence points at" 9/11 having had aspects of being an inside job
- The
Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs, who served as
Senior Analyst from 1966 - 1990. He also served as Professor of
International Security at the National War College from 1986 - 2004
(Melvin Goodman) said "The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately a coverup"
If even our country's top intelligence officers don't buy the official story, why do you?
Congressmen:
- According
to the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and former Head
of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham, an
FBI informant had hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000
and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI
refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a
high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House (confirmed here)
- Current Democratic U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy said "The
two questions that the congress will not ask . . . is why did 9/11
happen on George Bush's watch when he had clear warnings that it was
going to happen? Why did they allow it to happen?"
- Current Republican Congressman Ron Paul calls for a new 9/11 investigation and states that "we see the [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on"
- Current Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich hints that we aren't being told the truth about 9/11
- Current Republican Congressman Jason Chafetz says that we need to be vigilant and continue to investigate 9/11
- Former Democratic Senator Mike Gravel states that he supports a new 9/11 investigation and that we don't know the truth about 9/11
- Former Republican Senator Lincoln Chaffee endorses a new 9/11 investigation
- Former U.S. Democratic Congressman Dan Hamburg doesn't believe the official version of events
- Former
U.S. Republican Congressman and senior member of the House Armed
Services Committee, and who served six years as the Chairman of the
Military Research and Development Subcommittee Curt Weldon has shown
that the U.S. tracked hijackers before 9/11, is open to hearing information about explosives in the Twin Towers, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job
If there is bipartisan questioning of the official story, why aren't you questioning it?
Other government officials:
- U.S.
General, Commanding General of U.S. European Command and Supreme
Allied Commander Europe, decorated with the Bronze Star, Silver Star,
and Purple Heart (General Wesley Clark) said "We've
never finished the investigation of 9/11 and whether the
administration actually misused the intelligence information it had.
The evidence seems pretty clear to me. I've seen that for a long time"
- Former
Deputy Secretary for Intelligence and Warning under Nixon, Ford, and
Carter (Morton Goulder), former Deputy Director to the White House Task
Force on Terrorism (Edward L. Peck), and former US Department of State
Foreign Service Officer (J. Michael Springmann), as well as a who's who
of liberals and independents) jointly call for a new investigation into 9/11
- Former
Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department
of Justice under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan; former U.S.
Army Intelligence officer, and currently a widely-sought media
commentator on terrorism and intelligence services (John Loftus) says
"The information provided by European intelligence services prior to
9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA
or FBI to assert a defense of incompetence"
- The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted a massive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility
- Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan (Col. Ronald D. Ray) said that the official story of 9/11 is "the dog that doesn't hunt"
- The former director of the FBI (Louis Freeh) says there was a cover up by the 9/11 Commission
If top government officials are skeptical, why aren't you?
Numerous other politicians, judges, legal scholars, and attorneys also question at least some aspects of the government's version of 9/11.
Note 1: Yes, this does have to do with economics and business. Nobel prize economist Joe Stiglitz just said
that the Iraq war is partly responsible for our bad economy. Many
forget, but the Iraq war was "legally" justified by the claim that Iraq
had a hand in 9/11. See this. And 9/11 has had a profound affect on the economy in many other ways as well. See this.
Note 2: This essay does not argue any theory of what did happen on 9/11; it only points out from credible sources that no thorough investigation has ever been conducted.
Note 3: As always, the views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect
those of the owners of the Zero Hedge site. In fact, I have no idea
whether they agree or disagree with any point made herein.
- advertisements -
Look, building 7 was sad and decided to commit Hara-Kiri. It was so sad that it fell into itself and turned to dust. Sadness can do this. Science told me.
If you think that it was anything but a structural collapse from fire and damage from the 2 other towers then you are a clueless gullible brain dead fool.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8
use your head people, please
Why did Larry Silverstein say it was pulled?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100
It sounds to me like Larry was discussing the fire department when he said "they made that decision to pull ...". I can accept that he left off the word "out" - as people often leave words out of spoken conversation. Has anyone asked Larry if he meant that the fire department "made that decision to pull out" of the building(s) - because they had made the decision that they could not contain the fires?
On the other hand, if Larry did mean "pull the trigger" to collapse the buildings, that would imply that the fire department had control of the button - re. my comments above.
“The Corporate Government Fascist entity controls the people, brainwashes them, and keeps them docile and ignorant…
We are the patriots, they are the terrorists. Those in and around our government are the terrorists…
There a lot of people out there, a lot of my buddies, retired military officers who know a lot of the truth but they’re intimidated because they want to be “patriotic” so they support the government. BALONY! Supporting the government is not is what’s patriotic. It’s doing what‘s right. It’s following the Constitution. Honoring the truth; serving the people. Our government does not do that. We are the ones doing that. We are the patriots – they are the terrorists…
I think the architecture of The New World Order is of course the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderbergers, the guys that came out of the old Cecil Rhodes organization, (The Corporate governing councils) but then there’s the operating arm is the World Trade Organization, the IMF, and the World Bank. And of course since it’s under their thumb, the U.S. government. And their enforcers are the U.S. military.”
Robert M. Bowman, former Director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the U.S. Air Force in the Ford and Carter administrations, a former United States Air Force Lieutenant Colonel with 101 combat missions, and presidential candidate for the Reform Party in 2000.
Spitzer- you are a casualty of enemy propaganda and it is a shame to see.
Isn't it amazing how some continue to remain so ignorant? It is easier to blame some mysterious conspiracy theory than it is to actually look into the engineering of the event.
Science is hard. Most people don't study it. Therefore, most people don't understand it. As such, things that would never sound plausible to someone who knows science can sound plausible to those who don't know science.
Having said that, this has always been my thought. Who would insure the Twin Towers unless they were built with some way to bring them straight down if they began to collapse? I have no trouble accepting that the buildings were brought down intentionally when it was feared they might collapse. Do I have proof that this is what happened? No. Do I stress over it? No.
You could be right, but if it was done the way you theorize, then why not let more people out of there before bringing it down?
I get the question about who has access to the "button". As to letting more people out before bringing it down, one would "push the button" at the point one thought the building was in danger of collapse (the whole point of the button). At such a point, the building won't halt it's potential collapse just to let a few more people out.
I'm not going to argue my point beyond saying - think about such tall buildings from the standpoint of the insurers. An uncontrolled collapse would cause incredible damage to the surrounding buildings and create a huge liability for the insurers. But maybe the insurers themselves believed the buildings would not collapse - and so this was a non-issue for them. I don't know. I'm just saying I can accept the idea of the buildings being initally constructed in such a way that someone could bring about a controlled collapse if that became necessary.
Because people are cheap. Opportunity is not.
That's an interesting angle, but... wouldn't there be a concern over someone being able to set off the trigger when it wasn't time?
There was lots of activity in the WTC buildings in the weeks leading up to 9/11. Lots of security systems turned off for various "work."
And then there was the long known about asbestos problem:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2008/090508_b_asbestos.htm
Hm, mix powerful people (who probably don't feel upset about killing a few muslims) and a LOT of money, and the storyline looks a lot different, far more compelling.
9/11 is the parable of the American Dream, we collectively (through mass manipulation- refer to Edward Bernays) believe we can do no wrong, and when wrong does happen we deny it, yet collectively pay for it, thereby sheilding the wealthy controllers from their foolish and greedy behavior.
So, if one follows the money and power trail...
Double post -hiccup
Seer- “…There was lots of activity in the WTC buildings in the weeks leading up to 9/11. Lots of security systems turned off for various "work…"
OF course, well known to all who have taken a little time to understand the foundational event for the Nazification of the U. S. 9-11 was the justification for so many un-American acts. Like the establishment of Homeland (Reich) Security. And let’s not forget Homeland Security hired Marcus Wolf as a paid consultant to help them set it up right. Marcus Wolf was the former head of the dreaded East German secret police, the Stasi.
Also, taking about access it might be curious to note the construction company on the repairs for the FBI run 1993 WTC bombing was none other than the Bin Ladens!
you're rather shrill today Spitzer
you and your team must be busier than one-armed paper hangers today
how many blogs do you have to post on when the 9/11 anniversary rolls around?
does anyone besides the sheeple believe the trype you post?
Hack. 9/11 was a false flag. It's been quantifiably proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Seriously, you are a hack.
You Can't Handle the 9/11 Truth: Dr. Paul Craig Roberts Explains.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nfM0cwouTE
what was the big prize for staging 9/11 ? the one big defined prize ?
The prize was social confusion -- volatility.
How is that a win?
Old fashioned change -- hit them with it while they aren't paying attention.
The question you should be asking is, "what changed?"
Why do you keep asking the same damned simplistic and self-evident question, when it has been answered for you several times in this thread already? Or are you suffering from a temporary case of JohnnyBravoitis?
He asks the question to take focus away from evidence.
Q: "Building 7 fell at in a manner only explained by the removal of resistance in a coordinated manner. How can this be".
A: "Why would someone do that".
The answer does not weaken the premise of the question. The answer changes the topic of conversation.
We need to accept that some very articulate and devious people are assigned the task (or taken on themselves) to create disinformation. Sometimes it manifests itself in weird theories regarding 9/11 (Green screens etc) but usually is comes in the form of distractions, character assassinations and similar methods. You'll notice that a very specific style of argumentation is always used. Please consider whom from now on.
best explanation I've heard so far
it was nice of building 7 to collapse into it's own footprint so neatly - it must have been studying the way a building collapses during a controlled implosion - leaving behind a big mess, or causing collateral damage to the surrounding buildings would have been very uncool
That is what is so stupid about the conspiracy claims. If they wanted to collapse the tower, they would have made it fall over sideways to shut morons like you up.
the truth is soothing ahh
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8
unless.. they thought that they had organised a third plane to strike but couldnt pull it off.....
dude, try and come up with a more scientific explanation for why building 7 collapsed - and collapsed so suddenly, and so neatly, from the full circumference of its base (the side facing the collapsed towers and the side that faces away from them that cant conceivably have copped debris) and then every other motherfkkr on this website wont suspect ur a zombie or a govt sponsored internet disinformationist
Let's see.. Dismissive attitude, name calling, character assassination..arrogance..
Anybody else notice that the defenders of the official story tend to have something in common? Oh, and did you all know that the guy who researched the 9/11 article for popular mechanics is named Chertoff? No relation to the other Chertoff. Well, not any more. His mother first told a Dutch journalist that they were cousins but now insists no blood relation.
Nice ad hominem there Mr. Hypocrite...
Debunk the Popular Mechanics article on its merits, with science, then we can talk.
Dial back another four score, and let's figure out who killed Lincoln. At least we can trust the integrity of the SEC. Oh, wait.
EB,
I think they were pretty certain who shot Lincoln.
http://rogerjnorton.com/Lincoln36.html
Let's figure out who killed Kennedy first, shall we?
You may use some investigative strategies like, "who benefits from this", or "follow the money", or just "what has changed immediately afterwards".
Last strategy says: immediatelly afterward presidential Executive Order 1110 was cancelled.
... but no, no, it wasn't FED.
I'm just glad the patriot Jack Ruby (Jack Leon Rubenstein) decided to settle the whole thing for us.
GWHB was in Dallas the night before and went to Tyler prior to the event, then phoned in his alibi from there to the Dallas FBI office - to an FBI agent known to the family.
His prints are all over it - as well as Watergate.
Family of Secrets
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52hrzJZkJd8
Russ Baker, the award-winning journalist and author with Alex in-studio. Ties together the last 50 years of the Bush Crime Family.
......................................................................................
George Bush: The Unauthorized Biographyhttp://tarpley.net/online-books/george-bush-the-unauthorized-biography/
Free E-Book
Accidental friendly fire.
The eyeball triangle worshipers are really good at covering their tracks. It is really hard to pin stuff on them, because of all the strings they can pull, and their wall of secrecy.
Too much effort is spent on trying to pin thing to them they've done in the past, you'll never do it. They always leave enough reasonable doubt, either by creating false information or hiding what they've done. It is wasted effort to pin stuff in the past on them.
Instead I say let focus on now. Let's get into the general public conciousness the fact that there are a group of elites who view themselves as a master race and hate the common man. Let's yell a little louder about things like the apotheosis of Washington painting in the capital. The Federal Reserve and who owns it and how it has hurt us. Let's talk about how both parties for some reason support both the Federal reserve and unlimited immigration and endless wars.
Many people don't realize these things. You can talk all day about 9-11 and conspiracies and all they'll do is roll their eyes because the eyeball people have covered their tracks so well. Focus on things going on right now.
Educate everyone you can talk to about the Federal Reserve, talk about our self-destructive trade policy and why both parties support it.
Making widespread credible public knowledge of the eyeball triangle cult is our only hope.
wooo...too much Alex Jones I believe,hahahahaha!
Al kayda Malumat - 'the-base-Identity' or database of men on payroll, mujahideens on hire was started in 1989 in afghanistan by u know who
After the russies left, why o why?
and they are merceneraies,of who??
this evil eyed triangle is 100% transparent
Kennedy was gunned down by a french assassin (who's fatal shot was indeed from the grass embankment) hired by mafia out of New Orleans that Jack Ruby "mediated."
How do I know this? It was on the history channel once. When calling for a copy of the Nigel Turner series "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" the gal on the phone said it was yanked from shelves with a lawsuit from the Johnson (Yep the crook from texas) family estate. There are two series, it is the latter that was yanked.
Well worth watching.
There is no justice in the united states, only lies to protect the elite.
where can I get some of those magic bullets?
180 degree turns in mid-flight!!!
I'd like a magic plane. 2 planes - 3 buildings.
You'd be suprised at what the military has for magic bullets.
Now, I'm taking my tinfoil hat off. People are staring at me again.
the FED.....n who did 911....also the FED