The whole 9/11 truth movement [Archive]

View Full Version : The whole 9/11 truth movement

bootleg42

14th February 2008, 22:45

I posted this on another board and I think it's a good read for here. This is basically me showing what the true plans of the whole 9/11 truth movement is about and the trick they're trying to play on people. I think it's a good analysis and the next time we get people here saying "OMG look at building 7" or anything of the type, this could be a good response, especially for those people who believe in these conspiracy theories and who have left-leaning thinking.

Plus when one does research on the movement and it's leaders, one sees that this is a trick by the ultra-right free-market libertarians to try to trick people (who otherwise wouldn't) into supporting their cause. I'll explain.

The leaders of these 9/11 truth movements themselves are also believers of something they call the "NWO" or the "New World Order", and they're not talking about a new world order in a metaphoric sense, but they're talking about it in a literal sense. They literally believe that a powerful secret group has been planning (for over 100 year according to them) to take over the world and that, "both the U.S. and Soviet governments are controlled by the same furtive conspiratorial cabal of internationalists, greedy bankers, and corrupt politicians. If left unexposed, the traitors inside the U.S. government would betray the country's sovereignty to the United Nations for a collectivist New World Order managed by a 'one-world socialist government." That quote is by Robert Welch Jr., the founder of the John Birch Society (a far-right conservative group who started these conspiracy theories, I'll get back to them later).

These people honestly believe that there is a "NWO" that will make a one world government and that it it force collectivism and socialism down our throats. They claim that the U.N. is one of those organizations. They claim that all major figures in world history from Karl Marx to Woodrow Wilson to Hitler to Noam Chomsky are all in on it. Also they believe that black helicopters are flying all over the world right now, planning to implement their plans of world domination (NoamChomsky made fun of these "black helicopters" claim once in a speech I heard on youtube).

All these conspiracy theories come from an old U.S. political organization called the John Birch Society. This organization is a far-right free-market libertarian organization. They've hated all the U.S. presidents (both Democrats and Republicans), considering them all part of the "NWO" conspiracy. Many of the people from this portion of the right wing is not even liked very much by the ruling class. These people sort of knew that it would be very hard to get the people of the United States of America to believe them in their causes. In the 90's, they had the support of the right-wing militia movements of the "angry white men" but other than that, they could get no more support. Nor did the far-right people in general get the support they have hoped for. Then 9/11 happened.

Being consistent, they pushed the claims that Bush and company where behind 9/11. These far right people where against the "war on terror" from the beginning and they've been against most wars of the past but not for the humanitarian reason, but because wars force the state to spend more and increase and that they believe their "NWO" conspiracies.

A good portion of the people in the U.S. were against the war and against all the mayhem Bush was creating. This is when the whole "Bush did 9/11" thing started getting popular. These far-right free-market libertarians pushed the whole "Bush did 9/11" and they pushed for an end of all U.S. foreign intervention. The far-right started to ride the wave of legit anti-Bush sentiments, pushing only the points that "Bush was behind 9/11" and that "all the wars should end". BUT THEY NEVER TALK ABOUT THEIR ALTERNATIVES (which is what Chomsky pointed out), WHICH ARE FREE-MARKETS, AND VERY ANTI-LABOR AND MANY TIMES, ANTI-SEMITIC. These same people who lead and are behind the 9/11 movements are so far-right that the current ruling class thinks they're a joke. Lets take a look at some of these people:

Alex Jones: He's probably the leader in this whole 9/11 movement. This guy is a free market pusher. He hates Bush, but he's from the right of Bush (scary no??). He has pushed this "NWO" theory. He claims Communism, Socialism and Anarchism are just conspiracies, funded by wall street to create chaos so that the conditions can occur for the "NWO" to take over. He interviewed Noam Chomsky once and after the interview, Jones (like a coward, not being able to say it to Chomsky's face) called Chomsky an "NWO shill" (meaning that Chomsky is supposedly a part of the "NWO"). I think we all know how ridiclous that sounds.

David Icke: This is a big name in the 9/11 truth movement. He claims that the VERY anti-semitic writing, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, reveals a plan for the "NWO" to rule the world. This is very anti-semitic. He claims that every important world leaders in history were and are reptilian humanoids (aliens). According to him, every big world leader is a reptile alien, from Britain's late Queen Mother to George H.W. Bush, Hillary Clinton, Harold Wilson, and Tony Blair. He's had a history with the white militias of the 90's.

Robert M. Bowman: He was a former Director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the U.S. Air Force in the Ford and Carter administrations, and a former United States Air Force Lieutenant Colonel. He has pushed that Bush was behind 9/11. He was also campaigned nationwide for the nomination of the Reform Party of the United States of America for President of the United States. This is the same party that had the ethnocentric Pat Buchanan as their candidate.

Steven E. Jones: This is the famous physics professor that has helped fueled the whole WTC 7 thing. He actually supported George W. Bush before 9/11 and he has had a history with the republican party.

Morgan Reynolds: He was the chief economist for the United States Department of Labor during 2001–2002, George W. Bush's first term. He has also been big in the 9/11 movement. Before the 9/11 truth thing, he claimed that labor unions exacerbates unemployment and inflation. He has been HUGE in anti-labor thinking, blaming unions for everything. He hates labor regulation, and he has pushed the U.S. to move to a completely free-market and to reject labor movements.

Notice how these leaders of the 9/11 movement are mainly far-right free-market lovers and what they're doing is they're riding the anti-Bush sentiments to try to gain power so that they can establish their far-right domestic policies (free-markets, anti-labor laws, "states-rights", etc) behind people's backs. These 9/11 leaders don't want to talk about their alternatives, because such alternatives are not what poor and working people would support.

It looks like the trick is working. Many people with left-leanings are falling for joining and supporting this whole truth movement. This is why Ron Paul became so popular over the internet, gaining support from people with left-leaning politics. This movement only wants to sneak in their free-market, small government, anti-labor policies and they use such things (anti-Bush feelings, 9/11, anti-war, etc) to gain support from factions they wouldn't otherwise get.

Thoughts??? Anything to add?? Anything you hate??? Please, comments.

jake williams

14th February 2008, 23:04

The whole 9/11 truth movement is almost utter nonsense, though of course parts of it make claims which have some legitimacy, even important legitimacy - you know, mismanagement of the response, the historic connection between Osama bin Laden and his crew and the American government, and so on.

But even insofar as it's nonsense, you do see, I think, where it's coming from - the fearmongering and propagandizing and really repressed articulate-intellectual culture and the real violent, covert actions of the American government, historic and current.

Cencus

14th February 2008, 23:28

If something smells like shit it usually isn't a bunch of roses. People give governments too much credit for their ability to create and hide conspiracies, Reagan couldn't even get some guns to the contras without being caught. Just now the whole Diana conspiracy thing is being knocked for six in an inquest.

bootleg42

15th February 2008, 00:04

One of the main points I tried to make was that elements of the far-right are behind the whole movement and that needs to be exposed because people with left sentiments are falling for this movement.

oujiQualm

15th February 2008, 00:11

I Stongly disagree with the thesis that this is only the ultra-right who belive this. It is certainly understandable that ONE WHO HAS ONLY FOLLOWED DEVELOPMENTS in the last two years could think this.

There is a propganda campaign to make us think this. Certainly I disagree with almost all of what Alex Jones believes.

There is noone who could argue that it was all right wing around 2001-5.

WHAT YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER IS THAT ALL OF THE GATEKEEPING IS IN LEFT PUBLICATIONS. Have you read the history of Encounter Magazine? Please look this up.

which doctor

15th February 2008, 00:23

Are you insisting that the 9/11 truth movement is, in fact, a conspiracy itself?

oujiQualm

15th February 2008, 03:28

Who Me? If that question is for me I would --sigh-- ask you the following question: when you type the words "the whole 9-11 truth movement" who or what are you refering to? Is it a cohesive group that all agrees on one thing? Are they ever allowed on national media that can CREATE A COMMON denominator FOR THEIR VARIED, AND I WOULD AGREE SOMETIMES KOOKY BELIEFS? Just what do you mean by these words?

which doctor

15th February 2008, 03:30

Zurdito

15th February 2008, 03:55

The 9/11 truth movement is the height of imperialist arrogance. The US is so powerful it chooses even it's own defeats? I get the feeling that if you could prove to a lot of those nuts that it was Al Qaeda who did it, that they would turn on muslims with the same hatred they currently hold for the US government - they just probably don't think anyone other than Americans (and Jews) is even capable of playing a role in history.

Also, it is anti-marxist to see conspiracies of the ruling class. We see struggle, and the ruling class cosntantly suffering the effects of its contradictions with the masses. 9/11 was an example of that. The conspiracy theory movement effectively sees the "evil" governmnet which can only be exposed by a few "heroic" white American freedom fighters, while the rest of the world watches on passively.

Ultra-Violence

15th February 2008, 04:28

BUSH DROPED THE TOWERS U CANT CONVINCE ME OTHER WISE I DONT GIVE A FUCK WHAT ANY BODY SAYS CALL ME CRAZY OR A NUT I DONT CARE!

im not buying the govements story some of the alleged hijackers are still alive listen to Normans testimony on cheny before he resigend. ALL PLANES WERE LANDED ON THAT DAY! and ur goana tell me a hijacked planes are goana get that close to the pentagon? WITH OUT MILITARY INTERVENTION! the list goes on and on

now on the truth movement its kinda 50/50 for me half are right wing LOONS the other half aint so eh..

Lenin II

15th February 2008, 04:48

One of the main points I tried to make was that elements of the far-right are behind the whole movement and that needs to be exposed because people with left sentiments are falling for this movement.
Most of them are Paultards and most Paultards are "truthers." They also believe in a Zionist conspiracy (I cannot believe I just defended Israel) and blatently watch the same documentary films over and over without noticing ALL of their arguments have been debunked by now. In addition, most of them are paleoconservative scum that want to "secure our borders" and say that communism is propped up by the globalists and Jews.

bootleg42

15th February 2008, 06:39

I Stongly disagree with the thesis that this is only the ultra-right who belive this. It is certainly understandable that ONE WHO HAS ONLY FOLLOWED DEVELOPMENTS in the last two years could think this.

Well I don't believe that ONLY the ultra-right believes this. I know plenty of people with left feelings seriously believe this to death. There were a few people here who honestly believed it.

What I'm saying is that the ultra-right are the ones leading this dumb crusade (and when you look at their leaders from the beginning and the whole history of where the modern conspiracy theories come from, you'll get that sense) and they're the ones riding it's wave and it can fool people.

There are plenty of left leaning people who believe this, but what I was pointing out is that the ultra-right (free-marketers, anti-Bush righties, etc) is using this as a smokescreen to try to get their people in power (hence one of the reasons Ron Paul got so popular over the internet) by getting support from a faction (people with left leanings) they otherwise wouldn't get without the topic of 9/11 and the such.

There is a propganda campaign to make us think this. Certainly I disagree with almost all of what Alex Jones believes.

Well how strong is this propaganda against them?? Why is it that they've had more time on "mainstream TV" then us leftist have had in the last 20 years???? I'm not saying the mainstream media is pushing this but it seems interesting that they give these conspiracy nuts so much TV time, knowing that a large percentage of the population thinks Bush had something to do with it. This shows that the media is using the 9/11 truth movement to distract people from real issues (which the media doesn't report on anyway).

And of course I disagree with all Alex Jones has to say. The guy is paranoid to death and claims everything against him is a conspiracy and a part of the "NWO". Lack of logic and reason I say.

There is noone who could argue that it was all right wing around 2001-5.

WHAT YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER IS THAT ALL OF THE GATEKEEPING IS IN LEFT PUBLICATIONS. Have you read the history of Encounter Magazine? Please look this up.

Again, I'm saying that the Ultra-right is behind all this and it's riding the wave of the anti-Bush feelings the people of the U.S. have. The fact that some left publications are gatekeeping this whole 9/11 thing shows that the trick the ultra-right is doing is working. I'm not saying it's all right-wing.....in fact maybe it's majority people with left leanings. But it's main leaders and their prepared alternatives are ultra-right and the people with left leaning don't realize this.

Notice how Cindy Sheehan appeared on Alex Jones's show and she has voiced support for Ron Paul. Sheehan is not a revolutionary leftist but she has left leanings (just look at her writings and her support for Cuba among other things). She has been praised by the ultra-right on her anti-war stance. This is the reason why she appeared on their mediums and even voiced support for the 9/11 truth movement. She is not thinking that this is just a group of free-marketers who want their policies sneaked from behind the people, she only cares (and legitimally and correctly let me add) about ending the war and this could lead to people being tricked.

bootleg42

15th February 2008, 06:46

Are you insisting that the 9/11 truth movement is, in fact, a conspiracy itself?

No. They're just riding the wave of Bush hatred from the petty bourgeoisie and the "middle class". This was an opportunity that they're riding, not a conspiracy.

They posted their theories and a ton of people from all across the political spectrum bought it. So with many people from various factions on their side (from this one topic), they rode the wave to today where people with left feelings are voting for people like Ron Paul, without even knowing about Paul's domestic policies and the such. This also led to people listening to Alex Jones and thinking that he's a great for alternative media. Notice how Jones rarely talks about his domestic policy beliefs as much as he just talks about 9/11 and the wars.

This also shows a failure of the left. This interest of 9/11 and why it happened shows that people cared about it's cause and people wanted to get politically smart. It also showed that people don't like the current power holders and they want some sort of change. This shows that we must do better now so that in the future, this these tricks by the ultra-right don't happen again. Don't indoctrinate, just discuss. Create thought from the people. Don't start saying "this path is the only path to socialism" or "this is flawed because it does not follow 'such and such' principle." Just create thought and the such. People will then know what to do and then they won't fall for tricks like this.

BIG BROTHER

15th February 2008, 07:49

9/11 truth=b.s.

EwokUtopia

15th February 2008, 08:17

Yeah, thats why I am very skeptical about Zeitgeist.
I fucking loved the first bit of it, the whole taking apart of the Christian mythology, but it went real sour after that. That whole bit on the North American Union was especially pathetic. If it happens, it wont be Americans or Canadians who get fucked over, it will be the Mexicans. The problem with these people is the near sacred reverence they hold for an archaic constitution which repeatedly has to be amended to keep up with the trends.

SouthernBelle82

15th February 2008, 17:53

I don't fully trust Alex Jones since he's a libertarian and I'm sure has his own agenda. With me I don't believe everything on either side. I think it's probably somewhere down the middle more than likely. I'm with Hugo Chavez however when he not long ago said how there should be an independent investigation with no ties to anyone where it could be white-washed etc.

SouthernBelle82

15th February 2008, 17:58

Oh I totally am skeptical about Zeitgeist. They barely talked about religion at all and I think they just threw that in there to get people to watch it. It was like a little blip. I thought it was pretty desperate. :rolleyes: I wish someone would do a film debunking Zeitgeist with the other stuff.

Yeah, thats why I am very skeptical about Zeitgeist.
I fucking loved the first bit of it, the whole taking apart of the Christian mythology, but it went real sour after that. That whole bit on the North American Union was especially pathetic. If it happens, it wont be Americans or Canadians who get fucked over, it will be the Mexicans. The problem with these people is the near sacred reverence they hold for an archaic constitution which repeatedly has to be amended to keep up with the trends.

bootleg42

17th February 2008, 01:10

Most of them are Paultards and most Paultards are "truthers." They also believe in a Zionist conspiracy (I cannot believe I just defended Israel) and blatently watch the same documentary films over and over without noticing ALL of their arguments have been debunked by now. In addition, most of them are paleoconservative scum that want to "secure our borders" and say that communism is propped up by the globalists and Jews.

The paleoconservatives and right-wing libertarians are basically the same except that the paleoconservatives push their ethnocentric social issue more and the right-wing libertarians try to push their economic issues more (and quite religiously may I add).

Both have small tendencies of fascism. Both are dangerous to poor and working people everywhere.

Dimentio

17th February 2008, 01:15

oujiQualm

17th February 2008, 15:00

I disagree with everything written here(sorry this is with reference to Zurditos comment). This person has read nothing about 9/11 and only seeks to apply labels and use the classic divide-the -left by spurious use of race labeling approach.

I think left needs to do a lot more reading in media history. I dont think Marx would mind. This post reminds me of the righteous fact-free analysis I used to read in my Z-magazine about twenty years ago. This magazine was theory based and appealed to college educated leftists who liked to talk and look college educated. All of their issues offered no entryramps onto its upper middle class highway. I am so sick of cultural based leftism. It has neutered the left.

jake williams

17th February 2008, 19:19

bootleg42

17th February 2008, 19:35

oujiQualm

17th February 2008, 19:55

Sorry, I was referring to the Cockburnish remartk that implied
1. All 9/11 ish types ( is there such a thing-- is there a place where millions can
recieve the common denominator required for the socialization of knowledge, the
way US government pronouncement-- even those headed by azelkow who was wrote
a book with Condi, Was on the Bush Transiton team, and later worked for Bush
admin again-- are promoted into 300 million eardrums on all four networks to serve
as the COMMON BASELINE for all future mediated deviations and agreement?)
believe that only whites in the US gov can plan or make anything happen etc.

Sorry this is not even an argument. It is a tranparent attmempt to use
race rhetoric to prevent a discussion. Great way to pretend to answer questions
without reading anything, though.

I am no rightist. I first became politicized by studying the CIA created slavadoran Death Squads. This dont make for naive liberals. I have read history for thirty years.

I think that the left needs to look seriously at media history, and the history of communications research. This is what the CIA does more than anything else. Of course we are encouraged to just label anything like this conspriracy thoery these days. Stalin could not have develped a disinfo campaign anywhere near this efficient!

Some cool books to read are

Nervous Liberals by Brett Gary
The Science of Coercion by Christopher Simpson
Total Cold War: Eisenhower's Secret Propaganda Battle at Home and Abroad by
by Kenneth Osgood.

The Mighty Wurlitzer: How the CIA played America, Harvard Univesity press, 2008
The Culturaral Cold War: The CIA and The World Of Arts and Letters by Frances
Stonor Saunders.

These books are by HISTORIANS.

History DOES INVOLVE communications people!!! Remember that guy gutenburghsp? from your high school history class!!

History does involve propaganda citizens! Is is CONSPIRACY THEORY to point out that the CIA paid for the creation of the cartoon version of Animal Farm and had it distributed all around the world?/ (look it up !) Is it CONSPIRACY THEORY to say that the CIA had editions of the Animal Farm translated into many different languages, MINUS ORWELLS INTODUCTION, WHICH WAS LEFT OUT BECAUSE HE IMPLEID THAT MEDIA TOTALITARIANISM WAS AS MUCH A THREAT IN THE WEST AS IN THE EAST??)

Well, although I believe all these assertions to be factually correct, IT MAY WELL BE CONSPIRACY THEORY ANYWAY!!!! --- this depends on the degree of CAUSALITY and weight one gives to these events!

But to just exclude media manipulation apriori, without even giving them a seconds consideration, this is naive..... at best!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i46RI2twVao&feature=related

The above video features Christopher Simpson of American University. If you disagree maybe you can type a note with two words CONSPIRACY THEORY. At this rate of pavlovian left-gatekeeping intoctirnation, he will be fired by thursday around tea-time!

Tatarin

17th February 2008, 23:40

Much of the CIA cold war "conflicts" are known, only they are not teached in US schools. And they are certainly not conspiracies in the sence of a "New World Order".

oujiQualm

18th February 2008, 04:12

Tatarin-- you would be amazed at how little Americans know of say the 1954 Guatemala coup. And yet this features a key player in the JFK Assassination, David Atley Phillps. Oops I have committed a sin, by mentioning something that is officially a sin-- a "black hole" in US Left - liberal historiogrophy-- as edited by today's version of Encounter Magazine? You are using "Conspiracy theory" in what sense of the term?????-- Right now it means basically nothing!-- and no, this does not mean I believe the moon landing was faked!

EwokUtopia

18th February 2008, 18:40

Amen Ouji.

The Mass Media is hugely important in all walks of modern life. Do you know of the Frankfurt school? They were German Marxists in the 30's who studied media. What they saw was all of the Revolutionary capability of many European countries in the 30's being snapped back by fascism. They looked at the connection of these political events and compared them to the rise of Mass Media (the radio in particular). They came to the conclusion that the Mass Media was so powerful, it made Marx's anticipation of revolution not so inevitable.

I agree with this, but I do have a shining hope: The Internet. We no longer live in a world completely dominated by Mass Media. There are many hopes and fears about this.

oujiQualm

18th February 2008, 21:54

yes Ewok I am familiar with the Frank Schools writings about Media. Very important stuff.

I am hopefull but also sceptical about the internet.

I think is an ironic way it has reinforced the M in MSM ( I actually prefer the term Corporate Media for this reason) What I mean by this is that by marginalizing the internet as "alternative" the Corporate Media has gotten even worse than ever. Far worse. So by having "the alternative" spread out over a million different sites, each with 13 and half people, THERE IS NO COMMONLY MEDIATED ALTERNATIVE to this fascistic MSM.

The solution, I have been trying to implement is to BRIDGE FROM MAINSTREAM US NEWSPAPER SITES TO ones like this and sites that offer real history.

If we spend too much time on this site and NOT ENOUGH TIME droppind breadcrumbs ala hansel and grettel, then we will be stuffed in the oven by Brian Williams of NBC and Wolf Blitzkreig of Clinton News Network

FIGHT MOATED CONSCIOUSNESS; lay tracks!

oujiQualm

18th February 2008, 22:06

The leaders of these 9/11 truth movements themselves are also believers of something they call the "NWO" or the "New World Order", and they're not talking about a new world order in a metaphoric sense, but they're talking about it in a literal sense. They literally believe that a powerful secret group has been planning (for over 100 year according to them) to take over the world and that, "both the U.S. and Soviet governments are controlled by the same furtive conspiratorial cabal of internationalists, greedy bankers, and corrupt politicians. If left unexposed, the traitors inside the U.S. government would betray the country's sovereignty to the United Nations for a collectivist New World Order managed by a 'one-world socialist government." That quote is by Robert Welch Jr., the founder of the John Birch Society (a far-right conservative group who started these conspiracy theories, I'll get back to them later).
-----\\

Will try to address this in pieces. I have been working on and off on 9/11 stuff in NYC for about six years. None of the people I work with believe this NWO rhetoric. I certainly regocnize its danger, and its historical origin. I have read quite a bit about the radical right.

That said I WOULD PROBABLY AGREE with you if you say, that the number who subscribe to this sort of dagnerous rhetoric is growing faster than other analysese of 9/11

But the key question is WHY?

I would suggest that there have been a tremendous amount of gatekeeping efforts made at the left- liberal end of the Spectrum (the nation, counterpunch, Common Dreams etc) BUT NONE WHATSOEVER on the right end of the spectrum.

Again I would argue very strongly that the conflation you are proposing "9/11 t268Th movement (I dont want to use the word truth here because that has been mediated AND NON-MEDIATED with only negative connotations) is IN ESSENCE right wing" is a hypothesis THAT IN NO WAY COULD HAVE BEEN MADE UNTIL late 2005 at the earliest. There have been seven years of left gatekeeping activity that have enabed this conflation.

If you are sceptical about my use of the term "left gatekeeping" I want to congratulate you. It is something that needs to be read about from a historical framework. Please see the books I mentioned in an earlier post on this thread. Again, the key model is Encounter Magazine, a left liberal magazine which had its hayday between 1950 -1964

By reading about this you will begin to understand the ESSENTIALLY RIGHTIST NATURE of left-gatekeeping media efforts

toeg

19th February 2008, 23:37

This is in response to bootleg42's first post. This is about the fiftieth time I've tried to awaken dead brain cells in people, and it is getting a bit tedious. For those who still believe in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy and that the far left is a "trick" by the far right to fool people, you don't need to read any further. Your mind is made up and you're useless anyway. For those who still have brain cell activity, please read on:

Your lack of knowledge is quite impressive. The Reichstag Fire, the Gulf of Tonkin attack, etc., were all examples of the national government fooling its people. Look up yellow journalism and Operation Mockingbird if you want to see how your government tricks you even today.

Here's one out of many examples showing what nearly all governments are capable of. This was the damning testimony about Saddam's invasion of Kuwait which gave Bush Sr. the "okay" to launch a war. The scenes were broadcast all over the world and sentiment in the US was extremely high against Saddam as a result:

Apparently, I can't provide any links. So if oujiQualm can please provide them from my original post, that would be greatly appreciated. I always provide links and proof of what I state, but I can't help the rules of a forum that requires me to post 25 times before giving me that ability. oujiQualm, you have to do this.

In reality, it even goes deeper than that. Here is Ambassador April Glaspie's statement to Saddam in 1990, assuring him that the US could care less of Iraq invades Kuwait

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - We have no opinion on your Arab - Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960's, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America.

Again, oujiQualm will have to provide the link I gave on this on the other forum.

Now I'm not trying to start any cranial activity out there. Americans are known to be brain dead when it comes to international affairs, and I can see that they are very well represented here. If your brain is fast asleep, there's no reason to read any further. It won't make sense to you anyway. Go back to watching Fox News and all the scantilly clad blonde bombshells they put there for your amusement.

This thread starts off with:

I think it's a good analysis and the next time we get people here saying "OMG look at building 7" or anything of the type, this could be a good response, especially for those people who believe in these conspiracy theories and who have left-leaning thinking.

This is already suspect for me. Building 7 is the only time in history that a steel-frame building collapsed on its footprint due to small fires. If you think you know how this occurred, I'd love to see your explanation. I've been studying this event intensely since 2003. Any new information would be greatly appreciated. At the same time, please explain why the Windsor Hotel did not collapse after 20 hours of intense fires on nearly all floors.

Then bootleg42 adds this:

Plus when one does research on the movement and it's leaders, one sees that this is a trick by the ultra-right free-market libertarians to try to trick people (who otherwise wouldn't) into supporting their cause. I'll explain.

Rest assured, bootleg, RUSH LIMBAUGH is not running the 9/11 truth movement. The last people the 9/11 truth movement wishes to promote are Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly. I can't help it if you're brain dead, but at least use lies that are more convincing than that pile of craap.

Then bootleg continues:

The leaders of these 9/11 truth movements themselves are also believers of something they call the "NWO" or the "New World Order", and they're not talking about a new world order in a metaphoric sense, but they're talking about it in a literal sense. They literally believe that a powerful secret group has been planning (for over 100 year according to them) to take over the world and that, "both the U.S. and Soviet governments are controlled by the same furtive conspiratorial cabal of internationalists, greedy bankers, and corrupt politicians. If left unexposed, the traitors inside the U.S. government would betray the country's sovereignty to the United Nations for a collectivist New World Order managed by a 'one-world socialist government." That quote is by Robert Welch Jr., the founder of the John Birch Society (a far-right conservative group who started these conspiracy theories, I'll get back to them later).

Um, To implicate the JBS in any of this is lunacy. My entire family of 4 uncles and 3 aunts were card carrying members of JBS along with my mom. I helped the TACT group in the 60s and ran around some parking lot in Fresno, California, in 1964 slapping AUH2O stickers on the backs of unsuspecting peop;e's cars (if you don't know, look it up. You're supposedly the JBS brainchild here).

To even suspect the JBS as the ringlieaders of the 9/11 truth movement is, in and of itself, a demonstration of one's loss of reality. I don't even need to go into detail here. Anyone who has even known a JBS person knows this is ludicrous. If you said that the JBS believes the 9/11 truth movement to be a direct infiltration of President Chavez to undermine American morality and make us susceptible to take over, I'd agree with you all the way. But as the ring leaders of the 9/11 truth movement - all I can say is, stay away from those meds.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

But then you bring in the NWO. Allow me to show you what you apparently haven't been aware of. The NWO is not a "secret" organization of two countries (one of which doesn't even exist anymore - since 1991). It is a viable program being formed by world leaders. I'm sure you've heard of George Herbert Walker Bush. He was president of the US. I'm not making this up. He was president right before Clinton. You can look it up if you don't believe me. He also spoke to the people, I kid you not. Here is Bush speaking to the people while president:

oujiQualm, please provide the YouTube link I gave here. Thanks,

I count four different times when President Bush says, "New World Order." I don't think he was talking about a new Monopoly game by Parker Brothers.

I have brought you actual footage from broadcasts in the US from presidents of the US. The insanity of thinking that Rush Limbaugh is one of the leaders of the 9/11 truth movement has been demonstrated. You cannot find one quote from Rush where he agrees with the 9/11 movement. Nor can you find any quote from JBS supporting the 9/11 truth movement.

I don't want to waste any more time on the subject. If you are confused about what's going on to the extent that you think Rush Limbaugh and the JBS are behind the 9/11 truth movement, you need much more help than what I can give you. The NWO exists, at least according to President Bush, the CFR, and other major organizations around the world. Come up to speed or be quiet.

This whole bs about the right orchestrating the 9/11 truth movement sounds exactly like something the far right would do to confuse people. Again, I can't help it if you're brain dead. I feel for your family and friends. But, fortunately, most of the rest of the world is awake at least enough not to swallow this load of bs.

superwog

22nd February 2008, 14:09

I did think 9/11 was what fox said it was but i've spent alot of time looking into it and it was done so that there could be a crack down on Islam worldwide.

toeg

23rd February 2008, 02:13

I did think 9/11 was what fox said it was but i've spent alot of time looking into it and it was done so that there could be a crack down on Islam worldwide.

Superwog,

If you believe ANYTHING Fox News says, you are superwong (get it?? wog - wong??? never mind)

We didn't need 9/11 to "crack down" on Muslims, Arabs or Islam. We've been fed that bs for over 50 years. Go here and watch the trailer. If you can see the film, do so.

Sorry, I am not able to give you that link. It's at www dot reelbadarabs dot com.

Hollywood has been instrumental in villifying Arabs over the years. You didn't need 9/11 to do that. We have been born and raised to dehumanize Arabs and their religion, Disney has probably been the best proponent in doing this.

But even this would not convince Americans that they needed to attack sovereign nations in the Middle East. In order to attack Iraq, we needed a pretext. Americans needed to want revenge against a particular enemy, and when you're the world's only superpower, there aren't too many enemies out there. Most countries are like, "Uh, dude you're nuts, but hey, you got the biggest toys on the block so, if you want our oil, here ya go."

No one was going to provoke us into war, that's suicidal. You don't get to be at the top of an entire country with suicidal thoughts like, "Hey let's pretend that we are going to attack America. Let's take four planes and crash them into buildings over there. What are they gonna do??? They only have 8,000 nuclear bombs and can turn our entire country into a glazed parking lot within two hours. I mean, so what." There won't be too many others sitting at that table going, "Hey, sounds like a good plan. We send a couple of guys, hijack a few planes, smash a few towers, then break for lunch. Sounds like a plan."

No one in the world would dare attack the US. That's been a given since WWII. I think the turning point was when we took two healthy cities, Nagasaki and Hiroshima, turned them into legoland building material with just two bombs. That's probably where the whole friggin' world went, "Uh, I don't think we need to go any further down this road. Nice toys there, US, make sure you keep them safe from the bogeymen."

Al Caeda was created by the US in the middle 80s to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan under Osama.

Again, I can't give you the direct link. It's at www dot janes dot com slash security slash international security slash news slash jir slash jir010726

Notice that Jane's IS NOT some leftwing site that many people scoff as being ludicrous. You don't need to go to only certain sites for accurate info.

If you plot OBL's work and the US government's need for a bogeyman, you'll see that Osama has been Bush's best friend always available with a terrorist attack whenever Bush needs to show that those guys are bad.

9/11 was needed to get Americans to unite against a nebulous enemy that was not restricted to national boundaries or political constraints. Any country from a secular dictatorship like Iraq to a theological hodge podge of inept politicians in Afghanistan can be designated "the enemy" simply by connecting them to this nebulous CIA created group Al Qaeda and its ruler OBL. In the annals of psyops throughout history no coup has ever succeeded better than this one. Bush could say tomorrow that, "Egypt has aligned itself with Al Qaeda and plans to attack the US," and you would get instant American hatred against Egypt and anything associated with it. Bush could then prepare his attack and send American troops to die there, along with countless thousands of Egyptians, on the one statement made above.

The attack on Iraq was formulated years before Bush took office. The attack on Afghanistan was also prepared years in advance. The missing ingredient was merely public acquiessence to the plan. 9/11 gave Bush a blank check to use American military anywhere in the world he so chose.

Read the original mission statement of the PNAC and you will see what they really want to do. You, and most other Americans, are merely the fodder they use to get what they need. Be happy that your particular fodder doesn't have to be used in Iraq or Afghanistan. You could quickly become fodderless over there.

last_angry_man

23rd February 2008, 02:29

I'm trained as a civil engineer and work in the engineering field building computerized models of the logistics involved in very large development projects (new cities, airports, subway systems, etc.) I'm not a structural engineer, nor am I a demolitions expert, but I work with both of those professions, along with architects, engineers of all types and lots of non-degreed individuals who just know a whole fuck-load about construction. In the six and one half years since 911, I have never met one industry pro who disbelieves the accepted story:
>>> fires weaken steel (not melt, weaken) >> single floor plate eventually gives way >> floor falls on adjacent level, already weakend by fire, causing it to give way >> process repeats and accelerates >> no more towers

I'll leave #7 to others, but I'll go to my grave believing the above about the two towers.

Tatarin

23rd February 2008, 03:17

Building 7 is the only time in history that a steel-frame building collapsed on its footprint due to small fires.

If that is the case, why would they destroy the whole building? For some documents?

At the same time, please explain why the Windsor Hotel did not collapse after 20 hours of intense fires on nearly all floors.

Maybe it was constructed in a very different way?

I count four different times when President Bush says, "New World Order." I don't think he was talking about a new Monopoly game by Parker Brothers.

So it is impossible that NWO can mean anything else, such as a new global capitalist order, one that is not stopped and overthrown by ideas such as communism?

The NWO exists, at least according to President Bush, the CFR, and other major organizations around the world.

You have proof of this?

9/11 gave Bush a blank check to use American military anywhere in the world he so chose.

The United States has always had the ability to go anywhere in the world. The first Gulf War didn't need any big terrorist attacks, nor did the Korean war, or US intervention in Chile, Nicaragua etc.

bootleg42

10th April 2008, 19:01

Rest assured, bootleg, RUSH LIMBAUGH is not running the 9/11 truth movement. The last people the 9/11 truth movement wishes to promote are Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly. I can't help it if you're brain dead, but at least use lies that are more convincing than that pile of craap.

I said far-right people farther to the right of bush and company are very much behind the 9/11 truth movement. Limbaugh and O'Reilly are part of "Bush and company", not a part of this right faction. I never mentioned Limbaugh and O'Reilly in my first post. I DID mention leading figures from the truth movement, why not comment on them???

Um, To implicate the JBS in any of this is lunacy. My entire family of 4 uncles and 3 aunts were card carrying members of JBS along with my mom. I helped the TACT group in the 60s and ran around some parking lot in Fresno, California, in 1964 slapping AUH2O stickers on the backs of unsuspecting peop;e's cars (if you don't know, look it up. You're supposedly the JBS brainchild here).

To even suspect the JBS as the ringlieaders of the 9/11 truth movement is, in and of itself, a demonstration of one's loss of reality. I don't even need to go into detail here. Anyone who has even known a JBS person knows this is ludicrous.

I never said the John Birch Society was behind the 9/11 movement. I mentioned that they are behind the past conspiracy theories, starting from the "NWO" (which I will get to later). Again I mentioned actual names of people in the 9/11 truth movement yet you are mentioning other names (Limbaugh, etc) that I never mentioned.

If you said that the JBS believes the 9/11 truth movement to be a direct infiltration of President Chavez to undermine American morality and make us susceptible to take over, I'd agree with you all the way. But as the ring leaders of the 9/11 truth movement - all I can say is, stay away from those meds.

Where the fuck do you get Hugo Chavez in this?? Just because he also has some suspicion of 9/11 makes him behind the truth movement???

And how the fuck is he undermining "American morality"??? If give cheap oil to really poor parts of the U.S. (like the south Bronx) is undermining "American morality" then sign me up. Fuck "American morality".

But then you bring in the NWO. Allow me to show you what you apparently haven't been aware of. The NWO is not a "secret" organization of two countries (one of which doesn't even exist anymore - since 1991). It is a viable program being formed by world leaders. I'm sure you've heard of George Herbert Walker Bush. He was president of the US. I'm not making this up. He was president right before Clinton. You can look it up if you don't believe me. He also spoke to the people, I kid you not. Here is Bush speaking to the people while president:

oujiQualm, please provide the YouTube link I gave here. Thanks,

I count four different times when President Bush says, "New World Order." I don't think he was talking about a new Monopoly game by Parker Brothers.

He was talking about it in a metaphorical sense. Not a literal sense. He was talking about a new era where free markets (their version of it at least) would dominate everything and that socialism was dead, ala the "End of history" thesis.

I have brought you actual footage from broadcasts in the US from presidents of the US.

I can bring you footage of a wrestling group called the "NWO" that did all the hand signals and shit back in 1996-1998. If such an "NWO" existed, we want solid proof. Not paranoia just because leaders mentioned it in their speechs, which was NOT in a literal sense.

The insanity of thinking that Rush Limbaugh is one of the leaders of the 9/11 truth movement has been demonstrated. You cannot find one quote from Rush where he agrees with the 9/11 movement. Nor can you find any quote from JBS supporting the 9/11 truth movement.

I don't want to waste any more time on the subject. If you are confused about what's going on to the extent that you think Rush Limbaugh and the JBS are behind the 9/11 truth movement, you need much more help than what I can give you.

When did I ever mention Rush Limbaugh in the 9/11 truth movement??? I never did. Find me a quote of me saying (from my first post) that Limbaugh is in it. You can't. I DID mention other names. Why not comment about them???

The NWO exists, at least according to President Bush, the CFR, and other major organizations around the world. Come up to speed or be quiet.

A new world order exists in the fact that there are institutional and market powers that now control most of the world undemocratically but NOT in the literal sense that there is a group (no longer is the Soviet Union in it) of people trying to rule the world with the black helicopters and they're going to create a one-world socialist government. We're all socialists here and we know that such a thing does not exist.

Now you mention about CFR. 1. Lately the Ron Paul freaks have been pushing the whole CFR topic. I wouldn't be shocked if you were one of them (not saying that you are). 2. Unlike the NWO claim, WE HAVE PROOF THAT CFR exists. Shit, they got an official website:

http://www.cfr.org/

Notice how we have proof for CFR but not for this "NWO".

This whole bs about the right orchestrating the 9/11 truth movement sounds exactly like something the far right would do to confuse people. Again, I can't help it if you're brain dead. I feel for your family and friends. But, fortunately, most of the rest of the world is awake at least enough not to swallow this load of bs.

Most of the U.S. can't stand the 9/11 movement right now. Remember a few months ago when those 9/11 truthers heckled Bill Maher on his show?? No one was cheering for those people. In fact, they made complete asses of themselves there. When the security was kicking them out, one of the truthers yelled "stop tasering him" when in fact there was no tasering anywhere and people started laughing about it (including Bill).

Also why do the 9/11 truthers heckle left figures from all parts of the left spectrum???? They bother Amy Goodman all the time (who is progressive left). They bothered Bill Maher (who is very little left but he is as left as you get in U.S. television). They bothered Michael Moore (a social democrat, very left for U.S. politics). They ALWAYS bash Noam Chomsky (a real revolutionary leftist of left marxist and anarchist tradition). Why do they attack these left figures???? The left figures I mentioned have actually tried to help people by pushing things like free healthcare for people in the U.S. and what do these truthers do in those events???? They start yelling "talk about building 7" or some shit that has nothing to do with the event. Why don't these same people yell "give people free healthcare!!" or "feed the homeless!!" or something to that extent????

I'll take a good question posed by Noam Chomsky about this movement, "WHAT'S THEIR ALTERNATIVE?" Tell me, what's their alternative????

nanovapor

10th April 2008, 19:20

9-11 was an inside jot as a tool for global imperial wars for oil, secure markets an global domination. 9-11 inside job theory is not a conspiracy theory, it is a fact. Whoever thinks that 9-11 was done by 19 islamic ragheads just because CNN and FOX said so is dumb.

By the way the 9-11 truth movement is not a political movement, they have the right to be right wingers, left wingers, centrists, or any religion they want, it is not about right, left, etc. it is about digging the facts of what really happened on that day.

What where the causes, consequences, motives, benefits of 9-11 inside job terrorism etc.

nanovapor

I posted this on another board and I think it's a good read for here. This is basically me showing what the true plans of the whole 9/11 truth movement is about and the trick they're trying to play on people. I think it's a good analysis and the next time we get people here saying "OMG look at building 7" or anything of the type, this could be a good response, especially for those people who believe in these conspiracy theories and who have left-leaning thinking.

Thoughts??? Anything to add?? Anything you hate??? Please, comments.

nanovapor

10th April 2008, 19:27

Bootleg: hahaha, i think you are generalizing so much, how can you say that far-right-wingers are behind the 9-11 truth movement? i know people from the 9-11 truth movement, and there are plenty of marxists, anarchists and non-politics people as well, even if there are far-right wingers inside the 9-11 truth movement it doesn't mean any thing.

9-11 truth movement is not a political-party aiming to govern the USA, so i don't see any problem with the 9-11 having right wingers inside their movement

do you mean that just coz a lot of the people of the 9-11 movement are capitalists, does that mean the 9-11 truth movement is wrong and CNN, FOX, US government is right?

Well if that is the case, CNN, FOX, US government is also wrong, because CNN, FOX, US gov. and the official 9-11 US government panel is right winger as well :scared:

nanovapor

I said far-right people farther to the right of bush and company are very much behind the 9/11 truth movement. Limbaugh and O'Reilly are part of "Bush and company", not a part of this right faction. I never mentioned Limbaugh and O'Reilly in my first post. I DID mention leading figures from the truth movement, why not comment on them???

I never said the John Birch Society was behind the 9/11 movement. I mentioned that they are behind the past conspiracy theories, starting from the "NWO" (which I will get to later). Again I mentioned actual names of people in the 9/11 truth movement yet you are mentioning other names (Limbaugh, etc) that I never mentioned.

Where the fuck do you get Hugo Chavez in this?? Just because he also has some suspicion of 9/11 makes him behind the truth movement???

And how the fuck is he undermining "American morality"??? If give cheap oil to really poor parts of the U.S. (like the south Bronx) is undermining "American morality" then sign me up. Fuck "American morality".

He was talking about it in a metaphorical sense. Not a literal sense. He was talking about a new era where free markets (their version of it at least) would dominate everything and that socialism was dead, ala the "End of history" thesis.

I can bring you footage of a wrestling group called the "NWO" that did all the hand signals and shit back in 1996-1998. If such an "NWO" existed, we want solid proof. Not paranoia just because leaders mentioned it in their speechs, which was NOT in a literal sense.

When did I ever mention Rush Limbaugh in the 9/11 truth movement??? I never did. Find me a quote of me saying (from my first post) that Limbaugh is in it. You can't. I DID mention other names. Why not comment about them???

A new world order exists in the fact that there are institutional and market powers that now control most of the world undemocratically but NOT in the literal sense that there is a group (no longer is the Soviet Union in it) of people trying to rule the world with the black helicopters and they're going to create a one-world socialist government. We're all socialists here and we know that such a thing does not exist.

Now you mention about CFR. 1. Lately the Ron Paul freaks have been pushing the whole CFR topic. I wouldn't be shocked if you were one of them (not saying that you are). 2. Unlike the NWO claim, WE HAVE PROOF THAT CFR exists. Shit, they got an official website:

Notice how we have proof for CFR but not for this "NWO".

Most of the U.S. can't stand the 9/11 movement right now. Remember a few months ago when those 9/11 truthers heckled Bill Maher on his show?? No one was cheering for those people. In fact, they made complete asses of themselves there. When the security was kicking them out, one of the truthers yelled "stop tasering him" when in fact there was no tasering anywhere and people started laughing about it (including Bill).

Also why do the 9/11 truthers heckle left figures from all parts of the left spectrum???? They bother Amy Goodman all the time (who is progressive left). They bothered Bill Maher (who is very little left but he is as left as you get in U.S. television). They bothered Michael Moore (a social democrat, very left for U.S. politics). They ALWAYS bash Noam Chomsky (a real revolutionary leftist of left marxist and anarchist tradition). Why do they attack these left figures???? The left figures I mentioned have actually tried to help people by pushing things like free healthcare for people in the U.S. and what do these truthers do in those events???? They start yelling "talk about building 7" or some shit that has nothing to do with the event. Why don't these same people yell "give people free healthcare!!" or "feed the homeless!!" or something to that extent????

I'll take a good question posed by Noam Chomsky about this movement, "WHAT'S THEIR ALTERNATIVE?" Tell me, what's their alternative????

bootleg42

10th April 2008, 19:31

Well their leadership sure is from the far-right. I'm not saying that all of it is from the far-right but the far-right have been using it as a tool. Again explain why they alway bother those left figures I mentioned the most??

Also answer this question that Chomsky pointed out, "what's their alternative?".

nanovapor

10th April 2008, 19:35

nanovapor

10th April 2008, 19:38

and CNN, FOX and the official US government 9-11 comission panel is revolutionary-maxist? So we should trust them because they are marxists? wow if that was the case, i think I'll start to watch socialist-CNN and the socialist-FOX news channel from now on. I think that Bush is wearing a marxist tshirt too.

By the way i told you that the 9-11 movement is not a political movement, it is not leftist, nor rightists, nor religious movement, there are all sorts of people in there, leftists, rightists, anarchists, non-political people, etc.

nanovapor

Well their leadership sure is from the far-right. I'm not saying that all of it is from the far-right but the far-right have been using it as a tool. Again explain why they alway bother those left figures I mentioned the most??

Also answer this question that Chomsky pointed out, "what's their alternative?".

bootleg42

10th April 2008, 20:20

The thing is that lots of US elitist social-democrat leftists like Amy Gooman, Paul Krugman, Naomi Wolf, Naomi Klein, Norman Solomon, commondreams, counterpunch, work for foundations funded by US government and elites, like the Ford Foundation. etc. even though they are leftists, they work for NY times, US newspapers, etc. so they cannot expose 9-11, because they fear for their lives.

Yeah so CNN, Fox, National Geographic and other mainstream channels also fear for their lives too right??? Because they've given the 9/11 truth movement a TON of air time to talk about their theories. National Geographic made a documentary about them (over an hour long) and gave them plenty of media time to spread their theories.

If those social-democrats fear for their lives, we need more proof than just you believing it. That fact that other mediums has given the truth movement more than enough air time disproves this fact. Also Amy Goodman had the makers of Loose Change (the documentary about 9/11 conspiracy) on her show and she gave them a ton of air time. This makes no sense.

Other "leftists" like Bob Avakian follow a Lacanian, Hegelian world view, and when they judge things, they generalize too much, which blocks any scientific truths.

Avakian is dogmatic. This we can agree on.

But i know lots of leftists who believe that 9-11 was an inside job like Michael Parenti for example, and many others.

Parenti is not a part of the 9/11 truth movement is he????

Alexander Cockburn from counterpunch website is so crazy, that he said that JFK was not killed by CIA, but by a "nut" haha, he is so Hegelian

Who cares who killed JFK??? As Malcolm said, it's like "chickens coming home to roost".

RedHal

11th April 2008, 02:00

What about professor David Ray Griffen, he's a big researcher in the 9/11 conspiracy, but from what I've heard of his talks, he's not about NWO but American imperialist aims behind 9/11.

redSHARP

11th April 2008, 06:19

i believe that the governement, just like pearl harbor, knew certain intelligence info, but did not connect the dots. Hlowever, the neo-cons are sure as fuck using this to their advantage!

RedAnarchist

11th April 2008, 06:36

the American authroities pretty much had everything to do with 9/11 apart from actually commiting the attacks. They were the ones who started and funded Al Qaeda. However, I don't think they fully kenw about the attacks before they took place, adn afterwards exploited them for their own interests.

non-vio-resist

11th April 2008, 14:24

the American authroities pretty much had everything to do with 9/11 apart from actually commiting the attacks.
i agree. as long as we're terrorizing people abroad there will be severe blowback; this is just as bad as 9/11 being an inside job. the u.s. absolutely gave rise to al qaida and gave it it's back-bone. terrorism abroad has increased seven-fold since the so-called war on terror. so, whether it was, per se, an inside job or not is irrelevant. imo, it wasn't an inside job but what the ruling elite have done is equally as negligent.

nanovapor

11th April 2008, 16:36

bootleg42

11th April 2008, 19:18

You are actually telling me that CNN, FOX and NG are trustable TV networks? I mean i don't even care to watch CNN, FOX and National Geographic. I think that most of what they say is lies, about 99% of their news, documentaries and programs are in favor of big interests

nanovapor

Yeah so CNN, Fox, National Geographic and other mainstream channels also fear for their lives too right???

You didn't understand what I wrote. Plus you did not quote the next few sentences I said so I'll do it:

Yeah so CNN, Fox, National Geographic and other mainstream channels also fear for their lives too right??? Because they've given the 9/11 truth movement a TON of air time to talk about their theories. National Geographic made a documentary about them (over an hour long) and gave them plenty of media time to spread their theories.

What I was basically saying was that it makes no sense when you said that some other more progessive journalists "fear for their lives" on the whole 9/11 thing, because they work for corporate media. Then why would the mainstream channels give a lot of airtime to the 9/11 movement and they NEVER give any airtime to revolutionary left voices like Noam Chomsky or Michael Parenti??? Also I stated that Amy Goodman had the makers of loose change on her show before many times. I don't see where this whole "they fear for their lives" thing comes from.

So when you originally said that the social democrats don't talk about it because they work for corporate media (according to you) and they fear for their lives, it makes no sense. Fox, National Geographic, MSNBC, etc all work for the corporate media but they give the 9/11 truth movement a ton of airtime.

Mod-ist

11th April 2008, 19:28

9/11 was set up by the us government, and there is indefinate proof to support this claim, such as, how come there was a building in spain that burnt for 24 hours but didnt fall down, and that had a wooden frame, whereas the WTC has a reinforced steel frame and fell down with a fire burning for just over an hour. it makes no sense whatsoever. loose change is an excellent source for people who want answers.

bootleg42

11th April 2008, 21:39

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76eSchi4heU

part 1^^^

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_EgR9G3Ov0&feature=related

part 2^^^

Noam Chomsky basically rapes the truthers here. Try answering those questions.

nanovapor

11th April 2008, 22:17

THE 40 TOP REASONS TO DOUBT THE OFFICIAL 9-11 ARGUMENT:

1) AWOL Chain of Command
a. It is well documented that the officials topping the chain of command for response to a domestic attack - George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Myers, Montague Winfield - all found reason to do something else during the actual attacks, other than assuming their duties as decision-makers.
b. Who was actually in charge? Dick Cheney, Richard Clarke, Norman Mineta and the 9/11 Commission directly conflict in their accounts of top-level response to the unfolding events, such that several (or all) of them must be lying.
2) Air Defense Failures
a. The US air defense system failed to follow standard procedures for responding to diverted passenger flights.
b. Timelines: The various responsible agencies - NORAD, FAA, Pentagon, USAF, as well as the 9/11 Commission - gave radically different explanations for the failure (in some cases upheld for years), such that several officials must have lied; but none were held accountable.
c. Was there an air defense standdown?
3) Pentagon Strike
How was it possible the Pentagon was hit 1 hour and 20 minutes after the attacks began? Why was there no response from Andrews Air Force Base, just 10 miles away and home to Air National Guard units charged with defending the skies above the nation''s capital? How did Hani Hanjour, a man who failed as a Cessna pilot on his first flight in a Boeing, execute a difficult aerobatic maneuver to strike the Pentagon? Why did the attack strike the just-renovated side, which was largely empty and opposite from the high command?

4) Wargames
a. US military and other authorities planned or actually rehearsed defensive response to all elements of the 9/11 scenario during the year prior to the attack - including multiple hijackings, suicide crashbombings, and a strike on the Pentagon.
b. The multiple military wargames planned long in advance and held on the morning of September 11th included scenarios of a domestic air crisis, a plane crashing into a government building, and a large-scale emergency in New York. If this was only an incredible series of coincidences, why did the official investigations avoid the issue? There is evidence that the wargames created confusion as to whether the unfolding events were "real world or exercise." Did wargames serve as the cover for air defense sabotage, and/or the execution of an "inside job"?

5) Flight 93
Did the Shanksville crash occur at 10:06 (according to a seismic report) or 10:03 (according to the 9/11 Commission)? Does the Commission wish to hide what happened in the last three minutes of the flight, and if so, why? Was Flight 93 shot down, as indicated by the scattering of debris over a trail of several miles?

THE DAY - POSSIBLE SMOKING GUNS
6) Did cell phones work at 30,000 feet in 2001? How many hijackings were attempted? How many flights were diverted?
7) Demolition Hypothesis
What caused the collapse of a third skyscraper, WTC 7, which was not hit by a plane? Were the Twin Towers and WTC 7 brought down by explosives? (See "The Case for Demolitions (http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050827011535140)," the websites wtc7.net (http://wtc7.net/) and 911research.wtc7.net (http://911research.wtc7.net/), and the influential article by physicist Steven Jones (http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collap se_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade_Center.pdf). See also items no. 16 and 24, below.)

FOREKNOWLEDGE & THE ALLEGED HIJACKERS

8) What did officials know? How did they know it?
a. Multiple allied foreign agencies informed the US government of a coming attack in detail, including the manner and likely targets of the attack, the name of the operation (the "Big Wedding"), and the names of certain men later identified as being among the perpetrators.
b. Various individuals came into possession of specific advance knowledge, and some of them tried to warn the US prior to September 11th.
c. Certain prominent persons received warnings not to fly on the week or on the day of September 11th.

9) Able Danger, Plus - Surveillance of Alleged Hijackers
a. The men identified as the 9/11 ringleaders were under surveillance for years beforehand, on the suspicion they were terrorists, by a variety of US and allied authorities - including the CIA, the US military''s "Able Danger" program, the German authorities, Israeli intelligence and others.
b. Two of the alleged ringleaders who were known to be under surveillance by the CIA also lived with an FBI asset in San Diego, but this is supposed to be yet another a coincidence.
10) Obstruction of FBI Investigations prior to 9/11
A group of FBI officials in New York systematically suppressed field investigations of potential terrorists that might have uncovered the alleged hijackers - as the Moussaoui case once again showed. The stories of Sibel Edmonds, Robert Wright, Coleen Rowley and Harry Samit, the "Phoenix Memo," David Schippers, the 199i orders restricting investigations, the Bush administration''s order to back off the Bin Ladin family, the reaction to the "Bojinka" plot, and John O''Neil do not, when considered in sum, indicate mere incompetence, but high-level corruption and protection of criminal networks, including the network of the alleged 9/11 conspirators. (Nearly all of these examples were omitted from or relegated to fleeting footnotes in The 9/11 Commission Report.)

11) Insider Trading
a. Unknown speculators allegedly used foreknowledge of the Sept. 11th events to profiteer on many markets internationally - including but not limited to "put options" placed to short-sell the two airlines, WTC tenants, and WTC re-insurance companies in Chicago and London.
b. In addition, suspicious monetary transactions worth hundreds of millions were conducted through offices at the Twin Towers during the actual attacks.
c. Initial reports on these trades were suppressed and forgotten, and only years later did the 9/11 Commission and SEC provide a partial, but untenable explanation for only a small number of transactions (covering only the airline put options through the Chicago Board of Exchange).

12) Who were the perpetrators?
a. Much of the evidence establishing who did the crime is dubious and miraculous: bags full of incriminating material that happened to miss the flight or were left in a van; the "magic passport" of an alleged hijacker, found at Ground Zero; documents found at motels where the alleged perpetrators had stayed days and weeks before 9/11.
b. The identities of the alleged hijackers remain unresolved, there are contradictions in official accounts of their actions and travels, and there is evidence several of them had "doubles," all of which is omitted from official investigations.
c. What happened to initial claims by the government that 50 people involved in the attacks had been identified, including the 19 alleged hijackers, with 10 still at large (suggesting that 20 had been apprehended)? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-worldtrade-50suspects,0,1825231.story

THE 9/11 COVER-UP, 2001-2006
13) Who Is Osama Bin Ladin?
a. Who judges which of the many conflicting and dubious statements and videos attributed to Osama Bin Ladin are genuine, and which are fake? The most important Osama Bin Ladin video (Nov. 2001), in which he supposedly confesses to masterminding 9/11, appears to be a fake. In any event, the State Department''s translation of it is fraudulent.
b. Did Osama Bin Ladin visit Dubai and meet a CIA agent in July 2001 (Le Figaro)? Was he receiving dyalisis in a Pakistani military hospital on the night of September 10, 2001 (CBS)?
c. Whether by Bush or Clinton: Why is Osama always allowed to escape?
d. The terror network associated with Osama, known as the "data base" (al-Qaeda), originated in the CIA-sponsored 1980s anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan. When did this network stop serving as an asset to covert operations by US intelligence and allied agencies? What were its operatives doing in Kosovo, Bosnia and Chechnya in the years prior to 9/11?

14) All the Signs of a Systematic 9/11 Cover-up
a. Airplane black boxes were found at Ground Zero, according to two first responders and an unnamed NTSB official, but they were "disappeared" and their existence is denied in The 9/11 Commission Report.
b. US officials consistently suppressed and destroyed evidence (like the tapes recorded by air traffic controllers who handled the New York flights).
c. Whistleblowers (like Sibel Edmonds and Anthony Shaffer) were intimidated, gagged and sanctioned, sending a clear signal to others who might be thinking about speaking out.
d. Officials who "failed" (like Myers and Eberhard, as well as Frasca, Maltbie and Bowman of the FBI) were given promotions.

15) Poisoning New York
The White House deliberately pressured the EPA into giving false public assurances that the toxic air at Ground Zero was safe to breathe. This knowingly contributed to an as-yet unknown number of health cases and fatalities, and demonstrates that the administration does consider the lives of American citizens to be expendable on behalf of certain interests.
16) Disposing of the Crime Scene
The rapid and illegal scrapping of the WTC ruins at Ground Zero disposed of almost all of the structural steel indispensable to any investigation of the collapse mechanics. (See also item no. 23, below.)
17) Anthrax
Mailings of weapons-grade anthrax - which caused a practical suspension of the 9/11 investigations - were traced back to US military stock. Soon after the attacks began in October 2001, the FBI approved the destruction of the original samples of the Ames strain, disposing of perhaps the most important evidence in identifying the source of the pathogens used in the mailings. Were the anthrax attacks timed to coincide with the Afghanistan invasion? Why were the letters sent only to media figures and to the leaders of the opposition in the Senate (who had just raised objections to the USA PATRIOT Act)?
18) The Stonewall
a. Colin Powell promised a "white paper" from the State Department to establish the authorship of the attacks by al-Qaeda. This was never forthcoming, and was instead replaced by a paper from Tony Blair, which presented only circumstantial evidence, with very few points actually relating to September 11th.
b. Bush and Cheney pressured the (freshly-anthraxed) leadership of the Congressional opposition into delaying the 9/11 investigation for months. The administration fought against the creation of an independent investigation for more than a year.
c. The White House thereupon attempted to appoint Henry Kissinger as the chief investigator, and acted to underfund and obstruct the 9/11 Commission.

19) A Record of Official Lies
a. "No one could have imagined planes into buildings" - a transparent falsehood upheld repeatedly by Rice, Rumsfeld and Bush.
b. "Iraq was connected to 9/11" - The most "outrageous conspiracy theory" of all, with the most disastrous impact.
20) Pakistani Connection - Congressional Connection
a. The Pakistani intelligence agency ISI, creator of the Taliban and close ally to both the CIA and "al-Qaeda," allegedly wired $100,000 to Mohamed Atta just prior to September 11th, reportedly through the ISI asset Omar Saeed Sheikh (later arrested for the killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who was investigating ISI connections to "al-Qaeda.")
b. This was ignored by the congressional 9/11 investigation, although the senator and congressman who ran the probe (Bob Graham and Porter Goss) were meeting with the ISI chief, Mahmud Ahmed, on Capitol Hill on the morning of September 11th.
c. About 25 percent of the report of the Congressional Joint Inquiry was redacted, including long passages regarding how the attack (or the network allegedly behind it) was financed. Graham later said foreign allies were involved in financing the alleged terror network, but that this would only come out in 30 years.
21) Unanswered Questions and the "Final Fraud" of the 9/11 Commission:
a. The September 11th families who fought for and gained an independent investigation (the 9/11 Commission) posed 400-plus questions, which the 9/11 Commission adopted as its roadmap. The vast majority of these questions were completely ignored in the Commission hearings and the final report.
b. The membership and staff of the 9/11 Commission displayed awesome conflicts of interest. The families called for the resignation of Executive Director Philip Zelikow, a Bush administration member and close associate of "star witness" Condoleezza Rice, and were snubbed. Commission member Max Cleland resigned, condemning the entire exercise as a "scam" and "whitewash."
c.The 9/11 Commission Report is notable mainly for its obvious omissions, distortions and outright falsehoods - ignoring anything incompatible with the official story, banishing the issues to footnotes, and even dismissing the still-unresolved question of who financed 9/11 as being "of little practical significance."

22) Crown Witnesses Held at Undisclosed Locations
The alleged masterminds of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohamed (KSM) and Ramzi Binalshibh, are reported to have been captured in 2002 and 2003, although one Pakistani newspaper said KSM was killed in an attempted capture. They have been held at undisclosed locations and their supposed testimonies, as provided in transcript form by the government, form much of the basis for The 9/11 Commission Report (although the Commission''s request to see them in person was denied). After holding them for years, why doesn''t the government produce these men and put them to trial?

23) Spitzer Redux
a. Eliot Spitzer, attorney general of New York State, snubbed pleas by New York citizens to open 9/11 as a criminal case (Justicefor911.org (http://justicefor911.org/)).
b. Spitzer also refused to allow his employee, former 9/11 Commission staff member Dietrich Snell, to testify to the Congress about his (Snell''s) role in keeping "Able Danger" entirely out of The 9/11 Commission Report.
24) NIST Omissions
After the destruction of the WTC structural steel, the official Twin Towers collapse investigation was left with almost no forensic evidence, and thus could only provide dubious computer models of ultimately unprovable hypotheses. It failed to even test for the possibility of explosives. (Why not clear this up?)

25) Radio Silence
The 9/11 Commission and NIST both allowed the continuing cover-up of how Motorola''s faulty radios, purchased by the Giuliani administration, caused firefighter deaths at the WTC - once again showing the expendability, even of the first responders.
26) The Legal Catch-22
a. Hush Money - Accepting victims'' compensation barred September 11th families from pursuing discovery through litigation.
b. Judge Hallerstein - Those who refused compensation to pursue litigation and discovery had their cases consolidated under the same judge (and as a rule dismissed).

27) Saudi Connections
a. The 9/11 investigations made light of the "Bin Ladin Airlift" during the no-fly period, and ignored the long-standing Bush family business ties to the Bin Ladin family fortune. (A company in which both families held interests, the Carlyle Group, was holding its annual meeting on September 11th, with George Bush Sr., James Baker, and two brothers of Osama Bin Ladin in attendance.)
b. The issue of Ptech.
28) Media Blackout of Prominent Doubters
The official story has been questioned and many of the above points were raised by members of the US Congress, retired high-ranking officers of the US military, the three leading third-party candidates for President in the 2004 election, a member of the 9/11 Commission who resigned in protest, a former high-ranking adviser to the George W. Bush administration, former ministers to the German, British and Canadian governments, the commander-in-chief of the Russian air force, 100 luminaries who signed the "9/11 Truth Statement," and the presidents of Iran and Venezuela. Not all of these people agree fully with each other, but all would normally be considered newsworthy. Why has the corporate-owned US mass media remained silent about these statements, granting due coverage only to the comments of actor Charlie Sheen?

GEOPOLITICS, TIMING AND POSSIBLE MOTIVES
29) "The Great Game"
The Afghanistan invasion was ready for Bush''s go-ahead on September 9, 2001, with US and UK force deployments to the region already in place or underway. This followed the failure earlier that year of backdoor diplomacy with the Taliban (including payments of $125 million in US government aid to Afghanistan), in an attempt to secure a unity government for that country as a prerequisite to a Central Asian pipeline deal.
30) The Need for a "New Pearl Harbor"
Principals in US foreign policy under the current Bush administration (including Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and others) have been instrumental in developing long-running plans for worldwide military hegemony, including an invasion of the Middle East, dating back to the Ford, Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations. They reiterated these plans in the late 1990s as members of the "Project for a New American Century," and stated a clear intent to invade Iraq for the purpose of "regime change." After 9/11, they lost no time in their attempt to tie Iraq to the attacks.
31) Perpetual "War on Terror"
9/11 is supposed to provide carte-blanche for an open-ended, global and perpetual "War on Terror," against any enemy, foreign or domestic, that the executive branch chooses to designate, and regardless of whether evidence exists to actually connect these enemies to 9/11.
32) Attacking the Constitution
a. The USA PATRIOT Act was written before 9/11, Homeland Security and the "Shadow Government" were developed long before 9/11, and plans for rounding up dissidents as a means for suppressing civil disturbance have been in the works for decades.
b. 9/11 was used as the pretext to create a new, extra-constitutional executive authority to declare anyone an "enemy combatant" (including American citizens), to detain persons indefinitely without habeas corpus, and to "render" such persons to secret prisons where torture is practiced.
33) Legal Trillions
9/11 triggers a predictable shift of public spending to war, and boosts public and private spending in the "new" New Economy of "Homeland Security," biometrics, universal surveillance, prisons, civil defense, secured enclaves, security, etc.

34) Plundered Trillions?
On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld announced a "war on waste" after an internal audit found that the Pentagon was "missing" 2.3 trillion dollars in unaccounted assets. On September 11th, this was as good as forgotten.
35) Did 9/11 prevent a stock market crash?
Did anyone benefit from the destruction of the Securities and Exchange Commission offices at WTC 7, and the resultant crippling of hundreds of fraud investigations?
36) Resource Wars
a. What was discussed in the Energy Task Force meetings under Dick Cheney in 2001? Why is the documentation of these meetings still being suppressed?
b. Is Peak Oil a motive for 9/11 as inside job?
37) The "Little Game"
Why was the WTC privatized just before its destruction?

HISTORY
38) "Al-CIA-da?"
The longstanding relationship between US intelligence networks and radical Islamists, including the network surrounding Osama Bin Ladin. (See also point 13d.)

39) Historical Precedents for "Synthetic Terror"
a. In the past many states, including the US government, have sponsored attacks on their own people, fabricated the "cause for war," created (and armed) their own enemies of convenience, and sacrificed their own citizens for "reasons of state."
b. Was 9/11 an update of the Pentagon-approved "Project Northwoods" plan for conducting self-inflicted, false-flag terror attacks in the United States, and blaming them on a foreign enemy?

40) Secret Government
a. The record of criminality and sponsorship of coups around the world by the covert networks based within the US intelligence complex.
b. Specifically also: The evidence of crime by Bush administration principals and their associates, from October Surprise to Iran-Contra and the S&L plunder to PNAC, Enron/Halliburton and beyond.

REASON NUMBER 41:
RELATED MOVEMENTS AND PARALLEL ISSUES
Ground Zero aftermath movements:
- Justice for the air-poisoning cover-up (wtceo.org (http://wtceo.org/))
- "Radio Silence" (radiosilencefdny.com (http://radiosilencefdny.com/))
- Skyscraper Safety (www.skyscrapersafety.org (http://www.skyscrapersafety.org/)).
Election fraud and black box voting, 2000 to 2004. (BlackBoxVoting.org (http://blackboxvoting.org/))
Lies to justify the invasion of Iraq. (afterdowningstreet.org (http://afterdowningstreet.org/))
Use of depleted uranium and its multi-generational consequences on human health and the environment.
Longstanding development of contingency plans for civil disturbance and military rule in the USA (See, "The War at Home" (http://911truth.org/osamas/morales.html))
Oklahoma City Truth movement. (okctruth.com (http://okctruth.com/))
Whether you call it "Globalization" or "The New World Order" - An unsustainable system of permanent growth ultimately requires warfare, fraud, and mass manipulation.