9/11 Was NOT An Inside Job

[The Vegan Marxist]

While I've been in this forum site, every now & then, I'd see a comment stating that 9/11 was an inside job. I know where they are coming from, as I use to be part of the 9/11 truth movement. Though, I came to realize that they were deceiving those of the movement & that the truth was not what I was fighting for. As someone who use to be part of the conspiracy theorist movement for quite a while, I've been able to understand the 'truth movement' & the people that are behind it. When it comes to the belief that a Satanic cult called the Illuminati are running the U.S. government, if in the movement, you come to understand that this was started by ultra-right Catholic dogma that went against the former free-thinkers called the Illuminati back in the 1700's. And yet the movement believes in what they say. When it comes to the belief that global warming is a hoax, many had failed in the movement to understand that this was started by big oil companies such as ExxonMobil. Same thing goes with the belief that free health care is bad, when in truth, this was started by the big drug industries. The belief of 9/11 being an inside job is not any different. This is being funded by ultra-right conservatives, despite whether you're a liberal or a socialist who believes in 9/11 being an inside job, you're believing in a false idea that's been clearly debunked over & over again with careful use of physics, science, & common sense. The best videos that I know, that really allowed me to finally leave the movement 2 years ago I will show you below. I am no longer a conspiracy theorist, & have left that life behind me for good. Before you watch these videos, let me first say do not attack this thread with illogical accusations, false quotations, altered science, etc., until you've watched every video, because once you do that all your questions will be answered:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43F54hR0NW8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgjWU6jXrdc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkivdEGph9A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZrlNw-31R8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lhwCM_dicc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hBDXB6cifo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAd_9zeldkI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3uq9zFT6xA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRCTkSJOViY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MRSr1MnFuk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJpsxQ3UI30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YXzjAKJQOg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z96MZOZyilo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWpC_1WP8do
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1wQ2BJsgx0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhC3ElWQkEc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xjBbqRJT7Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=989BqQ0WF2A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsUYhrXonXQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjcAoc3ZPwY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDXNDZDATLg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jir7yWTroN8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IergOYj63oE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMZ-nkYr46w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XebFE_7N-Dk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh8hErn2UZU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTXFnAIP6A0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFW_T2QfjgY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhHzMttUKO0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBHi9CbrNf4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7iX_jHg_Uo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tp8T2s96pg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tacYjsS-g6k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTNRkb7AaQk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1g3OAOiOP0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9Mhhvl7vWk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwFGLIsIBuM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j_c1tPMiG0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVbw4tbq7jM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySHgiUxnLC0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtyzsSL3Gaw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8B-AvIt6V4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLShZOvxVe4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G86yuunRBIw&feature=player_embedded

[RadioRaheem84]

Agreed. The right wing conspiracy stuff has to stop.

[Tablo]

Nice list of videos. I feel like a few people on this site have watched the Zeitgeist movie a few too many times. :laugh:

[The Red Next Door]

I have a friend who is a 9/11 truther.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Nice list of videos. I feel like a few people on this site have watched the Zeitgeist movie a few too many times. :laugh:

Well even the creator of 'Zeitgeist', Peter Joseph, has backed off from the 9/11 conspiracy theories somewhat & has spent most of his time trying to teach people about the 'Venus Project'. Which I'm glad he's doing. Because that type of project is far more better than trying to refute debunkings towards 9/11 conspiracy theories.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I haven't been able to watch the videos yet, but thanks for posting them as well as your personal experience with the conspiracy theories.

I don't find it too surprising that honest people would be drawn to these conspiracies. It's natural to try and make sense of the world and when something really out of the ordinary happens (combined with dishonesty from officials - like using 9/11 as an excuse to peruse an unrelated [imperialist] agenda) people do their best with the information available to try and make some sense of it.

But I'm glad you've been able to rethink your understanding of this event - it's too bad that people spend all this time and energy trying to prove a conspiracy theory like this rather than using that energy and time trying to stop the more definite and known wrongs that have been the result of the US government's response to the attacks. I always found it strange that truthers would talk about how 9/11 was a plot to take away civil liberties, but then would do nothing about the PATRIOT ACT or the scapegoating of Muslims and so on.

[Psy]

There is the problem that the Army and Air Force did not defend the capital from decapitation as their trained to do during the cold war, NORAD planed for the scenario of USSR bombers getting past the outer defenses through the use of stealth technology and/or radar jamming that would have scrambled air defenses to try and shoot down Russian bombers before they could nuke the capital.

So the real question is not about the Air Force not being able to intercept the airliners but why the military did not defend the capital from Flight 77 (they had 1/2 an hours to defend the capital). Why didn't NORAD assume the WTC was the vangaurd of a major invasion of the USA? Why wasn't NORAD thinking like with the typical paranoid military mind that always prepares for the worst? Why didn't they airdrop light infantry to Washing DC with stinger missiles to protect the chain of command just in case?

[The Vegan Marxist]

I haven't been able to watch the videos yet, but thanks for posting them as well as your personal experience with the conspiracy theories.

I don't find it too surprising that honest people would be drawn to these conspiracies. It's natural to try and make sense of the world and when something really out of the ordinary happens (combined with dishonesty from officials - like using 9/11 as an excuse to peruse an unrelated [imperialist] agenda) people do their best with the information available to try and make some sense of it.

But I'm glad you've been able to rethink your understanding of this event - it's too bad that people spend all this time and energy trying to prove a conspiracy theory like this rather than using that energy and time trying to stop the more definite and known wrongs that have been the result of the US government's response to the attacks. I always found it strange that truthers would talk about how 9/11 was a plot to take away civil liberties, but then would do nothing about the PATRIOT ACT or the scapegoating of Muslims and so on.

Well, to give the movement some credit, we ended up talking about the Patriot Acts a lot. And was one of the main issues we'd talk about when it came to topics such as lost liberties, martial law, domestic terrorism, etc. Though, the movement took it a little too far & decided to bring conspiracy theories in the mix with it.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

9/11 wasn't an inside job. That's pretty obvious. I'm a jerk who thankfully has no dictatorial powers over the forum. I'd have some many reasons for banning people. One of them would be believing 9/11 was an inside job. It takes an impressive level of stupidity to believe that, and I think it is extremely detrimental to the image the movement presents. Even if people don't like us, we should only attach ourselves to reasonable theories that seem crazy to others, like communism. Theories that are really crazy. Maybe we shouldn't give people anymore ways to criticize us.

I have a joke that's funnier in person. It basically goes like this. "I think the 9/11 truth people are motivated by hatred of the government. They want a understandable reason they can provide to justify their hatred. This confuses me. Aren't there enough "real" reasons to hate the government? I think it's quite unnecessary to start making things up, myself.

[The Vegan Marxist]

There is the problem that the Army and Air Force did not defend the capital from decapitation as their trained to do during the cold war, NORAD planed for the scenario of USSR bombers getting past the outer defenses through the use of stealth technology and/or radar jamming that would have scrambled air defenses to try and shoot down Russian bombers before they could nuke the capital.

So the real question is not about the Air Force not being able to intercept the airliners but why the military did not defend the capital from Flight 77 (they had 1/2 an hours to defend the capital). Why didn't NORAD assume the WTC was the vangaurd of a major invasion of the USA? Why wasn't NORAD thinking like with the typical paranoid military mind that always prepares for the worst? Why didn't they airdrop light infantry to Washing DC with stinger missiles to protect the chain of command just in case?

Well, given that the first two attacks were planes in the wtc's, & at the time we weren't sure if it was an attack or just an accident. This was the main thought of the first hit. Then the second hit we became suspicious. But then we had one last plane that made its destination, the pentagon. There was no way that, by the time they came up with the right mind that it was an attack, to have intercepted the pentagon hit. Now, I'll give it to you that it's kind of suspicious that they didn't hit the plane that was taken over by the passengers, but let it be known that, 1) the passengers had mentioned their plan to take it over, so an interception would've put on stand by, & 2) I never said that the U.S. government didn't use 9/11 to their own advantage, I just said that the claim of it being an 'inside job' is completely absurd.

[Psy]

Well, given that the first two attacks were planes in the wtc's, & at the time we weren't sure if it was an attack or just an accident. This was the main thought of the first hit. Then the second hit we became suspicious. But then we had one last plane that made its destination, the pentagon. There was no way that, by the time they came up with the right mind that it was an attack, to have intercepted the pentagon hit. Now, I'll give it to you that it's kind of suspicious that they didn't hit the plane that was taken over by the passengers, but let it be known that, 1) the passengers had mentioned their plan to take it over, so an interception would've put on stand by, & 2) I never said that the U.S. government didn't use 9/11 to their own advantage, I just said that the claim of it being an 'inside job' is completely absurd.
But we are talking about the military, them deploying defenses after the second plane hit the WTC would be just taking precautions. Having AA guns, SAMs and fighters paroling the capital could easily be reported as the military playing it safe if it turned out to be nothing.

[Vendetta]

Why wasn't NORAD thinking like with the typical paranoid military mind that always prepares for the worst?

Because Hollywood lied, they don't prepare for the worst. They prepare for the most obvious threats. I might be mistaken, but American planes dropping out of the sky probably weren't the most obvious.

[Psy]

Because Hollywood lied, they don't prepare for the worst. They prepare for the most obvious threats. I might be mistaken, but American planes dropping out of the sky probably weren't the most obvious.

That is bad military doctrine, if a military prepares for the obvious they will be caught off guard as good commanders don't do the obvious.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Because Hollywood lied, they don't prepare for the worst. They prepare for the most obvious threats. I might be mistaken, but American planes dropping out of the sky probably weren't the most obvious.

You've also go the confusion on whether it was a game or not. Because NORAD was conducting similar training missions, where they'd use planes as weapons on buildings. But seriously Psy, the only thing what you're talking about would prove was that they allowed 9/11 to happen so that they could use it to their own advantage. It doesn't prove that 9/11 was an inside job, whatsoever.

[Vendetta]

That is bad military doctrine, if a military prepares for the obvious they will be caught off guard as good commanders don't do the obvious.

And that's why good commanders are recognized as good commanders.

[danyboy27]

That is bad military doctrine, if a military prepares for the obvious they will be caught off guard as good commanders don't do the obvious.

well, you cant really expect every threat, its impossible, especially when you deal with imaginative sick individual who could turn copletly innofensive things into something horrible and destructive.

plus its written in sun tzu art of war that by over doing something, you will do it wrong.

[Psy]

You've also go the confusion on whether it was a game or not. Because NORAD was conducting similar training missions, where they'd use planes as weapons on buildings. But seriously Psy, the only thing what you're talking about would prove was that they allowed 9/11 to happen so that they could use it to their own advantage. It doesn't prove that 9/11 was an inside job, whatsoever.
True but there is the question even if there was a stand down order why didn't the military respond with a coup? The military was threatened with decapitation, you'd think if the White House told them to stand down the military would respond with sending a armor division to arrest the civil-government, declaring marshal law based on the threats they were seeing (hell their head (the Pentagon) was attacked) not only out of self-preservation but to use the attacks (and inept leadership of the bourgeoisie state) to install the military as the new head of the US state. The US bourgeoisie would not have objected if during 9/11 the Pentagon announced the White House ordered them to stand down thus the US was now a military dictatorship since the bourgeoisie they knows the leadership of the military is on their side due to the generous kickbacks from the military industrial complex.

So one has to ask did the leadership of the US military know this was only a terrorist attack and was not a significant threat to them? that would mean the stand down was planned in advanced that would suggest the CIA had a hand in arranging the attacks? The CIA arranged countless atrocities so it is not improbable that they arranged the 9/11 attacks just like how the Nazi's arranged the Reistag fire.

[Tablo]

I think it is possible they saw it coming and let it happen. Kinda like how the US had been warned about Pearl Harbor, but ignored the warnings. It certainly was not an inside job.

[Psy]

well, you cant really expect every threat, its impossible, especially when you deal with imaginative sick individual who could turn copletly innofensive things into something horrible and destructive.

plus its written in sun tzu art of war that by over doing something, you will do it wrong.
True which is why centralized militarizes don't leave their head exposed especially when they don't know what the enemy is up to.

[Psy]

I think it is possible they saw it coming and let it happen. Kinda like how the US had been warned about Pearl Harbor, but ignored the warnings. It certainly was not an inside job.
So you think the CIA lost control over their paramilitary forces in the Middle East?

[Tablo]

So you think the CIA lost control over their paramilitary forces in the Middle East?
Are you referring to Al Qaeda? I do think they acted on their own against the US so yes.

[RED DAVE]

Thanx VA. I worked in the World Trade Center. I was a weekend worker at a large law firm situated on the 59th floor of the north tower, the one that was hit first. I left work at 7:30 AM Monday, 25 hours or so before the first plane hit.

One thing that should be stressed is the whole issue of security. After the attack in '93, the WTC was sewn up tighter than a gnat's asshole. The idea of crews working there installing large numbers of explosive charges and no one reporting it is ludicrous.

I also saw WTC 7 in flames. I hiked down from my wife's and my home in Chelsea to volunteer to help. (I had some fantasy about helping to pull people out of the rubble.) The building was wreathed in flames. I saw the flames penetrate from one floor to another from a distance of less than half a mile. It was obvious the building was going to collapse. They didn't need people like me, so I didn't stick around. WTC 7 fell about an hour after I left for home.

It was a bad day. A very bad day. I still react negatively to low-flying planes over the City, sirens and helicopters, and its been almost 8 1/2 years.

RED DAVE

[LeninistKing]

9-11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB !! and who ever wrote those 9-11 debunked videos works for zionists and neocons. So becase CNN and BBC says that 9-11 was done by 19 poor muslims with box cutters and all that Bush and Cheney says is true. Then we should believe that Iran nas nuclear weapons. Israel is not a terrorist state, and Chavez is a dictator.

Even Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez have said that 9-11 was an inside job. I think Vegan Anarchist works for the US government coz he deffends the US government version of 9-11 like a religion.

.

[Tablo]

9-11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB !! and who ever wrote those 9-11 debunked videos works for zionists and neocons. So becase CNN and BBC says that 9-11 was done by 19 poor muslims with box cutters and all that Bush and Cheney says is true. Then we should believe that Iran nas nuclear weapons. Israel is not a terrorist state, and Chavez is a dictator.

Even Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez have said that 9-11 was an inside job. I think Vegan Anarchist works for the US government coz he deffends the US government version of 9-11 like a religion.

.
You're joking right? It is a simple matter of looking at the facts. It was NOT an inside job.

[LeninistKing]

What facts? CNN said that Saddam Hussein had nuclear bombs. And by the way i don't believe in not even 1% of what comes from CNN and BBC. So thanks but no thanks.

Oh by the way and how come the greatest socialist of this world Hugo Chavez said that 9-11 was an inside job?

.


You're joking right? It is a simple matter of looking at the facts. It was NOT an inside job.

[Tablo]

What facts? CNN said that Saddam Hussein had nuclear bombs. And by the way i don't believe in not even 1% of what comes from CNN and BBC. So thanks but no thanks.

Oh by the way and how come the greatest socialist of this world Hugo Chavez said that 9-11 was an inside job?

.
Of course we can't believe the nonsense that comes from the corporate media, but that does not mean we need to believe some wackos on the internet.

Hugo Chavez is in no way the greatest Socialist in the world, but he has done a lot of good for hiss country.

[LeninistKing]

HUGO CHAVEZ SAYS 9-11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB !!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTVuMUtIDOg




You're joking right? It is a simple matter of looking at the facts. It was NOT an inside job.

[Tablo]

So why is your glorious leader Chavez the ultimate authority on something he probably does not have any extensive knowledge on?

[Psy]

Are you referring to Al Qaeda? I do think they acted on their own against the US so yes.

That is not how imperialism workers, Panama showed how the CIA pulls the plug (with the US military marching in), the CIA did not crush Al Qaeda when they knew everything about them (as they created them) thus at some level they must have still seen them as asset.

[Tablo]

That is not how imperialism workers, Panama showed how the CIA pulls the plug (with the US military marching in), the CIA did not crush Al Qaeda when they knew everything about them (as they created them) thus at some level they must have still seen them as asset.
The CIA certainly did use them to fight the Soviets, but they existed prior to the CIA helping them. They did wage war on America and they are being actively targeted now. As much as you think it would be the perfect plan I do not think the USA likes creating security threats that make them look like a bunch of idiots. It might help if you read up a bit on Osama and read what he has said in tapes. They are no longer working for the USA.

[RadioRaheem84]

I just don't get how these conspiracy nuts can believe in the craziest unproved things but not believe in the stuff or care about the US government did to destabalize countries during the Cold War? The US engaged in some conspiracies there and has admitted to it in the past. That's how you know how shallow and nativist these people are. When it's other nations they don't care or think it was right for the US to instigate coups but when it happens on American soil then it's personal.

[Psy]

The CIA certainly did use them to fight the Soviets, but they existed prior to the CIA helping them. They did wage war on America and they are being actively targeted now. As much as you think it would be the perfect plan I do not think the USA likes creating security threats that make them look like a bunch of idiots. It might help if you read up a bit on Osama and read what he has said in tapes. They are no longer working for the USA.
Prior to the CIA Al Qaeda was a minor group with limited resources. If the CIA viewed Al Qaeda as a real threat prior to 9/11 they would have shut down their revenue streams by ***** slapping Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Afganistan but if you remeber the US viewed the Taliban as a client state before 9/11.

[PsychedelicSocialist]

It doesn't matter whether or not it was an inside job. Capitalism is evil with or without particularly dastardly acts. If it's true, 1 more bad thing they've done. Either way, capitalism is still a rapacious and bloodthirsty machine.

I believe completely in Corporate Capitalism's ability to create peace, if by peace we mean the lack of war. But what kind of peace will it be? A gray, lifeless, and shackled peace. Shall we trade their bombs for their shackles?

[Vendetta]

If the CIA viewed Al Qaeda as a real threat prior to 9/11

But they didn't (iirc, may be wrong, im a bit buzzed). That's why it was a suprise.

[Tablo]

Prior to the CIA Al Qaeda was a minor group with limited resources. If the CIA viewed Al Qaeda as a real threat prior to 9/11 they would have shut down their revenue streams by ***** slapping Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Afganistan but if you remeber the US viewed the Taliban as a client state before 9/11.
They were minor prior, but their primary source of money comes from Osama bin Laden so it isn't like the are poor or anything. They have a lot more access to resources than much larger groups.

[HEAD ICE]

I haven't really seen much support for 9/11 conspiracy theories in the left really, mainly with anti-Semitic right wing bozos who don't want to use toothpaste because it will rot their brain.

[Psy]

They were minor prior, but their primary source of money comes from Osama bin Laden so it isn't like the are poor or anything. They have a lot more access to resources than much larger groups.
But the CIA knows where Osama Bin Laden's money is at least they did prior to 9/11. COINTELPRO documents states the FBI staged terrorist attacks on US soil to get justification to crush dissident groups, so if the FBI was willing to support terrorist attacks within the US in 1960's and 70's to discredit dissident groups why wouldn't the CIA also resort to such methods? Not saying the CIA did but I wouldn't be supprized if they did.

[The Vegan Marxist]

9-11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB !! and who ever wrote those 9-11 debunked videos works for zionists and neocons. So becase CNN and BBC says that 9-11 was done by 19 poor muslims with box cutters and all that Bush and Cheney says is true. Then we should believe that Iran nas nuclear weapons. Israel is not a terrorist state, and Chavez is a dictator.

Even Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez have said that 9-11 was an inside job. I think Vegan Anarchist works for the US government coz he deffends the US government version of 9-11 like a religion.

.

:lol::laugh::lol::thumbup1: Of course, we have a devout conspiracy theorist in here, just like Alex Jones, Michael Tsarion, David Icke, & Bill Cooper. You're clearly one-sided my friend if you choose not to look at the science of the situation. These videos were not created by mainstream media, & hasn't even made it on television. This was made by someone who has direct knowledge of science & physics, & made these videos freely for all to see. If you truly believe that he's some zionist agent for the New World Order, then you're completely lost.

And another thing, I'm not defending the official version whatsoever. I've said that in the forum, within agreement, that the government used 9/11 to their own advantage. We even have former 9/11 commission members that have spoken out saying that they believe the government had used that day to their advantage, & had made sure to cover some things up to put the blame completely on the other side. But to believe that the government had a direct hand in the situation, you're nuts & are believing in phony-science created by the Loose Changers. And also, what significance is there for Chavez to say that 9/11 was an inside job? Yes, he's a great leader in my opinion, but he stays away from U.S. political affiliations, & has no idea what is going on through the U.S. government. It's apparent that he just got a little paranoid like the many lost activists that switched over towards conspiracy theories. So who cares if he said that 9/11 was an inside job. If that's the case, then so did Charlie Sheen, Rosie O'Donnel, that guy who killed all those people at the museaum about a year ago, etc. So both yours & Psy's arguments are completely irrelevant & do not prove that 9/11 was an inside job.

[Sogdian]

Always when something big happens there are "conspiracy theorists" who are mostly supported by the status quo and tend to mislead the public by making all sorts of ridiculous claims... and surely majority of the reasonable people don't take them seriously and tend to accept the authorities' version of events without asking unanswerable questions! This is very unfortunate because important questions aren't being asked! To use Enronish slogan, Ask why, asshole!

Here's 9/11 truth movement supported by more than 1000 architectural and engineering professionals www[dot]ae911truth.org I'd rather bandwagon with those lot who ask serious questions.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Always when something big happens there are "conspiracy theorists" who are mostly supported by the status quo and tend to mislead the public by making all sorts of ridiculous claims... and surely majority of the reasonable people don't take them seriously and tend to accept the authorities' version of events without asking unanswerable questions! This is very unfortunate because important questions aren't being asked! To use Enronish slogan, Ask why, asshole!

Here's 9/11 truth movement supported by more than 1000 architectural and engineering professionals www[dot]ae911truth.org I'd rather bandwagon with those lot who ask serious questions.

Well, according to recorded statistics of 2008 (http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos027.htm#emply), it had recorded that, in the U.S. alone, there were 1,572,100 professional engineers. Compare that with those that believe that 9/11 was an inside job, the 'truther' engineers is merely 0.06% of American professional engineers. So I'd rather stick with the 99.94% of professional engineers that say 9/11 was NOT an inside job. How about, instead of reading from ae911truth.org site, go to this site instead that has real architects & engineers that are exposing & debunking all the b.s. claims on the ae911truth.org site: http://www.ae911truth.info/tiki-index.php

[bailey_187]

9-11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB !! and who ever wrote those 9-11 debunked videos works for zionists and neocons.
.

What interest would Israel have in the 9/11 conspiracy?

[Sogdian]

What interest would Israel have in the 9/11 conspiracy?

War in the Middle East. Don't you remember the BIGgest cheerleader in the room for the war against Iraq?

[Sogdian]

Well, according to recorded statistics of 2008 (http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos027.htm#emply), it had recorded that, in the U.S. alone, there were 1,572,100 professional engineers. Compare that with those that believe that 9/11 was an inside job, the 'truther' engineers is merely 0.06% of American professional engineers. So I'd rather stick with the 99.94% of professional engineers that say 9/11 was NOT an inside job. How about, instead of reading from ae911truth.org site, go to this site instead that has real architects & engineers that are exposing & debunking all the b.s. claims on the ae911truth.org site: http://www.ae911truth.info/tiki-index.php

Because there are 1000+ engineers and architectures who stood up and demand the truth, does not mean that the rest ~1,570,000+ oppose them! And to go even further and assert that ~1,570,000+ actually believe "9/11 was NOT an inside job" is just ridiculous.. where did you get this from?

Science is not based on blind belief system, but experiment, evidence, etc. Those brave 1000+ don't believe 9/11 was inside job, but oppose the official story as scientifically unsatisfactory and unreasonable. http://www.ae911truth.org/aboutus.php

[The Vegan Marxist]

Because there are 1000+ engineers and architectures who stood up and demand the truth, does not mean that the rest ~1,570,000+ oppose them! And to go even further and assert that ~1,570,000+ actually believe "9/11 was NOT an inside job" is just ridiculous.. where did you get this from?

Science is not based on blind belief system, but experiment, evidence, etc. Those brave 1000+ don't believe 9/11 was inside job, but oppose the official story as scientifically unsatisfactory and unreasonable. http://www.ae911truth.org/aboutus.php

Are you nuts? Have you not watched these guys' videos? They clearly talk about how 9/11 was more than likely an inside job, & use the 'evidence' to prove so, which were originally created by Loose Change. Go to http://www.ae911truth.info/tiki-index.php (http://www.ae911truth.org/aboutus.php) & then tell me that these over 1000 engineers are correct with their questions, & weren't misleading those who follow them.

[Vendetta]

Even Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez have said that 9-11 was an inside job.

Okay, and...?

[Sogdian]

Are you nuts? Have you not watched these guys' videos? They clearly talk about how 9/11 was more than likely an inside job, & use the 'evidence' to prove so, which were originally created by Loose Change. Go to http://www.ae911truth.info/tiki-index.php (http://www.ae911truth.org/aboutus.php) & then tell me that these over 1000 engineers are correct with their questions, & weren't misleading those who follow them.

Please keep your emotions into yourself. Ok, I entered and read some stuff on the link (http://www.ae911truth.info/tiki-index.php) that you posted. However, what I found most interesting was the author (http://www.ae911truth.info/tiki-index.php?page=Joseph+Nobles) of the website. Let me share it:
I am currently a live voice writer, which means I produce captions for live television using voice recognition software. I used to be an working actor with the various "day jobs" such a profession requires. I also graduated from International Bible College (now Heritage Christian University) with a BA in Bible, and attended Harding Graduate School of Religion for two years pursuing a Masters in Christian Theology. I am now an agnostic on all matters religious.

My interest in 9/11 conspiracy theories stems from two places.

When I was a young teenager, I was starting to be consumed by various types of woo. I found a book in my local library, The Bermuda Triangle Mystery: Solved! by Lawrence David Kusche. His patient research and debunking of all Triangle mysteries was a revelation to me. I've always felt a debt to him that helping to debunk 9/11 CT satisfies.

I am also very liberal in my politics. I was posting on my favorite website in 2002, The Smirking Chimp, when someone posted a link to the Hunt the Boeing! website. It caused a sensation and was very quickly shot down there. However, the natural appeal to such Bush-hating CTs among liberals led me to dedicate quite some time to knocking these theories down. It's something that has united a number of people across the political spectrum, but I am happy to do my part in resisting these cynical attempts at political snobbery. Government is a useful tool, the people can assert their control over it, and we can work together to root out corruption and build a better future for those who follow us. The 9/11 CT advocates draw their emotional strength from a dark, cynical view of all things political. The boulevard, as Elton John said, is not that bad.

And here is your previous post:

Well, according to recorded statistics of 2008, it had recorded that, in the U.S. alone, there were 1,572,100 professional engineers. Compare that with those that believe that 9/11 was an inside job, the 'truther' engineers is merely 0.06% of American professional engineers. So I'd rather stick with the 99.94% of professional engineers that say 9/11 was NOT an inside job. How about, instead of reading from ae911truth.org site, go to this site instead that has real architects & engineers that are exposing & debunking all the b.s. claims on the ae911truth.org site: http://www.ae911truth.info/tiki-index.php

Now, first of all, where did you get the information that "99.94% of professional engineers ... say 9/11 was NOT an inside job"? Secondly, you are not really suggesting that a guy with BA in Bible :blink: has the right to speak for 99.94% of architects and engineers, are you :confused:

What a waste of time.

[bailey_187]

War in the Middle East. Don't you remember the BIGgest cheerleader in the room for the war against Iraq?

What does 9/11 have to do with Iraq?

Sure, 9/11 was used to create support for Iraq, but since when did America need to go to such elaborate measures to invade another country?

[Psy]

And another thing, I'm not defending the official version whatsoever. I've said that in the forum, within agreement, that the government used 9/11 to their own advantage. We even have former 9/11 commission members that have spoken out saying that they believe the government had used that day to their advantage, & had made sure to cover some things up to put the blame completely on the other side. But to believe that the government had a direct hand in the situation, you're nuts & are believing in phony-science created by the Loose Changers.

Wait why is it nuts to think that the CIA might have given Al Qaeda the idea and resources to pull off the attacks while tell the US military to stand down? The CIA already drew up plans in 1962 of creating a terrorist attack for a casus belli against Cuba, the CIA even proposed creating Cuban terrorist groups to launch terrorist bombing against not only in Miami but Washing DC that would be pre-linked to Havana (this idea was only shot down because the CIA at the time were at odds with the FBI and such a plan required their cooperation).

It would explain why the FBI came to such a quick conclusion when most terrorist bombing of a airliner takes months for the FBI to come to a conclusion, take Pan AM Flight 103 for example it took from December 21 1988 till sometime in September 1989 till they linked the bombing with Lybia and that was one crime scene 9/11 there was far more debris but strangely the FBI seemed to know who did it very quickly as if they didn't have to do any forensics as they were able to solve the case of the 9/11 attacks in only a mater of a few days when Flight 103 took weeks just to sort through the all the debris.

[Kayser_Soso]

Wait why is it nuts to think that the CIA might have given Al Qaeda the idea and resources to pull off the attacks while tell the US military to stand down?

Crazy or not, the evidence isn't there. What is important is not what "could have happened", but what did happen. Besides, when did the US ever need a real reason to go to war?



The CIA already drew up plans in 1962 of creating a terrorist attack for a casus belli against Cuba, the CIA even proposed creating Cuban terrorist groups to launch terrorist bombing against not only in Miami but Washing DC that would be pre-linked to Havana (this idea was only shot down because the CIA at the time were at odds with the FBI and such a plan required their cooperation).

This was never carried out, and in this plan, nobody was to be killed.



It would explain why the FBI came to such a quick conclusion when most terrorist bombing of a airliner takes months for the FBI to come to a conclusion, take Pan AM Flight 103 for example it took from December 21 1988 till sometime in September 1989 till they linked the bombing with Lybia and that was one crime scene 9/11 there was far more debris but strangely the FBI seemed to know who did it very quickly as if they didn't have to do any forensics as they were able to solve the case of the 9/11 attacks in only a mater of a few days when Flight 103 took weeks just to sort through the all the debris.

I am not familiar with the exact evidence used in the Pan AM bombing- there may be a specific reason for this.

[Psy]

What does 9/11 have to do with Iraq?

Sure, 9/11 was used to create support for Iraq, but since when did America need to go to such elaborate measures to invade another country?

Since Vietnam and the "Vietnam Syndrome", 9/11 allowed the US state to play the victim card. There already is growing cases of minor mutinies in the US armed forces imagine how bad it would be without 9/11. Remember during Vietnam even the troops that volunteered mutinied in high numbers and were growing more militant and more uncontrollable when troops frag their officers and no one in the unit saw anything, it is hard for the military to have any sort of discipline. Without 9/11 US troops in Iraq probably be as uncontrollable as US troops were in Vietnam.

[bailey_187]

Since Vietnam and the "Vietnam Syndrome", 9/11 allowed the US state to play the victim card. There already is growing cases of minor mutinies in the US armed forces imagine how bad it would be without 9/11. Remember during Vietnam even the troops that volunteered mutinied in high numbers and were growing more militant and more uncontrollable when troops frag their officers and no one in the unit saw anything, it is hard for the military to have any sort of discipline. Without 9/11 US troops in Iraq probably be as uncontrollable as US troops were in Vietnam.

Troops in Vietname were conscripted.

http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html

This is a list of US miliary interventions and invasions. How did the USA stop troops becoming "militant" and "uncontrolable" in all of these?

[Psy]

I am not familiar with the exact evidence used in the Pan AM bombing- there may be a specific reason for this.
It takes time to go through the remains of airliner and most evidence is very very small in the case of Pan AM 103 the key piece of evidence (part of the timer to the bomb). Imagine all the debris of all the crash sites of the 9/11 attacks, in a normal investigation all of that debris would have to be looked at, you'd won't normally see any intact documents as the fire would have spread them around into bits of burned paper so investigators would have to chemically treat each bit of paper to see what was on them then piece them all together to see what the documents were.

[Psy]

Troops in Vietname were conscripted.

Not all and troops the volunteered also mutinied



http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html

This is a list of US miliary interventions and invasions. How did the USA stop troops becoming "militant" and "uncontrolable" in all of these?
Since Vietnam? There hasn't been a major drawn out conflict. Prior to Vietnam the average class consciousness of the recruits were lower as more came from rural areas and more recruits were uneducated.

[Ovi]

The demolition theory seems absurd. But what I always thought these conspiracy theorists say about 9/11 is that the government knew about it and didn't do anything. You can't disprove that scientifically but neither prove it though.

[Dimentio]

The important thing is not whether conspiracy theories are debunked or not, but that they exist and are so prevalent today. That shows a sign of a rapid deterioration of authority and legitimacy.

Such deterioration could, when combined with a sudden crisis or a worsening of an existing crisis, serve to bring down an entire system. In the fall of the Soviet Union for example, there was a widespread cynicism and apathy amongst the population towards the political elite. Other examples are for example The Western Roman Empire, and China during the end of various dynasties.

[pierrotlefou]

What does 9/11 have to do with Iraq?

Sure, 9/11 was used to create support for Iraq, but since when did America need to go to such elaborate measures to invade another country?
Since always. Besides, it's harder these days to garner public support for a senseless invasion, which iraq was, so they needed a good excuse and 9/11 just fell right in their lap. Imperialism knows no bounds and the middle east is no exception. Iraq was just a "necessary" stepping stone in the larger picture.

[bailey_187]

Since Vietnam? There hasn't been a major drawn out conflict. Prior to Vietnam the average class consciousness of the recruits were lower as more came from rural areas and more recruits were uneducated.


You are assuming that Iraq was supposed to be a drawn out long conflict.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Wait why is it nuts to think that the CIA might have given Al Qaeda the idea and resources to pull off the attacks while tell the US military to stand down? The CIA already drew up plans in 1962 of creating a terrorist attack for a casus belli against Cuba, the CIA even proposed creating Cuban terrorist groups to launch terrorist bombing against not only in Miami but Washing DC that would be pre-linked to Havana (this idea was only shot down because the CIA at the time were at odds with the FBI and such a plan required their cooperation).

It would explain why the FBI came to such a quick conclusion when most terrorist bombing of a airliner takes months for the FBI to come to a conclusion, take Pan AM Flight 103 for example it took from December 21 1988 till sometime in September 1989 till they linked the bombing with Lybia and that was one crime scene 9/11 there was far more debris but strangely the FBI seemed to know who did it very quickly as if they didn't have to do any forensics as they were able to solve the case of the 9/11 attacks in only a mater of a few days when Flight 103 took weeks just to sort through the all the debris.

It's nuts to assume that it was an inside job when all the science points to it not being an inside job. Now if you were to say that they allowed it to happen, sure, I'll go with that. But to ignore the science that shows how it was not an inside job, then it becomes apparent that you are no longer searching for THE truth & instead are searching for YOUR truth.

[bailey_187]

Since always. Besides, it's harder these days to garner public support for a senseless invasion, which iraq was, so they needed a good excuse and 9/11 just fell right in their lap. Imperialism knows no bounds and the middle east is no exception. Iraq was just a "necessary" stepping stone in the larger picture.

Surely the WMD accusations would have been enough?

I mean, its not like Saddam was thought of well in America, they invaded Iraq once already...

[Kayser_Soso]

Since Vietnam and the "Vietnam Syndrome", 9/11 allowed the US state to play the victim card. There already is growing cases of minor mutinies in the US armed forces imagine how bad it would be without 9/11. Remember during Vietnam even the troops that volunteered mutinied in high numbers and were growing more militant and more uncontrollable when troops frag their officers and no one in the unit saw anything, it is hard for the military to have any sort of discipline. Without 9/11 US troops in Iraq probably be as uncontrollable as US troops were in Vietnam.

Troops in Vietnam did not "mutiny". Some of the resistance in Iraq, though less violent, has been more organized and widespread to that seen during the Vietnam war. Also the resistance among soldiers mainly came once it was announced that the US would be withdrawing. Soldiers tend to get pissed off when they are told that they will be leaving, but they still need to go on patrol and get shot at.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Here's a question, if 9/11 was set up by the intelligence agency of the U.S. government, then why didn't they just fly one of the planes into the Indian Point Nuclear Facility right outside of New York? That would've done much more damage, & would've brought in a more better message for the people to see to believe that we are fucked if we don't fight against the 'terrorists overseas'.

[Kayser_Soso]

Here's a question, if 9/11 was set up by the intelligence agency of the U.S. government, then why didn't they just fly one of the planes into the Indian Point Nuclear Facility right outside of New York? That would've done much more damage, & would've brought in a more better message for the people to see to believe that we are fucked if we don't fight against the 'terrorists overseas'.

Or at least bust some patsy planning to blow up the plant- in other words, don't kill anyone at all. Dead bodies make people ask questions.

[Psy]

It's nuts to assume that it was an inside job when all the science points to it not being an inside job. Now if you were to say that they allowed it to happen, sure, I'll go with that. But to ignore the science that shows how it was not an inside job, then it becomes apparent that you are no longer searching for THE truth & instead are searching for YOUR truth.
How so, if the CIA still infiltrated enough of the Al Qaeda leadership it could have pushed the idea of the WTC attacks unto Al Qaeda the same way COINTELPRO pushed the idea of terrorist attacks onto leftist groups through FBI during the 1960's and 1970's, the evidence would still point to Al Qaeda.

COINTELPRO showed the the US state was willing to kill innocent US citizens through proxy terrorist attacks just to denouce enemies of the state.

[Kayser_Soso]

How so, if the CIA still infiltrated enough of the Al Qaeda leadership it could have pushed the idea of the WTC attacks unto Al Qaeda the same way COINTELPRO pushed the idea of terrorist attacks onto leftist groups through FBI during the 1960's and 1970's, the evidence would still point to Al Qaeda.

COINTELPRO showed the the US state was willing to kill innocent US citizens through proxy terrorist attacks just to denouce enemies of the state.

Could have, could have....find some EVIDENCE, not speculative scenarios.

[Psy]

Troops in Vietnam did not "mutiny".

Killing officers is mutiny, especially when the unit collaborates to it cover up.



Some of the resistance in Iraq, though less violent, has been more organized and widespread to that seen during the Vietnam war. Also the resistance among soldiers mainly came once it was announced that the US would be withdrawing. Soldiers tend to get pissed off when they are told that they will be leaving, but they still need to go on patrol and get shot at.
Actually the mutinies in Vietnam came long before a withdraw as announced, it grew out of the futility of the war were no significant gains were being made for years while US troops were still dying.

[Psy]

Here's a question, if 9/11 was set up by the intelligence agency of the U.S. government, then why didn't they just fly one of the planes into the Indian Point Nuclear Facility right outside of New York? That would've done much more damage, & would've brought in a more better message for the people to see to believe that we are fucked if we don't fight against the 'terrorists overseas'.

That would be too big of a victory for the enemy, it would really call into question the competency of the military and intelligence services. It would make the US state look far too weak, imagine how the after math would have played out if Indian Point Nuclear Facility was destroyed and inner-cities responded by declaring their independence from the US state? Even if that happen the Bush Admin probably would have not have survived such attacks politically.

[Psy]

Could have, could have....find some EVIDENCE, not speculative scenarios.

I'm just point out that the idea of it being a inside job and is not that crazy.

[Kayser_Soso]

I'm just point out that the idea of it being a inside job and is not that crazy.

Perhaps not crazy per se, but when people go nuts defending an unlikely theory against all evidence to the contrary, then it's crazy.

[Dimentio]

Banned LeninistKing for antisemitic statements and baseless accusations against another user (Vegan Anarchist). The thread is kept open to discuss the subject at hand.

[The Vegan Marxist]

I'm just point out that the idea of it being a inside job and is not that crazy.

The science has shown that there was no way that it was an inside job! There was no controlled demolitions. A plane did hit the pentagon. A plane did crash land, & it wasn't in Cleveland. All the terrorists that conducted 9/11 have been identified through their dead corpses. We have video coverage of Osama bin Laden admitting to 9/11, more than once I might add. The only possibility we have right now in getting a new investigation would be if the U.S. government allowed 9/11 to happen, because that's still on the table. When it comes to the 'inside job' claim, it's been thoroughly debunked. Don't make this another 'moon landing hoax' incident.

[pierrotlefou]

Surely the WMD accusations would have been enough?

I mean, its not like Saddam was thought of well in America, they invaded Iraq once already...
But there was no military threat from him toward us. Lots of countrys have WMDs. Even US enemies but they don't just go in an attack them. The only threat was that he had nationalized the oil fields and kicked out all of the US corporations a while ago and then had threatened to begin to sell with the euro over the dollar which would be a major blow to the dominance of the US over the entire capitalist system. It's pure imperialist strategy. After afghanistan, the next logical step would be Iraq to surround the only real threat in the area which is Iran who also controls oil and separate it from it's ally Syria. The WMDs were faked because the US could not wait for another 9/11 to blame on Iraq seeing as Saddam did not like al queda in his country.
Now, I can see how someone can take that evidence to build a case for the US being behind 9/11 but in my view, the evidence clearly supports that Bin Laden pulled a fast one on the country that spends the most on national security. An attack on the US was bound to happen anyway seeing as they antagonize everyone but I do not think they expected it to be like that. Afghanistan fell into their lap.

[Psy]

The science has shown that there was no way that it was an inside job! There was no controlled demolitions. A plane did hit the pentagon. A plane did crash land, & it wasn't in Cleveland. All the terrorists that conducted 9/11 have been identified through their dead corpses. We have video coverage of Osama bin Laden admitting to 9/11, more than once I might add. The only possibility we have right now in getting a new investigation would be if the U.S. government allowed 9/11 to happen, because that's still on the table. When it comes to the 'inside job' claim, it's been thoroughly debunked. Don't make this another 'moon landing hoax' incident.
Yet COINTELPRO showed that the intelligence services of the US don't stage their own terrorist attacks but instead they convince proxies to do their dirty work. Meaning if 9/11 was a inside job they would have used moles in Al Qaeda, so of course Bin Laden would say he did it even if knew the CIA tricked him odds are Bin Laden wouldn't admit the leadership of Al Qaeda was infeltrated by the CIA and puppeted them. Remeber when the FBI puppeted the KKK to commit terrorist attacks in the USA even top member of the KKK that knew the FBI was using them kept their mouths shut and it was only uncovered when the FBI documents were leaked.

The dead terrorist were identified too quickly, the most logical explaination for this is the CIA had infeltrated the leadership of Al Quada so had inside knowledge of the 9/11 attacks.

[bailey_187]

But there was no military threat from him toward us. Lots of countrys have WMDs. Even US enemies but they don't just go in an attack them. The only threat was that he had nationalized the oil fields and kicked out all of the US corporations a while ago and then had threatened to begin to sell with the euro over the dollar which would be a major blow to the dominance of the US over the entire capitalist system. It's pure imperialist strategy. .

No one is doubting that.


The WMDs were faked because the US could not wait for another 9/11 to blame on Iraq seeing as Saddam did not like al queda in his country.

So 9/11 was not done by Bush as a pretext to invade Iraq? Thats what i am saying.

So 9/11 was done by Busht to invade Afghanistan? Surely, if Osama (this is to general 9/11 Truthers not you btw) had nothing to do with 9/11 and 9/11 was an inside job to invade another country, why not blame it on somewhere with more importance than Afghanistan? For example they could have blamed it directly on Saddam? Or Libya? Both countries are much more rich in resources than Afghanistan.
If 9/11 was an inside Job to invade somewhere, they sure picked a shit (by comparison with possible other candidates) to blame the attacks on.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Yet COINTELPRO showed that the intelligence services of the US don't stage their own terrorist attacks but instead they convince proxies to do their dirty work. Meaning if 9/11 was a inside job they would have used moles in Al Qaeda, so of course Bin Laden would say he did it even if knew the CIA tricked him odds are Bin Laden wouldn't admit the leadership of Al Qaeda was infeltrated by the CIA and puppeted them. Remeber when the FBI puppeted the KKK to commit terrorist attacks in the USA even top member of the KKK that knew the FBI was using them kept their mouths shut and it was only uncovered when the FBI documents were leaked.

The dead terrorist were identified too quickly, the most logical explaination for this is the CIA had infeltrated the leadership of Al Quada so had inside knowledge of the 9/11 attacks.

I don't deny that the COINTELPRO was vastly operational under the circumstances you are talking about. But you're basing this all under assumptions, not facts since we have no idea if the COINTELPRO even exists anymore. And no, the most logical explanation would be that they were given word that an attack was soon to come, & so the U.S. was getting things ready, such as the Patriot Acts, etc. The same thing happened with Pearl Harbor, the Lusitania, etc. Why is it so hard to understand that it wasn't an inside job, that the U.S. didn't have a direct hand into 9/11, but merely allowed it to happen for their own advantage.

[Sogdian]

Banned LeninistKing for antisemitic statements and baseless accusations against another user (Vegan Anarchist). The thread is kept open to discuss the subject at hand.

Seriously :huh:, for what "antisemitic statements and baseless accusations" LeninistKing was banned? I'm still new here, but already have noticed several users being banned for obscure reasons, disappointing.

And, The_Vegan_Anarchist is an annoying stupid kid... I've shown an evidence to back up this accusation in my previous post. :thumbdown:

[Vendetta]

The dead terrorist were identified too quickly, the most logical explaination for this is the CIA had infeltrated the leadership of Al Quada so had inside knowledge of the 9/11 attacks.

Or maybe they're just good at their job?

[The Vegan Marxist]

Seriously :huh:, for what "antisemitic statements and baseless accusations" LeninistKing was banned? I'm still new here, but already have noticed several users being banned for obscure reasons, disappointing.

And, The_Vegan_Anarchist is an annoying stupid kid... I've shown an evidence to back up this accusation in my previous post. :thumbdown:

Well, I didn't call for the ban of LeninistKing, but maybe because he started calling people who didn't agree with his views as government agents & wouldn't back up anything he stated. And you didn't back up anything. You just rather chose to follow a group of 0.06% of engineers in the world that are open to the idea of 9/11 being an inside job, despite the fact that they are basing all their information towards the 'evidence' brought forth originally by Loose Change, which if you watch all the videos in the beginning of this thread, then you'll realize that they were all debunked, meaning the accusations made on 9/11 by the ae911truth group were debunked as well. All you chose was to go against the site that clearly debunked the ae911truth site just because one was a former God believer, now agnostic. This only clearly shows that you're one-sided towards a certain 'truth' that you're searching for, & you limit your sources towards certain people based on their backgrounds.

If that's the case, then why don't you look into David Ray Griffins background as well, the main speaker for 9/11 truth, who even published a book called 'Debunking 911 Debunkings'. This guy is still a full-fledged God believer, & his studies through school were exactly that. So why go against one thing, when it's based on the exact same background of the people you support?

[Sogdian]

Well, I didn't call for the ban of LeninistKing, but maybe because he started calling people who didn't agree with his views as government agents & wouldn't back up anything he stated. And you didn't back up anything. You just rather chose to follow a group of 0.06% of engineers in the world that are open to the idea of 9/11 being an inside job, despite the fact that they are basing all their information towards the 'evidence' brought forth originally by Loose Change, which if you watch all the videos in the beginning of this thread, then you'll realize that they were all debunked, meaning the accusations made on 9/11 by the ae911truth group were debunked as well. All you chose was to go against the site that clearly debunked the ae911truth site just because one was a former God believer, now agnostic. This only clearly shows that you're one-sided towards a certain 'truth' that you're searching for, & you limit your sources towards certain people based on their backgrounds.

If that's the case, then why don't you look into David Ray Griffins background as well, the main speaker for 9/11 truth, who even published a book called 'Debunking 911 Debunkings'. This guy is still a full-fledged God believer, & his studies through school were exactly that. So why go against one thing, when it's based on the exact same background of the people you support?

The author's background was important because you made this statement:

Well, according to recorded statistics of 2008 (http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos027.htm#emply), it had recorded that, in the U.S. alone, there were 1,572,100 professional engineers. Compare that with those that believe that 9/11 was an inside job, the 'truther' engineers is merely 0.06% of American professional engineers. So I'd rather stick with the 99.94% of professional engineers that say 9/11 was NOT an inside job. How about, instead of reading from ae911truth.org site, go to this site instead that has real architects & engineers that are exposing & debunking all the b.s. claims on the ae911truth.org site: http://www.ae911truth.info/tiki-index.php
And as it happens all those "real architects & engineers" was ONE guy with BA degree in Bible from International Bible College (now Heritage Christian University). :rolleyes:

[The Vegan Marxist]

The author's background was important because you made this statement:

And as it happens all those "real architects & engineers" was ONE guy with BA degree in Bible.

His debunkings though are through real physics & architectural math by real engineers & architects. Alright, I made an assumption that was proven wrong, I'll admit that, but you're still basing your support towards a group of people who have been debunked thoroughly. It doesn't take an engineer to debunk these people when we have the facts & science already provided for us.

[Psy]

Or maybe they're just good at their job?

Too many man hours of work were required so it would being lucky not good. Investigations of crash sites takes time because evidence is all mixed up and it takes time to reconstruct the bits of evidence into leads. Just think about how much time it would take just to separate the remains of the airliner for the remains of the WTC so forensic investors could piece together who was on the flight.

[Kayser_Soso]

Too many man hours of work were required so it would being lucky not good. Investigations of crash sites takes time because evidence is all mixed up and take time to reconstruct the bits of evidence into leads. Just think about how much time it would take just to separate the remains of the airliner for the remains of the WTC so forensic investors could piece together who was on the flight.

I am starting to wonder how much experience you have investigating airplane crashes.

[The Vegan Marxist]

You do realize that it took longer than just overnight when it came to piecing the bodies. They didn't even get done cleaning out all the rubble at the WTC sites 'til around 2004 if I'm not mistaken. The investigation took a few good years.

[Psy]

I am starting to wonder how much experience you have investigating airplane crashes.

Go look into investigations of airline crashes, it usually takes weeks just for investigators to collect and sort though most of the evidence that survived was recovered. WTC was worse then the average airline investigation is that you had all the remains of the towers fall onto the evidence that should have drastically delayed the investigation.

[IllicitPopsicle]

Wait why is it nuts to think that the CIA might have given Al Qaeda the idea and resources to pull off the attacks while tell the US military to stand down? The CIA already drew up plans in 1962 of creating a terrorist attack for a casus belli against Cuba, the CIA even proposed creating Cuban terrorist groups to launch terrorist bombing against not only in Miami but Washing DC that would be pre-linked to Havana (this idea was only shot down because the CIA at the time were at odds with the FBI and such a plan required their cooperation).

It would explain why the FBI came to such a quick conclusion when most terrorist bombing of a airliner takes months for the FBI to come to a conclusion, take Pan AM Flight 103 for example it took from December 21 1988 till sometime in September 1989 till they linked the bombing with Lybia and that was one crime scene 9/11 there was far more debris but strangely the FBI seemed to know who did it very quickly as if they didn't have to do any forensics as they were able to solve the case of the 9/11 attacks in only a mater of a few days when Flight 103 took weeks just to sort through the all the debris.

The CIA is legally not allowed to operate on a large scale in the United States; it is an intelligence-gathering agency (hence the name) and with all of the documents pertaining to waterboarding being leaked (that in itself is a big fucking deal right there) it follows that if there was a secret plan to pull something like this off, it would most likely have been leaked by now.

Not saying the CIA is good at all. But there is a logical process to follow here. Not even CIA spooks are so evil they'd kill a bunch of non-important people in a financial building for no reason but to start a war somewhere else.

[IllicitPopsicle]

What I'd like to know is why there are those who call themselve anarchists and communists on this board who are so quick to believe the tripe that an overweight overblown conservative throws out blindly? Alex Jones knows he can sucker anyone for money, he does it - and all of this 9/11 Truth business is pissing me off. Way to play into the capitalists' hands, Psy and Sogdian.

[The Vegan Marxist]

What I'd like to know is why there are those who call themselve anarchists and communists on this board who are so quick to believe the tripe that an overweight overblown conservative throws out blindly? Alex Jones knows he can sucker anyone for money, he does it - and all of this 9/11 Truth business is pissing me off. Way to play into the capitalists' hands, Psy and Sogdian.

Thanks for changing names to Psy & Sogdian, instead of Bailey. I was going to ask when did Bailey ever make a reference that 9/11 was an inside job, but you cleared it out.

[Psy]

You do realize that it took longer than just overnight when it came to piecing the bodies. They didn't even get done cleaning out all the rubble at the WTC sites 'til around 2004 if I'm not mistaken. The investigation took a few good years.
I'm talking about how the FBI was able to name the hijackers in about a week due to conveniently finding intact passports early on, that means either the FBI was improbably lucky or they planted the evidence as they already knew how was responsible.

[IllicitPopsicle]

Thanks for changing names to Psy & Sogdian, instead of Bailey. I was going to ask when did Bailey ever make a reference that 9/11 was an inside job, but you cleared it out.

That was my bad, yeah... oops. *must be more careful...*

[The Vegan Marxist]

I'm talking about how the FBI was able to name the hijackers in about a week due to conveniently finding intact passports early on, that means either the FBI was improbably lucky or they planted the evidence as they already knew how was responsible.

Can you provide any sources that clarifies that all the hijackers were identified within a week of its investigation? If so then I'd love to see it.

[Sogdian]

What I'd like to know is why there are those who call themselve anarchists and communists on this board who are so quick to believe the tripe that an overweight overblown conservative throws out blindly? Alex Jones knows he can sucker anyone for money, he does it - and all of this 9/11 Truth business is pissing me off. Way to play into the capitalists' hands, Psy and Sogdian.

On what bases are you asserting that I am playing in the hands of the capitalists?

[gorillafuck]

Let's ignore technical aspects of 9/11 for a second. The U.S. started a war with Iraq on bogus claims of Iraq having WMD's. Does anyone here honestly think that they would feel it necessary to fly planes into and bring down two buildings in New York in order to go to war in Afghanistan? If 9/11 was an inside job, it would probably be the most elaborate plan ever carried out that was for the sole purpose of war propaganda.

[Sogdian]

Can you provide any sources that clarifies that all the hijackers were identified within a week of its investigation? If so then I'd love to see it.

Press Release
For Immediate Release
September 14, 2001

Washington D.C.
FBI National Press Office
(202) 324-3691

FBI Announces List of 19 Hijackers

The following is a list of the nineteen (19) individuals who have been identified as hijackers aboard the four airliners that crashed on September 11, 2001, into the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon, and Stony Creek Township, Pennsylvania. Information listed for each hijacker differs, but may include date of birth, address provided, or visa status. This is the extent of the information available at this time.

The FBI requests that anyone who may have information about these individuals-even though they are presumed to be dead- to immediately contact an FBI field office or call the toll-free hotline at 1-866-483-5137.

... http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/091401hj.htm

[IllicitPopsicle]

I'm talking about how the FBI was able to name the hijackers in about a week due to conveniently finding intact passports early on, that means either the FBI was improbably lucky or they planted the evidence as they already knew how was responsible.

Considering the FBI is the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION...

Think about this for a second: If there is cause to suggest that terrorists flew planes into buildings and killed thousands of people, IT WOULD FOLLOW that the federal law enforcement agency would be working around the clock at finding whodunnit. Because it's their job.

[Psy]

The CIA is legally not allowed to operate on a large scale in the United States; it is an intelligence-gathering agency (hence the name) and with all of the documents pertaining to waterboarding being leaked (that in itself is a big fucking deal right there) it follows that if there was a secret plan to pull something like this off, it would most likely have been leaked by now.

You do know the FBI and CIA had a war in the 1960's over that fact, leaked FBI documents showed that Hoover was very concerned about the CIA operating paramilitary forces within the borders of the USA and ordered that the CIA paramilitary forces within the USA should be infiltrated by the FBI and brought under Hoover's direct command to turn them into the FBI's paramilitary forces.

[IllicitPopsicle]

^^So... what was the point of making that comment?^^

[Psy]

Considering the FBI is the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION...

Think about this for a second: If there is cause to suggest that terrorists flew planes into buildings and killed thousands of people, IT WOULD FOLLOW that the federal law enforcement agency would be working around the clock at finding whodunnit. Because it's their job.

Actually Hoover would disagree, Hoover in his leaked memo's stated the primary task of the FBI was to keep the lesser classes inline.

This also ignores the scale required to reconstruct evidence in the attacks is too large for the FBI to have came to a conclusion so quickly regardless how many man hours they put into it.

[Psy]

^^So... what was the point of making that comment?^^
That the CIA has operated in the US domestically.

[The Vegan Marxist]

That the CIA has operated in the US domestically.

These are all accusations though, Psy. You are caught up with these opinions, & you're basing them on a idea of yours. I'm sure a lot of the investigation for the first few days was to find out who hijacked the planes in the first place. All of which can be found through flight logs & video capture, not to mention passports found along with witnesses of such individuals before 9/11.

Besides, it doesn't take too long to identify certain hijackers. What about the 1996 Flight 961 hijacking? The hijackers were identified pretty quick as well as Ethiopians soon after the crash land of the plane, & all the hijackers were killed in the process, just like 9/11.

[IllicitPopsicle]

It comes down to efficiency of bureaucratic agencies in times of perceived or real crises. If an agency is well-funded and organized at the time, or if the shock is sufficient enough, then the agency will do its job reasonably better than if it was underfunded and disorganized. 9/11 happened to catch the FBI with their pants up in whatever department goes around finding IDs of suspects.

Here's what the FBI presumably had in the days after 9/11: the flight numbers of all the planes involved; the minutes of security camera footage from the major airports from which the attacks originated; a roster of passengers; and a list of international persons of interest. Honestly dude it doesn't take but a few clicks around the google to find all of this stuff. Just because it doesn't come from InfoWars or some other Alex Jones-subsidized "news organization" doesn't make it any less logical, much less factual. Alex Jones and co. makes money on your stupidity; therefore, you're playing directly into capitalists' hands by spewing this crap.

[Psy]

These are all accusations though, Psy. You are caught up with these opinions, & you're basing them on a idea of yours. I'm sure a lot of the investigation for the first few days was to find out who hijacked the planes in the first place. All of which can be found through flight logs & video capture, not to mention passports found along with witnesses of such individuals before 9/11.

Besides, it doesn't take too long to identify certain hijackers. What about the 1996 Flight 961 hijacking? The hijackers were identified pretty quick as well as Ethiopians soon after the crash land of the plane, & all the hijackers were killed in the process, just like 9/11.
Flight 961 had survives and a video tape of the hijacking.



It comes down to efficiency of bureaucratic agencies in times of perceived or real crises. If an agency is well-funded and organized at the time, or if the shock is sufficient enough, then the agency will do its job reasonably better than if it was underfunded and disorganized. 9/11 happened to catch the FBI with their pants up in whatever department goes around finding IDs of suspects.

How did the FBI know who was the suspects?



Here's what the FBI presumably had in the days after 9/11: the flight numbers of all the planes involved; the minutes of security camera footage from the major airports from which the attacks originated; a roster of passengers; and a list of international persons of interest. Honestly dude it doesn't take but a few clicks around the google to find all of this stuff. Just because it doesn't come from InfoWars or some other Alex Jones-subsidized "news organization" doesn't make it any less logical, much less factual. Alex Jones and co. makes money on your stupidity; therefore, you're playing directly into capitalists' hands by spewing this crap.

The hijackers bordered with fake IDs (according to the FBI) so the roster of passengers was useless in that regard, we are also talking long before computers could quickly compare faces to large databases and face recognition software was very unreliable at the time.

So it would still have taken time.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Flight 961 had survives and a video tape of the hijacking.


How did the FBI know who was the suspects?


The hijackers bordered with fake IDs (according to the FBI) so the roster of passengers was useless in that regard, we are also talking long before computers could quickly compare faces to large databases and face recognition software was very unreliable at the time.

So it would still have taken time.

With all those things operational, it would've taken a few hours, but instead, it took a few days. So I think that was a logical time of getting everything done. And what makes you think that face recognition was unreliable at the time? When was this ever known?

But, to explain better, I'll provide all the information on how these people were identified, & how it was so quickly. Sorry if it seems long.

[The Vegan Marxist]

The process of identifying the 9/11 hijackers began early. Very early. In fact, as the 9/11
Commission explains, before even the first crash had taken place:
At 8:26, Ong reported that the plane was “flying erratically.” A minute later, Flight 11 turned south. American also began getting identifications of the hijackers, as Ong and then Sweeney passed on some of the seat numbers of those who had gained unauthorized access to the cockpit.
Page 6, 9/11 Commission Report


Other accounts from the time gave more details:

As the hijacking unfolded, Ong punched the number 8 on a seatback GTE Airfone and got through to an American reservations agent. The agent called the system operations control center in Fort Worth at 8:27. "She said two flight attendants had been stabbed, one was on oxygen," said Craig Marquis, the manager on duty. "A passenger had his throat slashed and looked dead and they had gotten into the cockpit."
Ong said the four hijackers had come from first-class seats: 2A, 2B, 9A, and 9B. She said the wounded passenger was in seat 10B.
http://www.boston.com/news/packages/underattack/news/planes_reconstruction.htm


We have four seat numbers. The manifest obtained by the Boston Globe helps us turn these into names:
http://www.911myths.com/images/8/84/Flight_11_Manifest.gif (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Image:Flight_11_Manifest.gif)
Ong had pointed to Wail (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Wail_al-Shehri) and Waleed al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Waleed_al-Shehri), Edmund Glazer and Daniel Lewin, according to those numbers, with Satam al-Suqami (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Satam_al-Suqami) being "wounded". That's quite different to what we know now, however as "Betty Ong and Amy Sweeney would have been working in coach" (Source) (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Image:Staff-report-sept2005.pdf) then it's possible she was relaying second-hand reports. Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta) is unlikely to have got involved in any initial struggle (he was to be the pilot and it would be imperative to avoid injury), and Abdulaziz al-Omari (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Abdulaziz_al-Omari) may also have held back to protect him, in which case they would be easy to miss.

In any case, Nydia Gonzalez would later pass on further information from Ong to help clarify the situation:

At 8:34 a.m., Ms. Gonzalez told Mr. Marquis at the SOC, "They think they might have a fatality on the flight. One of our passengers, possibly on 9B, Levin or Lewis, might have been fatally stabbed."
(Source) (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Image:ST00001A.pdf)



Gonzalez confirmed the details of a report by Ong regarding the identity of one of the hijackers: "He's the one that's in the—he's in the cockpit. Okay you said Tom Sukani? Okay—Okay and he was in 10B. Okay, okay, so he's one of the persons that are in the cockpit. And as far as weapons, all they have are just knives?"
(Source) (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Image:Staff-report-sept2005.pdf)


Now we have Satam al-Suqami (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Satam_al-Suqami) as a hijacker, and Lewin as the passenger who has been stabbed. This still isn't the complete list, however there was another source of information in a call from a fellow flight attendant, Amy Sweeney:

"Listen, and listen to me very carefully. I'm on Flight 11. The airplane has been hijacked," said the voice on the other end. The caller was Amy Sweeney, a flight attendant on board American Airlines Flight 11, which had just been hijacked on its way from Boston to Los Angeles... Woodward said Sweeney spoke "very, very calmly... in a way which was quick but calm." She gave him the seat numbers for four of the five hijackers, allowing airline staff to pull up their names, phone numbers, addresses — and even credit card numbers — on the reservations computer. One of the names that came up was Mohamed Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta), the man the FBI would later identify as the leader of all 19 of the Sept. 11 hijackers.
Sweeney told Woodward the hijackers seemed to be of Middle Eastern descent and said they had gone into the cockpit with a bomb with yellow wires attached.
She said they had stabbed the two first-class flight attendants, Barbara Arestegui and Karen Martin, whose station at the front of the plane likely made them the first crew members to confront the hijackers. She said they had also slashed the throat of a business class passenger, who was bleeding severely.
http://web.archive.org/web/20020803044627/http://abcnews.go.com/sections/primetime/DailyNews/primetime_flightattendants_020718.html


According to this account Sweeney effectively provided four hijacker names, including Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta), however another version names only three:

Sweeney slid into a passenger seat in the next-to-last row of coach and used an Airfone to call American Airlines Flight Service at Boston's Logan airport. "This is Amy Sweeney," she reported. "I'm on Flight 11-this plane has been hijacked." She was disconnected. She called back: "Listen to me, and listen to me very carefully." Within seconds, her befuddled respondent was replaced by a voice she knew. "Amy, this is Michael Woodward." The American Airlines flight service manager had been friends with Sweeney for a decade, so he didn't have to waste any time verifying that this wasn't a hoax. "Michael, this plane has been hijacked," Ms. Sweeney repeated. Calmly, she gave him the seat locations of three of the hijackers: 9D, 9G and 10B. She said they were all of Middle Eastern descent, and one spoke English very well.
http://www.observer.com/node/48805


This particular report caused controversy in itself when it was mentioned that "some of the seat numbers were incorrect", and that's true: 9D and 9G were empty. However we're relying on a report of what Woodward said, based on his notes: they may not be accurate. And even if they are, Sweeney's seat numbers provided a useful initial hint. There was no-one in 9D and 9G, or 10D and 10G, however 8D and 8G were Mohamed Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta) and Abdulaziz al-Omari (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Abdulaziz_al-Omari). Given that, and the "Middle Eastern descent" description they would naturally be suspects.

These named quickly proved important. Some of Atta's luggage didn't make it onto Flight 11 (why? read Attas Luggage (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Attas_Luggage) for a partial answer), the FBI got a warrant to examine it, and some reports say the contents alone were enough to identify everyone else:

An affidavit filed by FBI agent James K. Lechner in federal district court in Portland reported that two bags checked by Atta were recovered at Logan Airport Sept. 11. They were never placed on Flight 11 before it departed from Boston, Lechner said, but there was no explanation of why they had not been loaded. Lechner described them as "a green Travel Gear bag" and "a black Travelpro bag." A former FBI agent and a former federal prosecutor who helped direct the New England investigation of the Sept. 11 attacks told Newsday that one bag found in Boston contained far more than what the commission report cited, including the names of the hijackers, their assignments and their al-Qaida connections.

"It had all these Arab-language papers that amounted to the Rosetta stone of the investigation," former FBI agent Warren Flagg said. The former federal prosecutor, who declined to be identified publicly, supported Flagg's account.

Hijacker IDs

"How do you think the government was able to identify all 19 hijackers almost immediately after the attacks?" Flagg asked. "They were identified through those papers in the luggage. And that's how it was known so soon that al-Qaida was behind the hijackings.

The former prosecutor agreed that papers from the luggage helped identify suspects. "I can't speak on the record about that evidence," he said. "This evidence was gathered under grand jury subpoenas and I can't discuss grand jury matters."
www.newsday.com (Web Archive copy) (http://web.archive.org/web/20070507054456/http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uslugg0417,0,3743892.story?coll=ny-homepage-bigpix2005)

This has been regarded as "too good to be true", in some quarters, that the FBI were simply following a trail that was left to be found.

However, if we look at an official FBI summary of the 9/11 case from early 2002, we find the luggage is given very little importance:

Later in the day on September 11, 2001, two pieces of luggage in the name of MOHAMED ATTA, which had not been loaded onto Flight 11, were recovered at Boston's Logan Airport. A subsequent search of this baggage revealed items to include a three page letter handwritten in Arabic which, upon translation, was found to contain instructions for the hijackers. Copies of this letter were also recovered at the crash site of Flight 93 and in the car registered to NAWAF AL-HAMZI that was found at Dulles International Airport.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13120344/FBI-Case-Summary-for-911-from-the-911-Commission-Files


Only the letter rates a mention here, and even that was found elsewhere.

But at least it helped identify all the hijackers, right? Perhaps, but the reality is there was plenty of other evidence connecting the hijackers together that would eventually point in the same direction.

The FBI discovered on 9/11 that Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta) and al-Omari (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Abdulaziz_al-Omari) paid for their tickets with a SunTrust Visa account, for instance. They were able to check other transactions, and look at charges for rental cars, airline tickets, and general expenses in the Miami and Fort Lauderdale areas. Run a check on passengers from the other flights and they would realise Marwan al-Shehhi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Marwan_al-Shehhi) paid for his seat with the same card number. We now have three people linked.

According to the Moussaoui indictment (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=technology&res=9C05EEDF153FF931A25751C1A9679C8B63&n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FH%2F Hanjour%2C%20Hani), Mohamed Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta) and Abdulaziz al-Omari (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Abdulaziz_al-Omari) listed a particular Florida telephone number as a contact number on their reservation. This was also used by Wail al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Wail_al-Shehri), Waleed al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Waleed_al-Shehri), Fayez Banihammad (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Fayez_Banihammad) and Mohand al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohand_al-Shehri). The suspects rise to seven.

Satam al-Suqami (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Satam_al-Suqami)'s reservation for Flight 11 was purchased with a bank account that he shared with Wail al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Wail_al-Shehri), linking him to the group as suspect #8.

A further report tells us that Mohamed Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta) used the same contact address on his reservation as Marwan al-Shehhi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Marwan_al-Shehhi) and Khalid al-Mihdhar (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Khalid_al-Mihdhar) (suspect #9). al-Mihdhar made reservations for himself and Majed Moqed (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Majed_Moqed) (suspect #10) on American Airlines Flight 77.

Nawaf al-Hazmi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Nawaf_al-Hazmi) had recently been added to a terrorist watch list (although unfortunately this wasn't used to check passengers on internal flights), and was linked to al-Mihdhar as they'd lived together, making him a natural suspect #11. In addition, Nawaf al-Hazmi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Nawaf_al-Hazmi) booked seats on American Airlines Flight 77 for both himself and Salem al-Hazmi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Salem_al-Hazmi), now suspect #12.

Ahmed al-Ghamdi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Ahmed_al-Ghamdi) wasn't immediately linked to the first group, but his appearance on an INS watchlist for illegal or expired visas should have been noticed quickly, making him suspect #13. His reservation for United Airlines Flight 175 was purchased with the same credit card as Hamza al-Ghamdi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Hamza_al-Ghamdi)'s, giving us suspect #14.

That's fourteen people linked either through records of flight reservations or Government watch lists only, no need at all for Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta)'s luggage. And the other five may have been accessible through public records:

(http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Hani_Hanjour)Hani Hanjour (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Hani_Hanjour), who hijacked AA Flight 77, lived with both Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar, a fact that searches of public records could have revealed.... Public records show that Hamza Alghamdi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Hamza_al-Ghamdi) lived with Saeed Alghamdi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Saeed_al-Ghamdi), Ahmed Al Haznawi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Ahmed_al-Haznawi), and Ahmed Alnami (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Ahmed_al-Nami), all hijackers of UA Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania....
Ahmed Al Haznawi lived with Ziad Jarrah (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Ziad_Jarrah), a UA Flight 93 hijacker.
http://www.mafhoum.com/press7/189T42.pdf


There were other routes to identifying and linking the hijackers, too. Ahmad al-Haznawi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Ahmad_al-Haznawi) entered the US with Wail al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Wail_al-Shehri), for instance, while Hamza al-Ghamdi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Hamza_al-Ghamdi) and Ahmed al-Nami (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Ahmed_al-Nami) arrived in the US with Mohand al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohand_al-Shehri). And of course so far we're just talking about work that could just be carried out or initiated in the first few hours after the attacks. More detailed investigations, from looking at where they stayed on September 10th to using financial records to trace their activities elsewhere, would quickly turn initial suspicions into something far more concrete.

Is this just our speculation? No, not at all. The FBI have already said that they identified the hijackers in a variety of ways: "Within a matter of days, the FBI identified the 19 hijackers using flight, credit card, banking, and other records." (Source (http://www.fbi.gov/libref/factsfigure/counterterrorism.htm).) The contents of Atta's suitcases may have pushed the process along a little quicker, but they weren't crucial, and even if the bags had been loaded onto Flight 11, the hijackers would still have been identified very quickly.

[IllicitPopsicle]

Flight 961 had survives and a video tape of the hijacking.


How did the FBI know who was the suspects?


The hijackers bordered with fake IDs (according to the FBI) so the roster of passengers was useless in that regard, we are also talking long before computers could quickly compare faces to large databases and face recognition software was very unreliable at the time.

So it would still have taken time.

Um... it was only 2001? Not terribly long ago, man.

[pierrotlefou]

If 9/11 was an inside Job to invade somewhere, they sure picked a shit (by comparison with possible other candidates) to blame the attacks on.
I never said it was a good plan.

[Psy]

These named quickly proved important. Some of Atta's luggage didn't make it onto Flight 11 (why? read Attas Luggage (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Attas_Luggage) for a partial answer), the FBI got a warrant to examine it, and some reports say the contents alone were enough to identify everyone else:

This has been regarded as "too good to be true", in some quarters, that the FBI were simply following a trail that was left to be found.

It also smells of planted evidence as if the hijackers knew the plan there would be no point in putting that stuff in their luggage as they wouldn't be able to access it anyway during the hijacking as it would have been in the cargo hold, also airports did searches of suspicious luggage before 9/11 and it had a knife in it that would have flagged it for a search as it would have shown up in the x-ray. So either the hijackers were really stupid or the luggage was planted evidence.



However, if we look at an official FBI summary of the 9/11 case from early 2002, we find the luggage is given very little importance:



Only the letter rates a mention here, and even that was found elsewhere.

But at least it helped identify all the hijackers, right? Perhaps, but the reality is there was plenty of other evidence connecting the hijackers together that would eventually point in the same direction.

The FBI discovered on 9/11 that Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta) and al-Omari (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Abdulaziz_al-Omari) paid for their tickets with a SunTrust Visa account, for instance. They were able to check other transactions, and look at charges for rental cars, airline tickets, and general expenses in the Miami and Fort Lauderdale areas. Run a check on passengers from the other flights and they would realise Marwan al-Shehhi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Marwan_al-Shehhi) paid for his seat with the same card number. We now have three people linked.

According to the Moussaoui indictment (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=technology&res=9C05EEDF153FF931A25751C1A9679C8B63&n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FH%2F Hanjour%2C%20Hani), Mohamed Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta) and Abdulaziz al-Omari (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Abdulaziz_al-Omari) listed a particular Florida telephone number as a contact number on their reservation. This was also used by Wail al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Wail_al-Shehri), Waleed al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Waleed_al-Shehri), Fayez Banihammad (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Fayez_Banihammad) and Mohand al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohand_al-Shehri). The suspects rise to seven.

Satam al-Suqami (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Satam_al-Suqami)'s reservation for Flight 11 was purchased with a bank account that he shared with Wail al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Wail_al-Shehri), linking him to the group as suspect #8.

A further report tells us that Mohamed Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta) used the same contact address on his reservation as Marwan al-Shehhi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Marwan_al-Shehhi) and Khalid al-Mihdhar (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Khalid_al-Mihdhar) (suspect #9). al-Mihdhar made reservations for himself and Majed Moqed (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Majed_Moqed) (suspect #10) on American Airlines Flight 77.

Nawaf al-Hazmi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Nawaf_al-Hazmi) had recently been added to a terrorist watch list (although unfortunately this wasn't used to check passengers on internal flights), and was linked to al-Mihdhar as they'd lived together, making him a natural suspect #11. In addition, Nawaf al-Hazmi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Nawaf_al-Hazmi) booked seats on American Airlines Flight 77 for both himself and Salem al-Hazmi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Salem_al-Hazmi), now suspect #12.

Ahmed al-Ghamdi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Ahmed_al-Ghamdi) wasn't immediately linked to the first group, but his appearance on an INS watchlist for illegal or expired visas should have been noticed quickly, making him suspect #13. His reservation for United Airlines Flight 175 was purchased with the same credit card as Hamza al-Ghamdi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Hamza_al-Ghamdi)'s, giving us suspect #14.

That's fourteen people linked either through records of flight reservations or Government watch lists only, no need at all for Atta (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohamed_Atta)'s luggage. And the other five may have been accessible through public records:



There were other routes to identifying and linking the hijackers, too. [URL="http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Ahmad_al-Haznawi"]Ahmad al-Haznawi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Hani_Hanjour) entered the US with Wail al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Wail_al-Shehri), for instance, while Hamza al-Ghamdi (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Hamza_al-Ghamdi) and Ahmed al-Nami (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Ahmed_al-Nami) arrived in the US with Mohand al-Shehri (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mohand_al-Shehri). And of course so far we're just talking about work that could just be carried out or initiated in the first few hours after the attacks. More detailed investigations, from looking at where they stayed on September 10th to using financial records to trace their activities elsewhere, would quickly turn initial suspicions into something far more concrete.

Is this just our speculation? No, not at all. The FBI have already said that they identified the hijackers in a variety of ways: "Within a matter of days, the FBI identified the 19 hijackers using flight, credit card, banking, and other records." (Source (http://www.fbi.gov/libref/factsfigure/counterterrorism.htm).) The contents of Atta's suitcases may have pushed the process along a little quicker, but they weren't crucial, and even if the bags had been loaded onto Flight 11, the hijackers would still have been identified very quickly.

Yet that all this would be circumstantial evidence, some of the hijackers turned out to be alive and had whiteness that put them outside the USA during 9/11 to which the FBI simply dropped them from the list of hijackers. A real investigation would not have released the names so early in the investigation as they would not have jumped to conclusions with such flimsy evidence without at least waiting to see what forensics come back with. Again suggesting the FBI simply planted evidence given to them by the CIA.

[Psy]

Um... it was only 2001? Not terribly long ago, man.
Very long in terms of computer technology.

[The Vegan Marxist]

some of the hijackers turned out to be alive and had whiteness that put them outside the USA during 9/11 to which the FBI simply dropped them from the list of hijackers.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Hijackers_still_alive

And also, just because you think it could've been planted evidence, doesn't make it truth. So please don't make accusations out as truth, when you can't back it up.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Very long in terms of computer technology.

I'm still waiting for your source that backs up your claim that face recognition software wasn't as reliable back then.

[IllicitPopsicle]

Very long in terms of computer technology.

By the general logic you've displayed in this discussion, it seems like even if the technology was available and reliable back then, it wouldn't have proved anything anyway - the NWO or whatever would still be the real perpetrator here.

Why am I arguing with you? What does this debate matter? Why does this truthiness schtick have to take up so much of the discussion all the time? Let it fucking go.

[Psy]

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Hijackers_still_alive

That shows why serious investigations don't release the suspects as hijackers so early in a investigation. Also Robert Mueller, Director of the FBI has state that there is "no legal proof to prove the identities of the suicidal hijackers



And also, just because you think it could've been planted evidence, doesn't make it truth. So please don't make accusations out as truth, when you can't back it up.
Yet it makes no sense that the terrorists would have put the evidence in the luggage along with a knife and video tapes of airliners. Also this is the FBI that was proven to guilty planting evidence during COINTELPRO so it is not like the FBI is a beliveable source, would you take investigations of the KGB at face value what about the Nazi Gestapo since the FBI performs the same role.

In other words why are you taking the word of the US beourgis state as fact?

[Psy]

By the general logic you've displayed in this discussion, it seems like even if the technology was available and reliable back then, it wouldn't have proved anything anyway - the NWO or whatever would still be the real perpetrator here.

NWO? Hell the FBI has been fabricating evidence since its inception since its was never created as a national investigating arm but as a secret police force.



Why am I arguing with you? What does this debate matter? Why does this truthiness schtick have to take up so much of the discussion all the time? Let it fucking go.
Because believing the state is counter-revolutionary, the correct Marxist perspective on 9/11 is we don't what happened as we don't have access to the state's files and the state has a long past in lying.

I'm not arguing that it was a inside job that it could be.

[The Vegan Marxist]

The science has proven that it was not an inside job, & it doesn't involve the support of the state. All your claims prove is the idea that the u.s. government allowed 9/11 to happen, which I've agreed upon.

[Psy]

The science has proven that it was not an inside job, & it doesn't involve the support of the state. All your claims prove is the idea that the u.s. government allowed 9/11 to happen, which I've agreed upon.

True but COINTELPRO means the US state also had previously orchestrated terrorist attacks through proxies which would also be an inside job which the science does not prove or disprove. Only intellegence documents would provide either way and odds are they would only come to light after a revolutionary army occupied Washington DC and even then there odds are such documents would be destroyed by a revolutionary could secure them as they would be actually be a very low priority to a revolutionary army (they would be pre-occupied with the counter-revolutionary forces).

[IllicitPopsicle]

I thought COINTELPRO was the program where they'd plant spies and agents provacateurs into radical groups to gather info on and disrupt any sort of meaningful movement. :ninja:

[Psy]

I thought COINTELPRO was the program where they'd plant spies and agents provacateurs into radical groups to gather info on and disrupt any sort of meaningful movement. :ninja:
That was part of COINTELPRO, it also included hijacking movements and fabricating cases against movements.

[The Vegan Marxist]

That was part of COINTELPRO, it also included hijacking movements and fabricating cases against movements.

So how does it have any relation with what had happened during 9/11?

[Kayser_Soso]

That was part of COINTELPRO, it also included hijacking movements and fabricating cases against movements.

They generally didn't kill anybody though.

[Psy]

They generally didn't kill anybody though.

COINTELPRO included the hijacking of the KKK and the KKK killed people while it was a puppet of the FBI so I would say COINTELPRO included the killing of people.

[Psy]

So how does it have any relation with what had happened during 9/11?
That the investigative authority for 9/11 is that same FBI. Thus it is contradictory for us to say Americans should believe the FBI's version of events for 9/11 but not the FBI version of events for the I.W.W, Black Panthers, American Indian Movement, Detroit Riots of 1967, Watts Riots of 1965, LA Riots of 1992, The WTO protests, ect.

While scientific evidence confirms how the 9/11 happened it does not confirm who did it, you are taking the FBI's word for that as even the FBI admits it had no real evidence to prove who did it.

[The Vegan Marxist]

That the investigative authority for 9/11 is that same FBI. Thus it is contradictory for us to say Americans should believe the FBI's version of events for 9/11 but not the FBI version of events for the I.W.W, Black Panthers, American Indian Movement, Detroit Riots of 1967, Watts Riots of 1965, LA Riots of 1992, The WTO protests, ect.

While scientific evidence confirms how the 9/11 happened it does not confirm who did it, you are taking the FBI's word for that as even the FBI admits it had no real evidence to prove who did it.

Despite the fact that Osama bin Laden has admitted to doing 9/11 more than once?

[Die Rote Fahne]

Inside job? No. Explosives? No.

Check these sites out:
http://911myths.com/
http://debunking911.com/
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
http://layscience.net/node/124

[Psy]

Despite the fact that Osama bin Laden has admitted to doing 9/11 more than once?

And?

It is common for terrorist groups claim responsibility for terrorist attacks they did not do.

[The Vegan Marxist]

And?

It is common for terrorist groups claim responsibility for terrorist attacks they did not do.

Really? Give me an example.

[Psy]

Really? Give me an example.
The most famous example of people taking credit for a crime they didn't do is that hundreds of people confessed to kidnapping the Lindbergh baby.

[The Vegan Marxist]

The most famous example of people taking credit for a crime they didn't do is that hundreds of people confessed to kidnapping the Lindbergh baby.

We're not talking about hundreds of people here though. We're talking about Osama bin Laden who specifically stated that he was behind the attacks, & no one else has stated such.

[Psy]

We're not talking about hundreds of people here though. We're talking about Osama bin Laden who specifically stated that he was behind the attacks, & no one else has stated such.

Right but that alone does not prove that Al Qaeda did it, Bin Laden could have taken responsibility in order to make Al Qaeda look more powerful then it was, then there is the issue that Bin Laden might have just assumed Al Qaeda was responsible. The problem is that it was in Al Qaeda's self-interest to take credit regardless if they did it or not.

So we have to believe Al Qaeda and FBI both not a reliable source.

Thus we don't know what really happened because we have a bourgeoisie imperialist power on one side and a reactionary terrorist group with fascist tendencies on the other, both a enemy of the proletariat. Yet the proletariat is suppose to believe the events of 9/11 described by these groups?

I think the proletariat should trust what is unearthed when a workers revolutionary army occupies the US capital and is able to go through all the captured documents of the US state, till then we have to accept we just don't know for sure what happened.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Right but that alone does not prove that Al Qaeda did it, Bin Laden could have taken responsibility in order to make Al Qaeda look more powerful then it was, then there is the issue that Bin Laden might have just assumed Al Qaeda was responsible. The problem is that it was in Al Qaeda's self-interest to take credit regardless if they did it or not.

So we have to believe Al Qaeda and FBI both not a reliable source.

Thus we don't know what really happened because we have a bourgeoisie imperialist power on one side and a reactionary terrorist group with fascist tendencies on the other, both a enemy of the proletariat. Yet the proletariat is suppose to believe the events of 9/11 described by these groups?

I think the proletariat should trust what is unearthed when a workers revolutionary army occupies the US capital and is able to go through all the captured documents of the US state, till then we have to accept we just don't know for sure what happened.

I'll agree with you that we won't OFFICIALLY know what had happened, but that doesn't mean we can't go through this in a rational justification, in which I see 9/11 not being an inside job. And really, you think that Osama would've 'thought' al Qaeda was behind it, & so he took the credit? He's the leader of al Qaeda, if they did anything, it would've been under the orders & commands of Osama bin Laden.

[Psy]

I'll agree with you that we won't OFFICIALLY know what had happened, but that doesn't mean we can't go through this in a rational justification, in which I see 9/11 not being an inside job. And really, you think that Osama would've 'thought' al Qaeda was behind it, & so he took the credit? He's the leader of al Qaeda, if they did anything, it would've been under the orders & commands of Osama bin Laden.
Not really Al Qaeda was never that centralized, if anything the idea would have been pitched to Osama and Osama would have given the idea the green light in which the branch would have gone about planning and executing 9/11

[The Vegan Marxist]

Not really Al Qaeda was never that centralized, if anything the idea would have been pitched to Osama and Osama would have given the idea the green light in which the branch would have gone about planning and executing 9/11

That's pure accusation, though. Here's the facts:



Osama bin Laden is the leader of al Qaeda
Osama bin Laden admitted to orchestrating 9/11
Science shows there was no explosives used during 9/11
There were warnings beforehand that Osama was going to attack the U.S.
The U.S. government was clearly in operation of creating the Patriot Acts.
All the hijackers were identified, & had ties with al Qaeda.

What this points to, at least, is that the government allowed it to happen. They were far too busy getting the plans of orchestrating an imperialist occupation over Iraq & Afghanistan, & were trying to get the Patriot Acts ready to be signed. Osama bin Laden was clearly behind the attacks, & lead al Qaeda to orchestrate them.

[Psy]

That's pure accusation, though. Here's the facts:



Osama bin Laden is the leader of al Qaeda
Osama bin Laden admitted to orchestrating 9/11


By science suggests he could not have orchestrated 9/11 only have approved 9/11 or set the planning of 9/11 in motion that would have been mostly carried out by people under him. Bin Laden did not have the means to practically orchestrate 9/11, it would mean Al Qaeda agents would have to have gathered intel in the USA then fly it all back to Afghanistan for Bin Laden to use it to craft a plan as Bin Laden had no access to telecommunications.





Science shows there was no explosives used during 9/11
There were warnings beforehand that Osama was going to attack the U.S.
The U.S. government was clearly in operation of creating the Patriot Acts.
All the hijackers were identified, & had ties with al Qaeda.


That does not prove or disprove the FBI's story.



What this points to, at least, is that the government allowed it to happen. They were far too busy getting the plans of orchestrating an imperialist occupation over Iraq & Afghanistan, & were trying to get the Patriot Acts ready to be signed. Osama bin Laden was clearly behind the attacks, & lead al Qaeda to orchestrate them.

Again it is unlikely Bin Laden orchestrated the attacks as he for the most part lacked the means to, if Al Qaeda did orchestrate the attacks it probably would have not been from Afghanistan but from Al Qaeda member within the USA.

[The Vegan Marxist]

And no one is denying that the al Qaeda was present in the U.S. & gathered enough information to create an attack on American soil. Which doesn't constitute under the idea of 9/11 being an inside job.

[Psy]

And no one is denying that the al Qaeda was present in the U.S. & gathered enough information to create an attack on American soil. Which doesn't constitute under the idea of 9/11 being an inside job.
But it means Osama bin Laden did not orchestrate 9/11 and did not play a important role even if al Qaeda was responsible.

[Uppercut]

I think it is possible they saw it coming and let it happen. Kinda like how the US had been warned about Pearl Harbor, but ignored the warnings. It certainly was not an inside job.

My thoughts exactly. I'm not into the whole explosives theory, but I wouldn't doubt that the U.S. was looking for a reason to get involved in Afghansitan and Iraq.

The U.S., prior to 9/11, did receive many warnings of a terroristic attack. Needless to say, they were either ignored or not taken seriously.

[RadioRaheem84]

The US didn't need a reason to go into Iraq. The had ample justification through the ambiguous writing of the UN Security Council Resolutions on Iraq. George Bush Sr. justified the attacks on Iraq in '93 on Saddam's failure to comply with UN Resolutions. Bill Clinton justified Operation Desert Fox, the largest bombing campaign on Iraq before the Shock and Awe, on Saddam's failure to comply with UN Resolutions.

On the list of reasons for invading Iraq in GWB's speech to the UN and the Joint Resolution in the US Congress, I believe only a couple of reasons were because of WMD or terrorist links. The rest had to do with Saddam's compliance with UN Law. The ambigious language of getting Iraq to comply with UN law by any means necessary also included, in Bush's eyes, regime change. The debate goes back several years back when dissenting nations objected to the language of the UN Resolutions which would make Iraq beholden to the Western nations and they could justify invasion at any time.

[Psy]

The US didn't need a reason to go into Iraq. The had ample justification through the ambiguous writing of the UN Security Council Resolutions on Iraq. George Bush Sr. justified the attacks on Iraq in '93 on Saddam's failure to comply with UN Resolutions. Bill Clinton justified Operation Desert Fox, the largest bombing campaign on Iraq before the Shock and Awe, on Saddam's failure to comply with UN Resolutions.

On the list of reasons for invading Iraq in GWB's speech to the UN and the Joint Resolution in the US Congress, I believe only a couple of reasons were because of WMD or terrorist links. The rest had to do with Saddam's compliance with UN Law. The ambigious language of getting Iraq to comply with UN law by any means necessary also included, in Bush's eyes, regime change. The debate goes back several years back when dissenting nations objected to the language of the UN Resolutions which would make Iraq beholden to the Western nations and they could justify invasion at any time.

The UN did not want to go to war, legally the US could no go to war in the name of UN against the UN. The reason being the other imperialist powers did not want Saddam to be overthrown and wanted to deal with Saddam. This is a reason the US went into Iraq, because its competing imperial powers were making deals with Saddam.

[Sogdian]

Is it only me, or others too, who think this thread should be moved to Trash section :confused:

[The Vegan Marxist]

Is it only me, or others too, who think this thread should be moved to Trash section :confused:

Just because you support the conspiracy theorist side when it comes to 9/11 doesn't mean a thread should be trashed.

[The Vegan Marxist]

But it means Osama bin Laden did not orchestrate 9/11 and did not play a important role even if al Qaeda was responsible.

Osama bin Laden was their leader! He sent them out there to get the right information! Just because he didn't have a direct hand into it doesn't mean he wasn't part of the orchestration, or at least planning. Osama had every right to take the heat of 9/11, since he's the leader of the people that brought the plans out through action.

[Psy]

Osama bin Laden was their leader! He sent them out there to get the right information! Just because he didn't have a direct hand into it doesn't mean he wasn't part of the orchestration, or at least planning. Osama had every right to take the heat of 9/11, since he's the leader of the people that brought the plans out through action.

Osama would not have sent people out to bring intel back due to lack of telecommunications and distance, meaning Osama would not have really been part of planning but simply have given permission for Al Quaeda to plan and carry out such attacks.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Osama would not have sent people out to bring intel back due to lack of telecommunications and distance, meaning Osama would not have really been part of planning but simply have given permission for Al Quaeda to plan and carry out such attacks.

Really? And you know this how? Osama bin Laden has more information about the U.S. than anyone over in the Middle East since he, & his jihads, were trained & funded by the U.S. gov. He isn't afraid of these people, & for you to claim what Osama was thinking to support your belief is pure speculation, & doesn't support anything.

[Psy]

Really? And you know this how? Osama bin Laden has more information about the U.S. than anyone over in the Middle East since he, & his jihads, were trained & funded by the U.S. gov. He isn't afraid of these people, & for you to claim what Osama was thinking to support your belief is pure speculation, & doesn't support anything.
Its a logically improbability due to the lack telecommunications and the distance. Are we to believe with less technology then the National Liberation Front for South Vietnam had during the Vietnam war that Osama was able to organize 9/11 from half way around the world? This would also go against the whole point of a cellular command structure where each cell is semi-independent from the other cells so raids on one cell (or even the head) does not take down the whole organiziation down.

Also Bin Laden didn't the most information about the US, the CIA gave him information on the how to use US arms against U.S.S.R troops.

[Manifesto]

There are also those "money folder" conspirators for 9/11. $5 (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_X7igbyFfqhw/SBFo7N8R10I/AAAAAAAAAHI/do_3mjryndM/s1600-h/Secrets+Of+The+Five,+Ten,+Twenty+And+One-+Hundred+Dollar+Bill+2.jpg), $10 (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_X7igbyFfqhw/SBFpcd8R12I/AAAAAAAAAHY/1cR2RhjUXwY/s1600-h/Secrets+Of+The+Five,+Ten,+Twenty+And+One-+Hundred+Dollar+Bill+4.jpg), $20 (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_X7igbyFfqhw/SBFp3d8R14I/AAAAAAAAAHo/jow-1IRPhGI/s1600-h/Secrets+Of+The+Five,+Ten,+Twenty+And+One-+Hundred+Dollar+Bill+6.jpg), $100 (http://www.aumdasabout2012.com/images/twin100.jpg). And the 9+11=20.
(http://www.conspiracies.net/osama.gif)

[The Vegan Marxist]

Its a logically improbability due to the lack telecommunications and the distance. Are we to believe with less technology then the National Liberation Front for South Vietnam had during the Vietnam war that Osama was able to organize 9/11 from half way around the world? This would also go against the whole point of a cellular command structure where each cell is semi-independent from the other cells so raids on one cell (or even the head) does not take down the whole organiziation down.

Also Bin Laden didn't the most information about the US, the CIA gave him information on the how to use US arms against U.S.S.R troops.

You think there's lack of communication from here to there? Really? And even if so, wasn't there reports on how those who committed the hijackings of 9/11 went back & forth from America to there at least once? If so, then that's where'd they get all the necessary info, bring it back to start getting the plans ready, then come back to the states to attack.

[IllicitPopsicle]

Its a logically improbability due to the lack telecommunications and the distance. Are we to believe with less technology then the National Liberation Front for South Vietnam had during the Vietnam war that Osama was able to organize 9/11 from half way around the world? This would also go against the whole point of a cellular command structure where each cell is semi-independent from the other cells so raids on one cell (or even the head) does not take down the whole organiziation down.

Also Bin Laden didn't the most information about the US, the CIA gave him information on the how to use US arms against U.S.S.R troops.

Bin Laden was a billionaire. He could more than afford adequate tech.

[Sogdian]

Is it only me, or others too, who think this thread should be moved to Trash section
Just because you support the conspiracy theorist side when it comes to 9/11 doesn't mean a thread should be trashed.

As an ex-conspiracy theorist you still seem to be comfortable with making assumptions about others without any evidence to support. Who are conspiracy theorists and what is their side? and How did I support that side (whatever it is)?

[Psy]

You think there's lack of communication from here to there? Really?

The U.S.S.R only built infrastructure in the areas well in its control and of that mostly in the urban areas, in the mountains there are no phone lines, electricity or roads.



And even if so, wasn't there reports on how those who committed the hijackings of 9/11 went back & forth from America to there at least once? If so, then that's where'd they get all the necessary info, bring it back to start getting the plans ready, then come back to the states to attack.
It would have been a huge bottleneck as not only do they have to fly to Kabul but Osama would still not have been able to easily communicate with Kabul (even battery opperated transimiters would need a constant supply of battiers that would have to be brough up through mountains with no roads), so they would have to hike up a mountain to where they would meet Osama.

In contast the National Liberation Front for South Vietnam not only had field phones and radios that covered most of their operational area but they met in urban areas that had regluar phones, the Tet Offensive was actually planned in Saigon.

[Psy]

Bin Laden was a billionaire. He could more than afford adequate tech.
The problem was distance and lack of infrastructure, if he was based out of Kabul it would have been different but in the mountains he was practicality cut off from the industrial world.

[ElectricSheep1203]

i love how hypocritical the 9/11 truthers are. they are just as bad as the facists they think theyre fighting.

[LeninistKing]

i don't know why many leftists, and socialists believe religiously that 9/11 was not an Inside job. And why do many leftists and dogmatic socialists, hate conspiracy theories so much? why the closed-minded mentality against conspiracies done by the governmetns and by corporations in this world to fullfill an economic or political goal?

Just because Noam Chomsky (A closet capitalist) said that 9-11 was not an inside job we dont have to take his words religiously !!

Think for your selves, question the authorities and question every thing. Don't be marxists, trotskists or leninists. Think for your selves, and dont follow anybody

[The Vegan Marxist]

As an ex-conspiracy theorist you still seem to be comfortable with making assumptions about others without any evidence to support. Who are conspiracy theorists and what is their side? and How did I support that side (whatever it is)?

Without any evidence to support? You're blindly supporting the views of the '9/11 Truth Movement' which is led by Alex Jones & formed by the conspiracy theorists. It's not an assumption whatsoever. I use to be part of that movement, & I've met the people that started the movement. And you're supporting it right now.

[Kayser_Soso]

i don't know why many leftists, and socialists believe religiously that 9/11 was not an Inside job. And why do many leftists and dogmatic socialists, hate conspiracy theories so much? why the closed-minded mentality against conspiracies done by the governmetns and by corporations in this world to fullfill an economic or political goal?

Just because Noam Chomsky (A closet capitalist) said that 9-11 was not an inside job we dont have to take his words religiously !!

Think for your selves, question the authorities and question every thing. Don't be marxists, trotskists or leninists. Think for your selves, and dont follow anybody

Because we are supposed to be materialists, following a scientific methodology in our approach to solving problems. It has nothing to do with what Chomsky says, and everything to do with the fact that the conspiracy theorists have failed to provide any convincing evidence, much less a coherent alternative hypothesis.

The kind of thinking behind conspiracy theories is the kind of thinking we need to be eliminating- namely, fallacious logic.

[La Comédie Noire]

I think conspiracy theories come from an urge to believe humans and the organizations they create are capable of acting rational 100% of the time and that "everything happens for a reason!" Not so, people fuck up all the time. It's what is called an "anomaly" and conspiracy theorists love to turn these little holes into Grand Canyon sized craters. Take this picture for example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Johnwaynegacyrosalynncarter.jpg

That is a picture of John Wayne Gacey Jr. Shaking hands with former first lady Roslyn Carter, if you look closely you can see a pin on his lapel. That pin is only given to individuals whom the Secret Service designate as "safe." They usually do extensive background checks as well as surveillance of the person in question before they are allowed anywhere near someone important.

Of course if the government spooks had taken a closer look at Gacey they might have found he had outstanding warrants in 2 different cities for assault, rape, and sodomy not to mention he was about 20 bodies deep in a killing spree. The cops even searched his house when one man accused him of drugging, hand cuffing him, and raping him and although the house stank of bodies and he had all sorts of souvenirs from his victims just lying around the house the police found nothing "suspicious."

Are we expected to believe two separate police forces, the Secret Service, and even The Kinks (http://http://www.artistfacts.com/detail.php?id=63) did not know what was up?

Of course, otherwise you'd have to perform ridiculous mental gymnastics to concoct some half baked story that everyone involved just "let it happen" or "planned it with military precision and black ops cunning". Yes perhaps the Office of the President and the Chicago Police Department let John Wayne Gacey Jr. serial murder people for some devious act not yet known. I mean the official story just doesn't add up you know?

Suffice it to say the picture was a big embarrassment to the Secret Service.

[Kayser_Soso]

I think conspiracy theories come from an urge to believe humans and the organizations they create are capable of acting rational 100% of the time and that "everything happens for a reason!" Not so, people fuck up all the time. It's what is called an "anomaly" and conspiracy theorists love to turn these little holes into Grand Canyon sized craters. Take this picture for example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Johnwaynegacyrosalynncarter.jpg

That is a picture of John Wayne Gacey Jr. Shaking hands with former first lady Roslyn Carter, if you look closely you can see a pin on his lapel. That pin is only given to individuals whom the Secret Service designate as "safe." They usually do extensive background checks as well as surveillance of the person in question before they are allowed anywhere near someone important.

Of course if the government spooks had taken a closer look at Gacey they might have found he had outstanding warrants in 2 different cities for assault, rape, and sodomy not to mention he was about 20 bodies deep in a killing spree. The cops even searched his house when one man accused him of drugging, hand cuffing him, and raping him and although the house stank of bodies and he had all sorts of souvenirs from his victims just lying around the house the police found nothing "suspicious."

Are we expected to believe two separate police forces, the Secret Service, and even The Kinks (http://http://www.artistfacts.com/detail.php?id=63) did not know what was up?

Of course, otherwise you'd have to perform ridiculous mental gymnastics to concoct some half baked story that everyone involved just "let it happen" or "planned it with military precision and black ops cunning". Yes perhaps the Office of the President and the Chicago Police Department let John Wayne Gacey Jr. serial murder people for some devious act not yet known. I mean the official story just doesn't add up you know?

Suffice it to say the picture was a big embarrassment to the Secret Service.


Bingo. You often hear a lot of these people insist that an explanation is wrong because it contains a lot of coincidences, when in fact strange coincidences are incredibly common throughout history. Often they are not really understood until after the fact, when we look back on the whole event and say, 'that sure was strange.' For example, Tamerlane had and inscription on his hidden tomb which read something to the effect of "He who disturbs my grave will face a fate worse than me." The mosque where he was entombed was in or near Samarkand, Uzbekistan, part of the USSR at the time. The commonly recorded date of the tomb's discovery and opening? 22 June, 1941.

Now how would we feel if the tomb had been discovered in say, 1965? Probably wouldn't seem so significant because it lacks the massive coincidence.

[Uppercut]

Osama bin Laden has more information about the U.S. than anyone over in the Middle East since he, & his jihads, were trained & funded by the U.S. gov.


That might have something to do with it...
Remember now, Bin Laden was a Saudi drug lord before any of this. He assisted the U.S. when the soviets invaded, and we made it easier for him to ship opium poppy.

What makes you think we wouldn't use him again?

[The Vegan Marxist]

That might have something to do with it...
Remember now, Bin Laden was a Saudi drug lord before any of this. He assisted the U.S. when the soviets invaded, and we made it easier for him to ship opium poppy.

What makes you think we wouldn't use him again?

I never said we wouldn't ever use him again, though I highly doubt it since Bin Laden left the commandment of the U.S. intelligence agency & went his own way by leading the command of al Qaeda. Them & the U.S. don't get along anymore. 9/11 was an act by them to strike back after the U.S. bombed their land god knows how many times. It was bound to happen sooner or later. And more than likely will happen again since we never learned the fucking lesson & decided to start bombing again.

[Kayser_Soso]

That might have something to do with it...
Remember now, Bin Laden was a Saudi drug lord before any of this. He assisted the U.S. when the soviets invaded, and we made it easier for him to ship opium poppy.

What makes you think we wouldn't use him again?

Osama Bin Laden was never a drug lord of any kind. He made his money mostly from his rich family, and their primary business is construction. Bin Laden was educated and worked as an engineer in Afghanistan(he was responsible for several public works projects) and Sudan. If he had any connection to the opium trade in Afghanistan during the war, it must have been quite indirect because his hands would have been tied up in helping run the "Services Bureau"(Maktab al-Khidimat) which helped organize volunteers to fight.

[Uppercut]

I never said we wouldn't ever use him again, though I highly doubt it since Bin Laden left the commandment of the U.S. intelligence agency & went his own way by leading the command of al Qaeda. Them & the U.S. don't get along anymore. 9/11 was an act by them to strike back after the U.S. bombed their land god knows how many times. It was bound to happen sooner or later. And more than likely will happen again since we never learned the fucking lesson & decided to start bombing again.

You're correct when you say Al-Qaeda doesn't trust us anymore, and yes, we probably will witness another terrorist attack if we Americans don't get this picture soon. Who knows what will happen this time...?

But I still see Bin-Laden as a CIA puppet, if he is even alive anymore.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrHZb1mYV6M

[The Vegan Marxist]

You're correct when you say Al-Qaeda doesn't trust us anymore, and yes, we probably will witness another terrorist attack if we Americans don't get this picture soon. Who knows what will happen this time...?

But I still see Bin-Laden as a CIA puppet, if he is even alive anymore.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrHZb1mYV6M

Yeah, I've seen that video before. And it was convincing at one point, but you've got to understand that his belief that Osama is dead was based on the fact that, at the time, no one had heard from Bin Laden in like 7 years. And so, one had the right to think of such. But then, you now have to understand that, during 2009, we heard from Bin Laden at least twice, & at least once in 2008. And then we also have that confirmation from Bin Laden in January of this year about the christmas underwear bomber, where he confirmed that he was part of al Qaeda at the time. So, I'm sure if we were to re-interview him, he'd probably have a different answer now.

[Sogdian]

Without any evidence to support? You're blindly supporting the views of the '9/11 Truth Movement' which is led by Alex Jones & formed by the conspiracy theorists. It's not an assumption whatsoever. I use to be part of that movement, & I've met the people that started the movement. And you're supporting it right now.

I never supported Alex Jones's 9/11 Truth Movement!! Keep making unfounded and absurd allegations ... I care no more :closedeyes:

[The Vegan Marxist]

I never supported Alex Jones's 9/11 Truth Movement!! Keep making unfounded and absurd allegations ... I care no more :closedeyes:

You may not be directly supporting them, but you're supporting the views of '9/11 truth' which was created & is still led by Alex Jones & the Loose Changers.

[Uppercut]

Yeah, I've seen that video before. And it was convincing at one point, but you've got to understand that his belief that Osama is dead was based on the fact that, at the time, no one had heard from Bin Laden in like 7 years. And so, one had the right to think of such. But then, you now have to understand that, during 2009, we heard from Bin Laden at least twice, & at least once in 2008. And then we also have that confirmation from Bin Laden in January of this year about the christmas underwear bomber, where he confirmed that he was part of al Qaeda at the time. So, I'm sure if we were to re-interview him, he'd probably have a different answer now.

If he is still alive, he is probably in a safe haven somewhere in Saudi Arabia or in the U.S.. Of course, you do have that video of "fat" bin laden. The excuse for this is that the Middle Eastern video format distorts and flattens an image.

Another thing that puzzles me is that Bin Laden claimed responsibility for 9/11, but then denied it.
http://www.public-action.com/911/oblintrv.html

October 16, 2001-- An interview with Osama bin Laden was published in a Karachi-based Pakistani daily newspaper, Ummat, on September 28, 2001. In this interview, bin Laden says of the September 11 attacks in the US:


KABUL, Afghanistan(Ummat): Prominent Arab mojahed (freedom fighter) Usama bin Laden or the Al-Qaida group has nothing to do with the 11 September attacks on the Bush Administration, according to an Usama bin Laden interview with Ummat, the Karachi-based Pakistani daily newspaper. In his interview, Usama bin Laden pointed out that the Israeli regime is behind the 9-11 attacks. He expressed gratitude and support for Pakistan, urging the Pakistani people to continue their jehad against dictators, tyrants, traitors, crooks, criminals, dictatorships and tyrannies. Following is the text of Usama Bin Laden's interview conducted by a "special correspondent" and published in the daily Ummat on Friday, 28 September 2001. [The place and date of the interview was not given by Ummat.]



Daily UMMAT: You have been accused of involvement in the attacks in New York and Washington. What do you want to say about this? If you are not involved, who might be?


USAMA BIN LADEN: In the name of Allah (God), the most beneficent, the most merciful. Praise be to Allah, Who is the creator of the whole universe and Who made the Earth as an abode for peace, for the whole humankind. Allah is the Sustainer, who sent Prophet Muhammad (saw) for our guidance. I am thankful to The Ummat Group of Publications, which gave me the opportunity to convey my viewpoint to the people, particularly the valiant and momin (true Muslim) people of Pakistan who refused to believe the lies of the demon (Pakistani military dictator General Pervez Musharraf).
I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act.


(he then goes on...)


Daily UMMAT: The losses caused in the attacks in New York and Washington have proved that giving an economic blow to the U.S.is not too difficult. U.S. experts admit that a few more such attacks can bring down the American economy. Why is Al-Qaida not targeting their economic pillars?



USAMA BIN LADEN: I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We are against the [U.S. Government] system, which makes other nations slaves of the United States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic freedom. This system is totally in control of the American-Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is clear that the American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the U.S. is not uttering a single word.





Now, it does get a little anti-semitic, but all in all, he blames Zionism.

[The Vegan Marxist]

If he is still alive, he is probably in a safe haven somewhere in Saudi Arabia or in the U.S.. Of course, you do have that video of "fat" bin laden. The excuse for this is that the Middle Eastern video format distorts and flattens an image.

Another thing that puzzles me is that Bin Laden claimed responsibility for 9/11, but then denied it.
http://www.public-action.com/911/oblintrv.html

October 16, 2001-- An interview with Osama bin Laden was published in a Karachi-based Pakistani daily newspaper, Ummat, on September 28, 2001. In this interview, bin Laden says of the September 11 attacks in the US:


KABUL, Afghanistan(Ummat): Prominent Arab mojahed (freedom fighter) Usama bin Laden or the Al-Qaida group has nothing to do with the 11 September attacks on the Bush Administration, according to an Usama bin Laden interview with Ummat, the Karachi-based Pakistani daily newspaper. In his interview, Usama bin Laden pointed out that the Israeli regime is behind the 9-11 attacks. He expressed gratitude and support for Pakistan, urging the Pakistani people to continue their jehad against dictators, tyrants, traitors, crooks, criminals, dictatorships and tyrannies. Following is the text of Usama Bin Laden's interview conducted by a "special correspondent" and published in the daily Ummat on Friday, 28 September 2001. [The place and date of the interview was not given by Ummat.]



Daily UMMAT: You have been accused of involvement in the attacks in New York and Washington. What do you want to say about this? If you are not involved, who might be?


USAMA BIN LADEN: In the name of Allah (God), the most beneficent, the most merciful. Praise be to Allah, Who is the creator of the whole universe and Who made the Earth as an abode for peace, for the whole humankind. Allah is the Sustainer, who sent Prophet Muhammad (saw) for our guidance. I am thankful to The Ummat Group of Publications, which gave me the opportunity to convey my viewpoint to the people, particularly the valiant and momin (true Muslim) people of Pakistan who refused to believe the lies of the demon (Pakistani military dictator General Pervez Musharraf).
I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act.


(he then goes on...)


Daily UMMAT: The losses caused in the attacks in New York and Washington have proved that giving an economic blow to the U.S.is not too difficult. U.S. experts admit that a few more such attacks can bring down the American economy. Why is Al-Qaida not targeting their economic pillars?



USAMA BIN LADEN: I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We are against the [U.S. Government] system, which makes other nations slaves of the United States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic freedom. This system is totally in control of the American-Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is clear that the American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the U.S. is not uttering a single word.





Now, it does get a little anti-semitic, but all in all, he blames Zionism.

Actually, I did a blog on the 'fat laden' theory & explained how the theory was uncredible & very debunkable. I'll find it & post it.

[The Vegan Marxist]

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=80976199&blogId=507407261

[Psy]

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=80976199&blogId=507407261

Yet the low tech for the video shows Osama did not access to very much technology, no DV decks and DV field camera that rich hobbyist had back in the mid 1990's and even the most poor ass news rooms had DVCPRO equipment by 2001.

Hell it looks worse then even then S-VHS that was used by wedding film filmographers at the time, if Osama could not even get in decent A/V equipment up the mountain how was he suppose to get telecommunication equipment into the mountains? Or Computers to plan attacks?

Face it, Osama was a arm chair general with the rest of his posse that simply delgated out to branches that actually had the ability to do stuff as they were not based in the middle of nowhere where industrialization has yet to touch.

If you look back to the U.S.S.R/Afghanistan war Osama was sided with the backward feudal lords that was fighting the U.S.S.R to stop the proletrainization of the peasants and industrialization of the Afghanistan as the U.S.S.R long term economic plan for Afghanistan was to bring heavy mining as Afghanistan had and still has a vast wealth of minerals locked in its mountains since Afghanistan is not industrialized enough to extract it and ship it to markets. The feudal lords was scared that heavy mining would undermine their class power, if Afganistan rural peasents could get wage jobs working in mines why would they put up with the shit from the landed aristocracy?

The other branches of Al Qaeda does not share Osama's feudal view thus it is far from a monolith organization.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Yet the low tech for the video shows Osama did not access to very much technology, no DV decks and DV field camera that rich hobbyist had back in the mid 1990's and even the most poor ass news rooms had DVCPRO equipment by 2001.

Hell it looks worse then even then S-VHS that was used by wedding film filmographers at the time, if Osama could not even get in decent A/V equipment up the mountain how was he suppose to get telecommunication equipment into the mountains? Or Computers to plan attacks?

Face it, Osama was a arm chair general with the rest of his posse that simply delgated out to branches that actually had the ability to do stuff as they were not based in the middle of nowhere where industrialization has yet to touch.

If you look back to the U.S.S.R/Afghanistan war Osama was sided with the backward feudal lords that was fighting the U.S.S.R to stop the proletrainization of the peasants and industrialization of the Afghanistan as the U.S.S.R long term economic plan for Afghanistan was to bring heavy mining as Afghanistan had and still has a vast wealth of minerals locked in its mountains since Afghanistan is not industrialized enough to extract it and ship it to markets. The feudal lords was scared that heavy mining would undermine their class power, if Afganistan rural peasents could get wage jobs working in mines why would they put up with the shit from the landed aristocracy?

The other branches of Al Qaeda does not share Osama's feudal view thus it is far from a monolith organization.

All you have is accusations. I've presented evidence & factual science with every comment I've made. I'm done arguing this simple truth that you're making more complicated at such an unnecessary level.

[Psy]

All you have is accusations. I've presented evidence & factual science with every comment I've made. I'm done arguing this simple truth that you're making more complicated at such an unnecessary level.
What accusations? The video and audio quality is shit compared to even entry level professional equipment that is fact.

The insurgency during the U.S.S.R/Afghanistan war were feudalistic while this stance makes no sense outside Afghanistan since most Arabs outside Afghanistan were never landed aristocracy. So why should we think that Al Qaeda is a monolithic organization where everything is run through Afghanistan? Not only are they in the middle of nowhere but their pro-feudalist ideology is incompatible with Arabs outside of Afghanistan.

[IllicitPopsicle]

Cool story, man.