Cheney contradicts Osama's 9/11 involvement

[Geggy]

This is coming from the White House's own site...

11:45 A.M. EST

Q Welcome back. Joining me now the Vice President of the United States, Dick Cheney. Mr. Vice President, thanks for joining us.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Hello, Tony. It's good to talk to you.

Q So the Democrats now have a plan. They call it Real Security: The Democratic Plan to Protect America and Restore Our Leadership in the World. As far as I can tell, there is nothing in here that actually talks about attacking the bad guys. But let's talk about some of the things that at least have been mentioned in recent days and weeks by Democrats -- number one, the idea of strategic withdrawal from Iraq in order to "strengthen our position in the region."

My question to you is, is there any difference in your mind between strategic withdrawal and retreat?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: No, and, frankly, that would be exactly what Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda types have been predicting and betting on all along -- it's the idea that if they kill enough Americans, they can force us to change our policy. It would be a strategic retreat. It makes no sense at all to turn Iraq over to the terrorists. We can succeed in Iraq. We can complete the mission. We are making progress day by day. It's tough, hard work, but it's very important that we prevail there, just as we're prevailing in Afghanistan.

Q You mentioned bin Laden who likes to talk about strong horse versus weak horse. He has predicted that the United States would become a weak horse. Are you saying that the Democrats, rather than as they have promised to do, to capture bin Laden, that they'd be giving in to him instead?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I don't think there's any question about that if you were to withdraw from Iraq. The al Qaeda presence there is significant. Mr. Zarqawi, the top terrorist in Iraq, is the head of al Qaeda in Iraq. He's pledged loyalty to Osama bin Laden; that if we were to withdraw from Iraq, I think the danger would be, obviously, that you'd turn the country over to the worst possible elements, and it would become a safe haven for terrorists. It makes no sense at all, and it's totally unnecessary.

Q I've talked to a number of people who have been in Iraq. The same stories keep coming back, which is that Iraqis increasingly are taking responsibility for military and police actions. Do you think it's conceivable or even likely that by the end of this year, there will be fewer American troops on the ground in Iraq?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that's a possibility, but we've been very firm, Tony, in refusing to put a timetable on it. We talk about it in terms of conditions on the ground. Obviously, there are a number of things happening that should result in that kind of outcome down the road. One is the progress that's being made on the political front as the Iraqis put together a government under their new constitution, and they're working on that very hard, day in and day out; and the other is the progress that's being made training Iraqi security forces and getting them into the fight.

They're now taking more and more responsibility for their own security. And those two developments are key ultimately to our being able to turn the situation over to them.

Q Today's release by Democrats contains a lot of second-guessing about what led up to the war and the early execution of it, including the notion that it was based on faulty security. Recently a number of documents that had been retrieved from Iraq have been translated, and what we're starting to get is a picture of Saddam Hussein actively involved in training terrorists, and even talking about weapons of mass destruction. Is it possible that we actually underestimated Saddam's involvement in the international terror network?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, some of us didn't. I think there are -- there's been a debate, obviously, and we've got a lot of folks who don't believe that there was any kind of a relationship there between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. I think the record is abundantly clear that Saddam Hussein was, in fact, a prime sponsor of terror. This is the guy who was making $25,000 payments to the families of suicide bombers. This is the guy who provided a safe haven for Abu Nidal. The track record there is very clear.

George Tenet, Director of the CIA, went before the Senate Intel Committee at one point and said there was a relationship between Iraq and the al Qaeda that went back to the early '90s. So I think what we'll find as we get a chance to go through and analyze these documents -- there's some 50,000 boxes of them that are now being made available here over the next few months -- that we'll see a pretty complete picture that Saddam Hussein did, in fact, deal with some pretty nefarious characters out there. And he was legitimately labeled by our State Department as a state sponsor of terror.

Q Including Osama bin Laden?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes, we don't know the full scale of it there yet, and I don't want to make a hard and fast prediction here. But there is reporting, obviously, that we've seen over the years that there was some kind of a relationship there between the Iraqis and Osama bin Laden.

Q I want to be clear because I've heard you say this, and I've heard the President say it, but I want you to say it for my listeners, which is that the White House has never argued that Saddam was directly involved in September 11th, correct?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: That's correct. We had one report early on from another intelligence service that suggested that the lead hijacker, Mohamed Atta, had met with Iraqi intelligence officials in Prague, Czechoslovakia. And that reporting waxed and waned where the degree of confidence in it, and so forth, has been pretty well knocked down now at this stage, that that meeting ever took place. So we've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden [sic] was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming. But there -- that's a separate proposition from the question of whether or not there was some kind of a relationship between the Iraqi government, Iraqi intelligence services and the al Qaeda organization.

Interview continued here...
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060329-2.html

Can anyone explain to me what the FUCK is going on here?

[KevinTheOmnivore]

http://www.rumormillnews.com/pix3/pic86243.jpg

[Abcdxxxx]

Geggy Duke and the Vindicated has a nice ring to it.

[ziggytrix]

dammit man, you got me interested over nothing. read the rest of the transcript:

Q Okay. A couple of things, I think a couple of minutes ago -- I want to make sure -- you said Osama bin Laden wasn't involved in 9/11 planning. You meant Saddam Hussein, correct? That Saddam Hussein was not involved in September 11th?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Correct. Yes, sir.

Q Okay.

THE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Thanks for straightening that out. I didn't realize I'd done that. (Laughter.)

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Can anyone explain to me what the FUCK is going on here?

Yeah, you're mentally ill.

[ranxer]

was it an honest mistake or a slip because of the lies they've been telling all along? The coverup of 9/11 makes me doubt everything the administration says about it. i can't say i Know what the truth is, but the doubts have at least some credibility..

the tape that came out after 9/11 of Osama confessing to being behind the attacks looks like a fake. The inconsistancies are clear if you look into it.. http://www.welfarestate.com/wtc/faketape/

then later we hear that he denied being involved in the attacks http://www.welfarestate.com/wtc/faketape/

why would osama lie about his involvement with the attacks if he's already wanted for terrorist crimes many times over?

[ItalianStereotype]

oh shit...oh shit. geggy AND ranxer.

a perfect storm. a perfect storm of bat shit crazy.

[ziggytrix]

I dunno. I think the person who sure their government isn't lying to them is crazier than the one who is sure they are. :/

[ItalianStereotype]

right, because that's exactly what I said.

[Immortal Goat]

As soon as I read the carefully edited version from Geggy, I said to myself "Well, to be fair, Cheney has a habit of mis-speaking. Maybe he MEANT Saddam", and lo and behold, I turned out to be right.

Geggy, it's alright if you don't like the president or this administration. I don't either. But every mis-spoken word doesn't automatically point to conspiricy. Hell, I sometimes when I mean to call my brother, I'll call my dog instead. People do it.

[Abcdxxxx]

http://www.dogsforpeace.com/graphics/Geggy_Tah-Gina-Blue.jpg

[ziggytrix]

right, because that's exactly what I said.

Did I say you did? I mean, you can be up this admin's butt about plenty of things, but stand you up next to the Vinces of the country and you hardly seem nuts at all to me.

I stand by my remark.

[Ant10708]

Italian do you like Blaze ya Dead Homie?

[kahljorn]

"why would osama lie about his involvement with the attacks if he's already wanted for terrorist crimes many times over?"

Because he sees the American's distrust for their leaders and wants to play on it? I'm not saying that's the truth, but you're asking for a reason and that seems like a pretty good one. Who's to say him saying he didn't do it is the fake thing?

I still don't get why the government would make a tape so obviously fake the fuckwits on this board could crack the mystery. Maybe so people will go, "That's too obvious to be true!"

[ItalianStereotype]

I don't know what Blaze Ya Dead Homie is :<

[Geggy]

Come on, guys. Yeah, I hate George Bush but let's be human here.

If the real perperators of the 9/11 tries to point blame on others in order to divert attention away from themselves, its most likely y'all bought into the lies. Wouldn't you want to the real perpetrators of the attacks be held accountable?

Ziggy, ever heard of cognitive association?

And Kevin, quit stalking me. :)

[Geggy]

was it an honest mistake or a slip because of the lies they've been telling all along? The coverup of 9/11 makes me doubt everything the administration says about it. i can't say i Know what the truth is, but the doubts have at least some credibility..

the tape that came out after 9/11 of Osama confessing to being behind the attacks looks like a fake. The inconsistancies are clear if you look into it.. http://www.welfarestate.com/wtc/faketape/

then later we hear that he denied being involved in the attacks http://www.welfarestate.com/wtc/faketape/

why would osama lie about his involvement with the attacks if he's already wanted for terrorist crimes many times over?

You got it mixed up. Osama publicly denied he had any knowledge of the plot BEFORE the fake Osama video came out.

[Immortal Goat]

Listen, I'm not denying that our own government may have had a hand in 9/11, but this was a slip of the tounge. And yes, I know about cognitive association, but like I said, I'll call my dog sometimes when I want to get my brother, and I've known him for 17 years. Like I said, it happens.

[Geggy]

:lol

I see what you're saying but cognitive association is more common in pathological liars. I'm not saying youre a liar. It happens more often with liars. Lying is a science and Cheney has to keep up with the layers of every lies and memorize every details of the lies he's spewed forth in the past god knows how long. Lying can also be very stressful, its no wonder Cheney takes 20 meds a day and drinks a lot to loosen up his stiff neck.

Once I've become a skeptic, I became commited to spreading the governments fables and the anamolies surrounding 9/11. Its called being an activist and I've become a part of the movement to spread the light. Its easy to get away with the murder of JFK because only one (or two) american was killed in the ordeal and i'm pretty sure a large group took part in it. PLus they didn't have an internet back then. But nearly 3000 civilians were killed in 9/11 and the attack itself nearly touched every heart of americans. I feel it's my job to contribute and keep people inform by using the internet as the tool. Once Ii've educated them what I know, they can pay it forward to the next group, hence transforming the movement into a larger group which will scare the shit out of the current administration. just like what you saw in the ending of V for Vendetta.

Think about how many people have been killed since Bush took power. Three more years of this, of feeling unsafe? Forget it. I believe 9/11 was more of an psychological operation than a terror attack. Although its still a terror attack, regardless of whoever orcestrated the event. The purpose of the PSYOP is to generate public surport for war in the middle east so the neocons meet their deranged agenda. One of the best ways is to put a halt to their destructive agenda is to expose the Bush Administration's involvement of 9/11 whether they orchestrated or allowed it to happen. If a person calls me mentally unstable because I have my doubts about 9/11 and try to use it as a tool to overthrow the neocons, then thats just fucking bizarre.

[ranxer]

thanks for the correction geggy.. i guess i was speaking of when i heard the news.. not always in correct chronological order.

kahljorn said "I still don't get why the government would make a tape so obviously fake the fuckwits on this board could crack the mystery. Maybe so people will go, "That's too obvious to be true!"

it's mystifying, but results in lots of credibility for the incompetence theory explaining 9/11, i run into it all the time, people tell me 'george is a bafoon, what makes you think these idiots who skrewed up Iraq, New Orleans response etc. could carry out a demolition of the trade towers? hah, got me.. i can't argue with that very well.

another really strange one is why would they publish names of the hijackers when several of them were alive and well, then months later republish the names in the commission report?! oh my god, they must think the sheeple are even more incompetent than they are. the list of bizaare 'facts' submitted around 9/11 goes on and on.

[Abcdxxxx]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5d/Daisyviolet.jpg

[El Blanco]

Hey, Kev, can you run an IP check on Geggy and ranx?

[Abcdxxxx]

It's cute how they finish each others sentences.

[ranxer]

more people share the 9/11 doubts than you give credit to.

we will multiply or i'll move to canada, um, deadline being around 2008 maybe, unless i'm put in prison for attending the april 29 antiwar rally in ny, i'll have a different perspective from that i wrecken.

[Abcdxxxx]

THIS IS WHAT CONSPIRACISTS LOOK LIKE! THIS IS WHAT CONSPIRATISTS SOUND LIKE!

[El Blanco]

more people share the 9/11 doubts than you give credit to.

And? Since when is reality a democratic process? It either is there or it ain't. We don't vote on it. A billion people can tell me the world is flat, but I can see for a fact it isn't.

So, either come with actual facts instead of shaddowy aspersions and grainy video that doesn't show a damned thing, or quit wasting my time.

we will multiply

Hey, if its one thing stupid people do really well, its breed.

or i'll move to canada, um, deadline being around 2008 maybe, unless i'm put in prison for attending the april 29 antiwar rally in ny, i'll have a different perspective from that i wrecken.

Damn, the internet just makes everyone's balls 10x bigger. It must be great to write a check you'll never have to cash.

How many people here alone have claimed they are skipping to Canada or some other country? How many have gone through with it?


And you've already given yourself a backdoor out. Pussy.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

I think they're two distinct people.

Scary.

[El Blanco]

Ya, the style is different enough, I've just seen like that shit before.

[Immortal Goat]

Geggy, I think it's adorable that you're so stout-hearted, but come on. "The things that I KNOW"? You don't KNOW shit, and no one else does, with maybe the exception of the president and vice president. There is no conclusive, inarguable proof so far. If there was, we'd have thrown out the entire administration.

Oh, and it was cute how you referenced V for Vendetta there. Great movie, but guess what? It's never going to happen. Never. No, put the mask down, it's not going to happen.


Ok, you can wear it at halloween, but not until then.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

If a person calls me mentally unstable because I have my doubts about 9/11 and try to use it as a tool to overthrow the neocons, then thats just fucking bizarre.

Get help.

[ranxer]

heh, same old smearing, ad hominem, smartass mocken group, i think we had this same discussion a few years ago.

blanco, canada is not an out, its a break from talking to some of the most mind controlled people on the planet. seriously, it's my view that if not enough people wake up to this corporate destruction of our flawed democracy then america is screwed. I may leave in the 4th wave of people or stay to pick up the pieces, but its not an out if i leave, it might be a break, a breather, a change, but there is no out.
the planet is too small for there to be an out anywhere.

So, either come with actual facts instead of shaddowy aspersions and grainy video that doesn't show a damned thing, or quit wasting my time.
I'm here after reading David Ray Griffins book "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions" www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8765.htm

and after reading Dr. Steven Jones research on the collapse of the trade towers www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

and after reading many of statements and speeches by academics for 9/11 truth www.scholarsfor911truth.org

i can't really spoon feed you the info, there's just too much of it.
If you can't read the info put forward in text and video then maybe i'm just wasting your time after all, but i can't stop trying to spread the info that i see as worth my time.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

You should be careful about what you read and hear, ranxer.

[Abcdxxxx]

I'm here after reading David Ray Griffins book "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions" www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8765.htm

and after reading Dr. Steven Jones research on the collapse of the trade towers www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html


Maybe you should start over from the beginning and try some Dr. Suess on the off chance you can still deprogram yourself.

[Geggy]

Believe me, ranxer, some of the people are never going to get it. But it is amusing to see they are refusing to take a closer look and throw insults at our faces like children. It's scary what this country has turned into.

Let me summarize about what I know by asking these questions and maybe it will push you into doing your own research....remember, these are pretty legimate questions...not conspiracy theories, BECAUSE YOU WERE THERE AND SAW THE WHOLE THING....

So tell me...

How was it possible that Osama bin Laden was named the culprit within 7 hours of the attacks when the Bush adinistration had claimed they had no prior knowledge of the operation being planned? Do you think the FBI was given enough time to gather information to support that accusation let alone Osama denying he had any knowledge of the plot?

How was it possible for the amateur pilots to fly planes off course, turn off transponders and be able to find their intended targets, let alone defeating the most technology advanced defense system in the world?

The pentagon was struck by a boeing ONE HOUR after the first attack in New York City without any scramblings of fighter jets to protect Washington DC. The incompetence theory is laughable.

Why was the collapsing of WTC7, which was not hit by a plane and fell in a free fall manner in just 7 seconds, not included the 9/11 commission report?

[Abcdxxxx]

and why did you insist on dying you hair so people would think you're the good sister?

[Geggy]

You see...this is what I'm talking about...

*pop*

[ranxer]

You should be careful about what you read and hear, ranxer.


can you be a little more specific or are you just dismissing everything i linked without looking into it? :P

[KevinTheOmnivore]

the latter, yes.

[ranxer]

you know your working for the bush admin without pay.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about you and Geggy.

You certainly work a lot harder at it than I do.

[Spectre X]

You should be careful about what you read and hear, ranxer.


can you be a little more specific or are you just dismissing everything i linked without looking into it? :P

I did look at one of those links. The second one.

Yes, the WTC was built with 47 big solid steel columns.

Yes, it was designed to withstand aeroplanes crashing into them.

BUT, they weren't designed to withstand big giant fucking Boeing 767s crashing into them near top speed. If you look at the videos, you can see that the planes nearly go right through the fucking towers. It's not hard to imagine that something with that much force would severely weaken the building's core.

Add to that a rather shoddy construction lacking any sufficient fire-proofing, and you've got a recipe for disaster.

You see, the WTC's floors were made of plates covered in concrete held up with truses. These truses were fireproofed insufficiently, and they were arranged in such a way that, though extremely strong, should only a bit of them fail, they'd fail completely. Add to that most of the existing fireproofing probably being blown away by a huge chunk of metal crashing into it at 800 or so kilometres per hour, and, well, you figure it out, corky.

They were strong, but they couldn't withstand a lot of punishment, and that's why the building collapsed.

[Geggy]

http://www.911wasalie.com/phpwebsite/images/photoalbum/5/wtc_small_1056.jpg

Are those explosive charges shooting out hundreds of feet away at high speed? Or what do you think it is?

http://www.conservationtech.com/MAIN-TOPICS/5-NYC-World-Trade/FEMA-WTC-photos/(4)%20fall(reuters).jpg

How do you explain the concrete that was pulverized into dust and small bits?

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/discussion_in_firehouse.wmv

A 5 second video clip of firefighters discussing the collapsing of WTC. Was it explosives that they heard or was it something else?

ANd look at ranxer's avatar...that is world trade center 7. It was not hit by a plane. No raging inferno. Yet it collapsed symmetrically, straight down to the foot print. Why?

Another interesting "coincidence"...Marvin Bush, W. Bush's younger brother, was the head of security of WTC at the time of the attack.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Bush

[Spectre X]

I don't know about the concrete. Maybe it was crushed because something really fucking huge fell on it?

[Geggy]

Ooh ooh...or..or..maybe...maybe it was the explosions that brought down the towers. Maybe...maybe...islamic terrorists packed the microwaves inside every break rooms in the twin towers with hot dogs and soda cans and set the timer to 30 minutes and 60 minutes.

http://www.geocities.com/iseepee57/wtc56.jpg

I have another question. How do you explain the fact that WTC buildings 5 and 6 (pictured above) which stood closer to buildings 1 and 2, has far thinner steel columns than buildings 1, 2 and 7 and suffered more damage than building 7, did not collapse after being mauled by the collapsings of south and north towers?

[ranxer]

Yes, it was designed to withstand aeroplanes crashing into them.

BUT, they weren't designed to withstand big giant fucking Boeing 767s crashing into them near top speed. If you look at the videos, you can see that the planes nearly go right through the fucking towers. It's not hard to imagine that something with that much force would severely weaken the building's core.


plausible, yes, but,
1. neither plane hit the center of the towers yet both towers fell almost straight down. i would have a lot of doubt about the demolition theories if they tipped over.
2. Then there's the rate of fall being nearly at the speed of freefall, just doesnt make sense unless there was timed demolition.
3. explosion of debris as geggy pointed out.
4. molten metal in the rubble that burned for weeks and couldn't be put out, that lends to the demolition theory and this might be one of the most critical pieces of evidence.
5. i don't know enough about the pulverization of the concrete but its existance is problematic to the bush admins theory and needs to be explained better.

none of these oddities were addressed by the commission report.

[Spectre X]

Was it later confirmed that the molten metal was steel? Because there are other metals, you know.

And I'm pretty sure that the planes hit the central columns. Maybe not head-on, but they did hit them, seeing as both planes practically went right through the towers. You can see it on all of the videos. Woooosh KABOOOOM pow.

The explosions as far as I can tell weren't that big at all, and oculd easily be attributed to stuff just buckling under pressure.

And do you know how they demolish those really big smokestacks without using explosives? They send a guy up there to knock bits of the top down into the stack. Eventually there's so much crap down in that thing that the walls just suddenly rupture and send the whole thing crashing down. The guy's tethered to a crane, of course.

The same principle applies here. Probably so much junk piled up at the weak points that they eventually just quit altogether. This happens quite suddenly, as all of the walls more or less similtaneously blow outward and desintegrate.

[ziggytrix]

How was it possible that Osama bin Laden was named the culprit within 7 hours of the attacks when the Bush adinistration had claimed they had no prior knowledge of the operation being planned?

Too easy. 7 hours is plenty of time for Al Qaeda to get the blame. I seem to recall a few other terrorist organizations tried to take credit, some just hours after the event, but that Al Qaeda was the most likely one.


How was it possible for the amateur pilots to fly planes off course, turn off transponders and be able to find their intended targets, let alone defeating the most technology advanced defense system in the world?

The pentagon was struck by a boeing ONE HOUR after the first attack in New York City without any scramblings of fighter jets to protect Washington DC. The incompetence theory is laughable.

This is probably the strangest part of 9/11 for anyone who's an amateur pilot - I don't know the exact details, cuz I'm not one, but talk to one sometime. Things did not occur that should have on that day. It could have been gross negligence, it could have been bribes or coercion. Even so, we don't know who coerced who, and likely never will. To assume it was individuals in the government is irresponsible, but one cannot completely ignore the possibility that events that might have been prevented were allowed to proceed (not unlike like the Pearl Harbor conspiracy theories) - perhaps with the thought that the outcome would not have been quite the disaster it was.

Why was the collapsing of WTC7, which was not hit by a plane and fell in a free fall manner in just 7 seconds, not included the 9/11 commission report?

That study is still under way I think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#Collapse

There's definitely plenty of material there for conspiracy theorists to seize upon, but nothing conclusive. Just lots of unaswered questions, that likely will stay unanswered for the forseeable future.

[Geggy]

Well, if you try to connect the dots of all the "coincidences" and the cover ups surrounding 9/11, as there are far too many of them, you can probably easily come to a conclusion.

Like starting with PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defense SYstem" document mentioning that, to be able to reach their goal of invading the middle east, they would need something like "catalyzing event —like a new Pearl Harbor" as a pretext.

http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf (page 51)

Rebuilding America's Defenses
In September 2000, the PNAC issued a 90-page report entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, And Resources For A New Century, proceeding "from the belief that America should seek to preserve and extend its position of global leadership by maintaining the preeminence of U.S. military forces." The report has been the subject of much analysis and criticism.

Also the war game exercises that took place on 9/11 during the attacks....

From 9/11 commission report...

116. On 9/11, NORAD was scheduled to conduct a military exercise, Vigilant Guardian, which postulated a bomber attack from the former Soviet Union. We investigated whether military preparations for the large-scale exercise compromised the military's response to the real-world terrorist attack on 9/11. According to General Eberhart, "it took about 30 seconds" to make the adjustment to the real-world situation. Ralph Eberhart testimony, June 17, 2004. We found that the response was, if anything, expedited by the increased number of staff at the sectors and at NORAD because of the scheduled exercise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_games_in_progress_on_September_11,_2001

It didnt mention that Dick Cheney was the commander of the wargame exercises on 9/11...

I have too many more "coincidences" to list but I'll try to add more when I have the time...

[Ant10708]

Geggy ignored Spectre X's evidence.


Ziggy def makes the most sense. Geggy try listening to him. Also wasn't it known that Bin Laden declared war on the U.S. and told reporters like a year or so before that he was planning to attack the U.S. big. But then again according to Geggy he is still working for the CIA maybe!

I saw a good hour special on the WTC7 building that explained why it fell. Fucking History Channel is in bed with the Bush administration.

[ziggytrix]

Ziggy def makes the most sense.

Houston, we have a problem...

[ranxer]

yea spectre, surely it was steel that was molten in the rubble, the scientists i've heard have stated that there should not be molten anything in the building unless there was an explosive like thermite that burns through metal, there are some folks still analyzing the debris that was flying out and saying that the preliminary results are that the metal was burning as it came down.. burning molten steel, a collapse doesnt fit that evidence.

anyway your and ziggys questions and points are somewhat plausible but the evidence seems conclusive to me. still, the questions yall have about it are difficult to brush aside especially with the mounds of disinformation out there. for every source i find that states what i have come to believe as facts, there are an almost equal number stating that the hijackers pulled it off by themselves.

I'm waiting on pins and needles for some new evidence from scientists and whistleblowers to come out.. I've heard that there is some steel from the structures being analyzed that should make headlines if conclusive. Dr. Steven Jones is a physicist and he says that after his analysis, there's no way that the towers fell from the planes hitting them, i read the paper, I'm convinced, but i fail to explain it to others that convincingly..

we need more physicists, engineers, demolition experts and pilots that are beyond reproach to tip the balance.

[El Blanco]

we need more physicists, engineers, demolition experts and pilots that are beyond reproach to tip the balance.

Because all the ones that provide an opposing expert opinion (http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html)from a professor at BYU are in on the scam?

[Geggy]

I'm curious how much the author is being paid to write that highly unconvincing article.

http://www.911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/experts/articles/eagar_jom/eagar_0112.html

I've read online on how buildings are brought down with explosives and watched a 2 part series of how building implosions are performed on discovery channel (coincidently it was shown after a mythbuster episode.) The pulverization of concrete, explosive charges, and the cloud of dust billowing around the wreckage are all characteristics of a controlled demolition. That's my argument and I'm sticking to it.

ANT:

I think I already disputed ziggy's claims on the reason for the NORAD standdown. They went ahead with the schedule to practice war games when they had foreknowldge of the attack that was going to take place that morning, ie. the august 6th memo showing bin Laden's plans to attack the US by hijacking planes and use it as missiles, among with other forewarnings the US has received.

As for WTC7 ziggy answered my question. Five years since the attack and still no answer as to why it collapsed. That's an obvious sign of a cover-up, just as much as it didn't get a lot of media coverage following 9/11. The building imploding of WTC7 is the only and the most plausible explanation of why it collapsed. If you think otherwise then your brain is probably decaying from smoking too much grade A herbola. Better lay off the pipe, pal.

Here is another "coincidence"...Larry Silverstein signed a 99 year, $3.2 billion lease just seven weeks prior to 9/11. Following the attacks, Silverstein was awarded an insurance payment of more than three and a half billion dollars to settle his seven-week-old insurance policy. In addition, the Silverstein group sued the insurers liable for the World Trade Center for another three and a half billion dollars, claiming that by an obscure clause in their contract, the two planes constituted two separate terrorist attacks. In total, Silverstein was awarded nearly $5 billion in insurance money following the destruction of the Twin Towers. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Silverstein)

[KevinTheOmnivore]

uh oh, Ssssssilverstein! Joo Zionist!

[Ant10708]

Our government couldn't even coverup the fact that we killed that professional football player who joined the military after 9/11. Yet after five years since the attacks they have still kept everything hush hush about how it was really CIA planted bombs that took out the towers demolition style and that bin laden played no role in the attacks or finacing of the attacks(under the assumption he isn't working for the CIA). Even memos between Blair and Bush before Iraq surfaced ruining the coverup that war wasn't planned before un inspections were over; yet Bush and Clinton(because there is no way they aka the JEWS n neocons, pulled 9/11 off in the time Bush jr. was the president) and whatever other jew or skulls and bones member that was a part of this elaborate plan for control of the world and dozens maybe hundreds of people they needed to pull it off and nothing has surfaced?

Spectre X explain why the WTC 7 building fell. I know you can do it. :)


Anyone remember the pictutre that ranxxer posted that proved a guy was standing where the planes hit the building(therefore proving how it wasnt hot but really a nice spring breeze) but apon further inspection it didn't have a head if it was a body at all.


Why the fuck would a building collapse with no people (WTC 7) get alot of media attention after 9/11? Do you honestly think thats what people were concerned with.


More questions to answer omg~
* While it did not receive any direct impact form the planes, how much debris hit at as the main towers collapsed and what damage did it cause?
* To what extent (if any) did the shock or vibrations caused by the collapse of WTC1 & 2 affect the integrity of WTC7?
* Did any unseen damage to the WTC7 foundations occur in the collapse of WTC 1 & 2?
* Did any of the fire suppression systems in WTC7 function?

[Spectre X]

I did't know that thing collapsed until this thread. I didn't even know it existed. And as such I don't have enough information to speculate on what happened. Sorry. :(

[Chojin]

Eh, it was an old building anyway. Bound to come down sooner or later.

[ranxer]

blanco, mit is certainly not beyond reproach, i thought everyone knew that the corporate military industrial complex is deeply embedded in funding and control of research at mit. I'm not dismissing it, the article just doesn't stand on its own, and motives are easily questioned. It's a very well written piece i must admit, i'd say slick even.

the article produced by that professor ignores some key points.
1. the fires could not weaken the truss clips in under 2 hours for they were embedded in concrete, he admits that the fires were not very hot noting the black smoke but omits info about the concrete.
apparently there is almost no chance of the steel weakening enough in this time (because of the construction redundancy) for the fire to contribute to a total collapse indeed, fires burned on the 11th floor in 1975 for 3 hours with no structural damage to the steel at all http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Sagadevan8Mar2006.html

2. he addresses the speed of fall but ignores the strength of the core, where did the core go during the collapse? the core beams should resist crumbling but somehow did not. the byu professor Jones does a much better job explaining why the rate of descent should be slower.

3. he ignores the collapse from center of the north tower in under 2 hours, why would the antenna drop into the tower before anything else moved?

4. he says there is no evidence of molten steel or burning steel when that is simply not true. omition is a key tactic of misinformation.

ant10708- that was a person standing in the hole.. how would a headless person(as you say) stand there and grip the edge anyway?

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/woman_wtc.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/woman_in_blackhole.jpg

regarding keeping 9-11 as an inside job hush hush, its a matter of cognitave dissonance.. there is a built in resistance to questioning our government that results in a faithful blindness keeping the questions down. the idea that if you question the bush admin you are not patriotic keeps many folks away from these issues and is very very strong. As geggy calls it a psy op, it is an attack on an ideology or emotion that is mentally hard to untangle or challenge. checkout: http://prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/240306_b_dissonance.htm

[Ant10708]

The body was slumped against something if my memory serves me right. Anyone else remember it?
It was no way clear enough for you to see them 'gripping' anything.

[ziggytrix]

ant10708- that was a person standing in the hole.. how would a headless person(as you say) stand there and grip the edge anyway?

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/woman_wtc.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/woman_in_blackhole.jpg


and here is a close-up of that first image WITHOUT digital manipulation:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v488/ziggytrix/woman_wtc.jpg

i think we should be more concerned with what is CLEARLY the face of SATAN over the woman's left shoulder! this was not terrorists! this was demons!!!1!

[Geggy]

Can't blame you for thinking the photo was manipulated. I was skeptical at first because the photo looks like it could be easily doctored until I saw a video as proof there was really a woman standing by the edge of the hole...(click on pic)

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/cintron_fox1.jpg (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/911.wtc.1.scar.person.wmv)

The quality is shitty but you can see it if you squint your eyes.

If you pluck a single hair out of your head and place it on the steel girdle of the stove top at high temprature, the hair would quickly vaporize, let alone the steel girdle doesn't melt. This woman waving frantically for help had a head full of hair. Naked steel and when I mean naked, i mean free of fireproof chemical, usually melts at 2500-2750 degrees. Do the math.

Chojin...WTC7 was built in 1984. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center)

ANT...explain to me why building 5 and 6 didnt collapse? Go back to earlier post I made in this thread about building 5 and 6. You must be smoking some real good shit...you know where i can score some of that you've been smoking? Don't worry, I'm in no way affiliated with CIA like you've wildly accused me of being so.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Chojin...WTC7 was built in 1984. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center)

:lol

[Ant10708]

I accused you of being a part of the CIA? I was obviously joking if I did. I apologize for indirectly accusing you of killing thousands of Americans on 9/11 and for working for a near facist country bent on world domination. I obviously wasn't being serious if I accused you of being in the CIA. I mean come on.

I don't know why 5 and 6 didn't fall but why did our government feel the need to destroy building 7 when ti had no people in it and no one even gave two shits about it? I thought 9/11 was to create an atmosphere in order for the neo cons to do whatever they want. Why didn't we set off the demolition explosions when people were still in it? Why didn't they actually attack the White House? Why didn't our govt go all out? Why just the east coast? If you want to rally the entire country for many years to come in order to support some world domination scheme shouldn't you hit targets all over the country? Why havn't the neo cons set off another 'terrorist' attack in the U.S. to bolster support for iraq? its clear the american people and the world no longer have the initial post 9/11 mindset. so why the hell not kill a couple hundred civilians or even blow up a bus of commuters in LA? Just to get the rally going again.

I'll believe your story once it has less fucking holes than the official story which most people admit is full of many holes.

Also get me some fucking evidence where the person doesn't need to squint their eyes and guess what the fuck they are looking at. I have yet to watch the video because I am at work and unable to but I will once I get home but I'm not expecting to come to the same conclusions you have reached.

I smoke nothing but high quality bud and I admit I smoke to much of it. I don't see how I'm being a dumb stoner though. Come to NY and we can get stoned and watch 9/11 footage and laugh our asses off. The best is the free fallers. Who knows maybe all the ganja will open up our minds to the real truth.

I don't believe the official story. I think the penn. flight was shot down. I have no idea what hit the pentagon but a story with more holes than the official one doesn't bring anyone closer to the truth.

And I'd honestly be more open to your theories if you didn't have a conspiracy theory for just about everything.

[Geggy]

The first person to admit they're joking usually loses in a mock war. I was messing with you about being a stoner. I knew you were one when you've claimed to be one several times in the past. I could care less that you smoke pot. I'm a former stoner myself. Currently I smoke only during biking season because it helps take my mind off things to increase focus and stamina while I'm riding. You should try the stuff from Vermont or Maine. They're the fucking boss.

I don't know what really happened in the pentagon attack. Anything that I come to a conclusion would be a conspiracy theory because I wouldn't have any proof backed up. I think an American Airline boeing hit it. Because several witnesses have claimed they saw an AA crashing into the building. Firefighters and cops are regular joes like you and I, how'd do you think they'd react if they saw something that wasn't a boeing? But I admit the fact that top officials wouldn't release tapes of the pentagon attack is very suspicious. I think flight 93 was shot down because the plane exploded into confetti and was scattered 8 miles across the field. Or maybe there was a bomb inside the plane. Nobody really knows for sure, which is why I don't spend a lot of time on it.

[Url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center]The government agencies housed at 7 World Trade Center were the United States Secret Service, the Department of Defense, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), the Mayor's Office of Emergency Management, the Internal Revenue Service Regional Council ("IRS"), and the Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA").[url]

They probably imploded WTC7 to get rid of evidence of documents and control devices, the same way you would throw out a bong of a moving car as soon as a cop switches on the sirens. If they've found a bong in your car, they would suspect you have some pot on you.

Because of 9/11 people now realize a terror attack that massive could occur on america soil, which is why homeland security invented the terror alert level to keep the public frightened. People are going to continue to support the war on terror until every one last of them motherfuckers in middle east are killed so we can feel safe again. Why didn't they strike the white house? Good question. If I was an islamic terrorist, white house would be my primrary target, or the capitol.

[Geggy]

regarding keeping 9-11 as an inside job hush hush, its a matter of cognitave dissonance.. there is a built in resistance to questioning our government that results in a faithful blindness keeping the questions down. the idea that if you question the bush admin you are not patriotic keeps many folks away from these issues and is very very strong. As geggy calls it a psy op, it is an attack on an ideology or emotion that is mentally hard to untangle or challenge. checkout: http://prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/240306_b_dissonance.htm

I got around to finishing the article and it is fairly hysterical and there is a lot of truth to it...

They knew beforehand that it would be hard for anyone to discuss the distortions of 9/11 because if I bring up the topic, it would reopen other people's wounds and makes it more difficult for them to comprehend. They'd rather leave the blinders shut and cling on the 9/11 official conspiracy theory because it's more comforting for them.

An interesting picture I've recently found...

http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/7131/smiles0gz.jpg
This photo was taken at the 9/11 memorial service at the Washington National Cathedral. Printed in the European version of Time magazine on 24 September 2001. Page 56. (http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=23172)

The sinister facial expression of Barbara's is priceless...[/img]

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Maybe she had gas.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

So Geggy, btw, did we ever get down to the bottom of Cheney contradicting Osama's involvement in 9/11?

I'm really curious.

[Ant10708]

They think its because he has to lie about so many things.

Geggy I didn't know we were having a mock war. I thought we were actually discussing things you take pretty seriously. I'm trying my best to raise questions for the debate instead of just dismissing it all.

I also wouldn't throw a bong out the window. Cops see contrband thrown out the car you still get in trouble for it or atleast a $500 littering fine. In NY anyways. I've been pulled over 3 times by local pigs(who have the least to do yet get paid the most) when I was really blazed and got off with them having no suspicions. Just gotta act calm and pray the car does not smell like skunk.

The bud I had that was grown in Maine was boss! I havn't tried Vermont bud to my knowledge yet.

[Geggy]

So Geggy, btw, did we ever get down to the bottom of Cheney contradicting Osama's involvement in 9/11?

I'm really curious.

What do you wanna know?

in case you missed this article...

The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney. (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm)

Dont get me wrong, I only take Alex Jones seriously half the time. He's a bit too over the top. But he does provide a lot of balanced news.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

What do you wanna know?

ya know, the first post in this thread? I know you bounce around a lot, but I was wondering if there was anything new on Cheney admitting Osama had no role. thanks.

[Geggy]

Geggy I didn't know we were having a mock war. I thought we were actually discussing things you take pretty seriously. I'm trying my best to raise questions for the debate instead of just dismissing it all.

I was only speaking hypothetically about two people having mock wars. I knew you were joking about me working for CIA. But I do appreciate you taking the topic seriously as well as willing to debate and ask questions.

I also wouldn't throw a bong out the window. Cops see contrband thrown out the car you still get in trouble for it or atleast a $500 littering fine. In NY anyways. I've been pulled over 3 times by local pigs(who have the least to do yet get paid the most) when I was really blazed and got off with them having no suspicions. Just gotta act calm and pray the car does not smell like skunk.

Good point about the bong. I've never, ever drove around with bongs or pipes in my car. I'd usually roll a joint or two at home before I go out. I smoke joints the same way people would smoke cigerettes. I have this hawiian punch soda can that acts as a disguised storage for pot that you can screw the lid off and place the joints inside. I put it in the cup holder of the interior so the cop wouldnt suspect anything if i get pulled over.

The bud I had that was grown in Maine was boss! I havn't tried Vermont bud to my knowledge yet.

They're so good because they're homegrown inside a greenhouse, which is better than outdoors imo.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

What do you wanna know?

ya know, the first post in this thread? I know you bounce around a lot, but I was wondering if there was anything new on Cheney admitting Osama had no role. thanks.

?

[Geggy]

Nothing happened...you know, as usual?

It wasn't only Cheney who has accidently flubbed Osama's innocence. W. Bush has flubbed Osama's innocence 13 times since 9/11. Last time was in an interview in Dec. 2005.

http://www.rense.com/general21/fematerror.jpg

Tom Kenney of FEMA’s National Urban Search and Rescue Team, accidently told Dan Rather of CBS News that FEMA had arrived in New York on the night of September 10, 2001, the day before they were schduled to perform terror drills...

Rumsfeld who is known to be a loose cannon, has accidently hinted that flight 93 was shot down.

Speaking of Rummy, here is another "coincidence", the looting of $2.6 trillion...
http://bozzysworld.com/images/rumsfeld.jpg

SEC. RUMSFELD: (7/16/01) As you know, the Department of Defense really is not in charge of its civilian workforce, in a certain sense. It's the OPM, or Office of Personnel management, I guess. There are all kinds of long- standing rules and regulations about what you can do and what you can't do. I know Dr. Zakheim's been trying to hire CPAs because the financial systems of the department are so snarled up that we can't account for some $2.6 trillion in transactions that exist, if that's believable. And yet we're told that we can't hire CPAs to help untangle it in many respects. (http://www.dod.gov/speeches/2001/s20010716-secdef2.html)


Rumsfeld:(9/10/01) Well, it takes some time. And, indeed, as you know, sometimes you need to invest some money upfront to make savings. For example, we're going to have to revamp our financial system so that we can actually understand what's taking place. At the present time, the financial systems aren't capable of tracking some 2.6 trillion dollars worth of transactions. (http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2001/t09232001_t0910cnn.html)

Then 9/11 happened and this story dissappeared...