Hi Geggy

[Misdemonar]

Could you tell me all about 9/11? Why did America and the Jews blow up the towers?

[Geggy]

In the Project for New America Century's 1997 document, which is sexed up to make it sound appealing to others, is based on their principles to implement and increase military security around the world. That's just screaming for a global takeover in what they've envisioned in creating an one world government that will give them power and control. Although no one in DC went for that notion, at least not until 9/11, in which the attack had galanivized national and international support for invasion in the middle east in order to curb terrorism (which turned out to be a farce). PNAC's global plan will require extensive cooperation from soveriegnity government. And those who don't comply will be painted as villians, terrorists, communists, etc by the west and will be required to engage in a battle upon them. The congress, military industrial complex and oil companies are playing along with it because there is something in it for them (big profits). It will continue to succeed just so as long they play by the nazi's playbook and keep the america public in the dark. I would suggest you to rent "Why We Fight", it blows michael moore's F911 out of the water.

[El Blanco]

I suggest you post what happened 9-11 like I said in the other thread or stop this conspiracy bullshit.

[Geggy]

The fuck is you talkin' about? It's all right here...

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

[El Blanco]

No, I want you to break down the players, what happened, and how the cover up is going down.

Don't link me to a fucking think tank with your half assed, vague, cryptic sentences. Show me what you actually think. If you can call whatever it is you do to get this shit "thinking".

Enough of the "connect the dots" bullshit. Show us the fucking picture already

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

No, I want you to break down the players, what happened, and how the cover up is going down.

Don't link me to a fucking think tank with your half assed, vague, cryptic sentences. Show me what you actually think. If you can call whatever it is you do to get this shit "thinking".

Enough of the "connect the dots" bullshit. Show us the fucking picture already

Amen to that. QFT.

We have evidence, where is yours?

[Geggy]

Man this is going to take me for-fucking-ever!

The indepedent inquiry into the attacks began 18 months after 9/11. The 9/11 commission wouldn't have been formed if it wasn't for the pressure by victims' relatives. They started off with as little as 3 million dollar budget whereas the investigaion into the Columbia shuttle crash started within weeks and a 50 million dollar budget. The commission would later request for 11 million dollars for extra funding, a request only to be rejected by the bush administration, then later decided to contribute 2 million dollars less than the asking amount.

The Able Danger data mining, an army intelligence program, was created in 1999 to gather and compile information on the al Qaeda network, including the hijackers' activites in the US as well as Osama bin Laden's prior to the attacks, yet the commission ignored it completely.

Here are some of the proofs of the investigation stonewalling and the coverup by the bush administration

(CBS) President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in509096.shtml

DISPLAYING ABSTRACT -Congressional deal to create independent commission to probe Sept 11 terrorist attacks is stalled, with Democrats, some Republicans and families of attack victims charging Bush administration undermines idea it only reluctantly embraced; administration officials and Congressional Republicans say they want commission structured to produce bipartisan result; almost completed deal was suddenly undone in Oct after Rep Porter J Goss, Republican involved in talks, got call from Vice Pres Dick Cheney; impasse shows how sensitive issue of intelligence lapses before Sept 11 remains for Bush.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F1091FFA3D5A0C718CDDA80994DA4044 82

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration and the nation's intelligence agencies are blocking the release of sensitive information about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, delaying publication of a 900-page congressional report on how the terrorist assault happened.

http://web.archive.org/web/200306032...ld/5792329.htm

One member's attempt to review confidential transcripts exposed a rift yesterday within the independent commission examining the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Timothy J. Roemer, a member of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, criticized the panel's leaders for not demanding immediate and total access to documents compiled during a congressional inquiry on the terrorist attacks.
..............
Roemer, a former Democratic House member from Indiana, tried to review the transcripts of the joint hearings held last year by the House and Senate intelligence committees. He learned that he had no permission to see them, even though he had served on the joint committee hearings and had, therefore, read the material before.

Roemer called the experience outrageous. He noted that the commission, by law, must build upon the work of the congressional inquiry, which found that organizational problems and human failings had prevented U.S. intelligence agencies from unraveling the Sept. 11 plot.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A39091-2003Apr25

A status report released by the 9/11 Commission shows that various government agencies are not cooperating fully with the investigation. Neither the CIA nor the Justice Department have provided all requested documents. Lack of cooperation on the part of the Department of Defense "[is] becoming particularly serious," and the commission has received no responses whatsoever to requests related to national air defenses. The FBI, State Department, and Transportation Department receive generally positive reviews.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/september11/story/0,11209,994933,00.html

Just before resigning, [Max] Cleland [member of 9/11 Commission] called the Bush administration's attempts to stonewall and "slow walk" the commission a "national scandal." He criticized the commission for cutting a deal with the White House that compromised their access to information, and said, "I'm not going to be part of looking at information only partially. I'm not going to be part of just coming to quick conclusions. I'm not going to be part of political pressure to do this or not do that. I'm not going to be part of that. This is serious."

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/11/21/cleland/

WASHINGTON -- Two of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers had a support network in the United States that included agents of the Saudi government, and the Bush administration and FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship, Senator Bob Graham wrote in a book to be released Tuesday.

The discovery of the financial backing of the two hijackers "would draw a direct line between the terrorists and the government of Saudi Arabia, and trigger an attempted coverup by the Bush administration," the Florida Democrat wrote.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar...ays _in_book/

It's no secret that Saudi Arabia is the epicenter of terrorism funding yet they are in cooperation with the US in the fight against global terrorism. A bit ironic, you think? The US had recently sold 6 billion dollars worth of machinery weapons and arms to the Saudis.

Check out this preview of 9/11 Press for Truth

"Henry Kissinger vs the 9/11 families"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcxjJDlbnC4

Henry Kissinger is a known war criminal who helped orchestrate the bombing of south asia from 1967-1971. Google "trial of henry kissinger amazon" or read this Salon article (http://archive.salon.com/books/feature/2001/05/18/kissinger/). He was also a consultant for Unocal and was involved with plans to build pipelines in Afghanistan. He lasted only one month as the head of 9/11 independent inquiry team before stepping down due to conflicts of business interest. Thomas Kean, Bush's whipping boy, would later replace his position.

I'm gonna stop here and maybe continue when I feel like it

[El Blanco]

Not what I asked for.

Give me your theory. In your words.

[Geggy]

I think you're confusing theories with facts. They way you're ridiculing those who have come to a conclusion that the US govt had a hand in the attacks as "silly conspiracy theorist kooks" is only going to slow you down, if not preventing, from seeing the big picture. Perhaps you'll listen to a list of government insiders since they have much more credibility than a little nobody like me...

This list was compiled by CB from Blue Lemur forums (http://forums.bluelemur.com/posting.php?mode=quote&p=44077&sid=b1ac4688e9d63e3962ac003ec93de86f)

[size=25]Former High Level Government Insiders Speak Up About 9/11


CIA, FBI, NSA, Pentagon, Presidential Advisors, Military Analysts, Aircraft Crash Investigators.... they're all here.

Air Force, Army, Lieutenants, Generals, Colonels.... they're here.

British, Russian, German High Ranks.... they're here too.



When former government insiders speak, we should listen...


Dr Robert Bowman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._Bowman)
Former Director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the U.S. Air Force in Ford/Carter Administrations; Coined the Term ‘Star Wars’, Retired US Air Force Lieutenant Colonel with 101 Combat Missions in Vietnam; Former NASA Rocket Scientist with PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering; Former Intercepter Pilot.

Article: April 4, 2006 (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm)
VIDEO: NYC, September 11, 2004 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6900065571556128674)
AUDIO: May 7, 2006 (http://www.radio4all.net/proginfo.php?id=18037)


“If our government had merely done nothing - and I say that as an old interceptor pilot and I know the drill, I know what it takes, I know how long it takes, I know what the procedures are, I know what they were and I know what they changed them to - if our government had merely done nothing and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the twin towers would still be standing and thousands of Americans would still be alive. My sisters and brothers, that is treason!” VIDEO: Washington DC - July 2005 (http://www.911podcasts.com/display.php?vid=147)


Dr Morgan Reynolds (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Reynolds)
Chief Economist in the US Department of Labor and Political Appointee for Bush Administration 2001-2002
Former Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis
Professor Emeritus at Texas A&M University

VIDEO: University of Wisconsin-Madison - May 6, 2006 (http://www.911blogger.com/2006/06/morgan-reynolds-presentation-at.html)
VIDEO: Chicago Conference – June 2-4, 2006 (http://www.911blogger.com/2006/06/ken-jenkins-and-morgan-reynolds.html)

Ex-Bush Official Busts 9/11 Perps at U.W. Historical Society

Madison, WI
Saturday, May 6, 2006

“Reynolds indicted Richard Cheney, George W. Bush, former Joint Chiefs Chairman Richard Meyers, confessed WTC demolisher and insurance-fraudster Larry Silverstein, and others for mass murder, conspiracy, and other charges including high treason.

…

[Reynolds] showed that the defendants conspired to create a false cover story of suicide hijackings in order to “blow the World Trade Center to kingdom come” with explosives—a shock-and-awe psy-op designed to coerce the American people into supporting a pre-planned “long war” in the Middle East, massive increases in military spending, and the rollback of Constitutional civil liberties.” Article: Madison, WI, May 6, 2006 (http://milwaukee.indymedia.org/en/2006/05/205461.shtml)


Dr Paul Craig Roberts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Craig_Roberts)
Father of Reaganomics; Former Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution; Research Fellow at Stanford's Independent Institute; Former Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal

“Americans never check any facts. Who do you know, for example, who has even read the Report of the 9/11 Commission, much less checked the alleged facts reported in that document. I can answer for you. You don’t know anyone who has read the report or checked the facts. … How do you know that 9/11 was a Muslim terrorist plot? How do you know that three World Trade Center buildings collapsed because two were hit by airliners? You only “know” because the government gave you the explanation of what you saw on TV. (Did you even know that three WTC buildings collapsed?) … Governments lie all the time--especially governments staffed by neoconservatives whose intellectual godfather, Leo Strauss, taught them that it is permissible to deceive the public in order to achieve their agenda. … Scientific evidence is a tough thing for the American public to handle, and the government knows it. The government can rely on people dismissing things that they cannot understand as “conspiracy theory." … For six years the Bush regime has been able to count on the ignorant and naive American public to believe whatever tale that is told them. American gullibility has yet to fail the Bush regime. The government has an endless number of conspiracy theories, but only people who question the government’s conspiracies are derided for “having a conspiracy theory.” … Gentle reader, wise up. The entire world is laughing at you.” Article: August 14, 2006 (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14531.htm)

“Most readers from whom I heard understand the difference between loyalty to country and loyalty to a government. They understand that to support a political party or a government that is destroying the US Constitution and America’s reputation in the world is, in fact, an act of treason. Therefore, I did not have to read the usual drivel about how doubting “our government” is un-American. … The only explanation known to science for the free fall collapse of a building, especially into its own footprint, is engineered demolition, which removes the supports for each floor of the building at split second intervals so that the debris from above meets no resistance on its fall. To call this explanation a “conspiracy theory” is to display the utmost total ignorance. Any physicist or engineer who maintains that buildings can “pancake” at free fall speed has obviously been bought and paid for or is a total incompetent fool. … How could government complicity be kept a secret? It can be kept a secret, because so many Americans are scientifically ignorant and emotionally weak. They are incapable of realizing the contradiction in the government’s claim that the WTC buildings “pancaked” at free fall speed, and they are emotionally incapable of confronting the evil of the Bush regime. … We know nothing about alleged suicide flyers led by M. Atta except what the government has told us, a government that has lied to us about everything else… … Americans who rely on the totally corrupt corporate media have no idea what is happening anywhere on earth, much less at home.” Article: August 16, 2006 (http://lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=6923)

“I guess the real story about 9/11 is about what the people are actually saying. I’ve gotten hundreds of emails in response to my columns and many of them talk about not getting the truth from the government or the media about what really happened at the World Trade Center. I know many qualified engineers and scientists have said the WTC collapsed from explosives. In fact, if you look at the manner in which it fell, you have to give their conclusions credibility.”
Article: June 22, 2005 (http://www.arcticbeacon.com/22-Jun-2005.html)

“Many patriotic readers have written to me expressing their frustration that fact and common sense cannot gain a toehold in a debate guided by hysteria and disinformation. Other readers write that 9/11 shields Bush from accountability, They challenge me to explain why three World Trade Center buildings on one day collapsed into their own footprints at free fall speed, an event outside the laws of physics except under conditions of controlled demolition. They insist that there is no stopping war and a police state as long as the government's story on 9/11 remains unchallenged.”
Article: February 6, 2006 (http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts02062006.html)

“The Bush administration is insane. If the American people do not decapitate it by demanding Bush's impeachment, the Bush administration will bring about Armageddon.” Article: August 15, 2005 (http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=6936)

“…I did go to Georgia Tech, and I did learn some physics, and I know enough physics to know that it is strictly impossible for buildings to collapse in their own footprint at freefall speed except under controlled demolitions. Those buildings did not come down the way the 9/11 report says. It’s strictly impossible. In fact it’s a total, the account of the 9/11 report in a total contradiction of the laws of physics.”
DIRECT MP3 LINK: February 7, 2006 - 60MB - 9/11 segment starts at 36:36 (http://www.electricpolitics.com/media/mp3/EP2006.02.07.mp3)


Daniel Ellsberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg)
Former American Military Analyst Employed by the RAND Corporation
Well Known for Leaking the “Pentagon Papers” During Vietnam War

"…we’re slipping toward, uh, in the direction of a police state, without a lot of resistance, which is what happened in Germany…"

Interviewer: “…have you had a chance to look at a lot of this information coming from America’s leading scholars, physicists, engineers, etc. who have taken a look now at 9-11 and are now not only questioning what might have happened on 9-11, but really being very direct…”

Ellsberg: “I have looked at a lot of that and I tell you, without going into it all, which would take a lot of time, I find some of it very implausible and other parts of it, quite solid. There’s no question in my mind, that there is enough evidence there to justify a very comprehensive and hard hitting investigation of a kind that we have not seen, with subpoenas, and general questioning of people, and release of a lot of documents. There’s no question that, uh… put it this way, that very serious questions have been raised about how much they knew beforehand and how much involvement there may have been. Is the administration capable, uh, humanly and psychologically, of engineering such a provocation? Yes. I would say that, I worked for such an administration myself... Johnson. President Johnson put destroyers in harm’s way in the Tonkin Gulf, not only once, but several times, with a lot of his people hoping that that would lead to a confrontation, and claiming that it had, and could have resulted in the loss of many lives in the course of it...”

AUDIO: July 2006 - 10 minute segment starts at 23:55 (http://www.911blogger.com/2006/07/daniel-ellsberg-comes-out-for-911.html)
Article/Full Transcript (http://www.infowars.com/articles/terror/pentagon_papers_author_gov_maybe_did_911.htm)

Ray McGovern (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_McGovern)
Retired CIA Intelligence Advisor to Reagan and George HW Bush
Founder of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity


Interviewer: “…what about our own governments, or someone in the government or a private group, staging some event and then claiming Iran has carried it out as a prelude to attacking Iran, or even once Iran is attacked, intelligence agencies launching something in Europe or the US, and then claiming Iran did that. Your take on that.”

McGovern: “Well Alex that’s altogether possible, it’s altogether possible. And I would say even probable because they would need some proximate cause, some casus belli to justify really unleashing things on Iran, and that would help of course. I would put very little past this crew. Their record of dissembling and disingenuousness is unparalleled.”
DIRECT MP3 LINK: May 29, 2006 - 13MB (http://nw0.info/files/Radio/Alex%20Jones%20Radio%20Archive/2006/May/29/aj_2006-05-29.mp3)
Article/ Audio Clip (http://www.infowars.com/articles/ww3/iran_mcgovern_war_set_june_july.htm)

“The 9/11 [Commission] Report is a joke.”
VIDEO: July 2006 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1232419751782017310)

David Shayler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Shayler)
Former MI5 British Counter Intelligence Officer; Whistleblower


“… in the light of recent events like 9/11, the invasion of Afghanistan, the invasion of Iraq, I believe this was an example of what we refer to as false flag terrorism, where terrorist acts are carried out, but they are either funded or encouraged by the western intelligence agencies, but of course in public are blamed on organizations like Al Qaeda.

...

It is therefore absolutely vital that we expose the lie of 9/11. And the time to do something is not in five years time. The time to do something is NOW. Because if we don’t act now, the very avenues of protest, the very right to protest, the rights to free speech, will be taken away from us, so there will be no conditions in which we can protest. And don’t even think this is simply an issue that you can ignore and live with yourself, because it’s not just affecting us, it’s going to affect our children.” Video Part 1 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5403286136814574974) -- Video Part 2 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2953150409490347185)


Totnes Devon UK – June 25, 2006
David Shayler & Annie Machon & Ian Crane on 9/11
Video Part 1 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2603862923619063168) -- Video Part 2 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-475674136383018572)

Zbigniew Brzezinski (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zbigniew_Brzezinski)
National Security Advisor to President Carter from 1977 to 1981

“If there is another terrorist attack in the United States, you can bet your bottom dollar that there also will be immediate charges that Iran was responsible in order to generate public hysteria in favor of military action.”
Article: LA Times April 23, 2006 (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-brzezinski23apr23,0,3700317.story)

Robert Baer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Baer)
Former CIA Case Officer

Interviewer: “Are you of the opinion that there was an aspect of 'inside job' to 9/11 within the U.S. government?”

Baer: “There is that possibility, the evidence points at it.”
Transcript/Audio - June 2006 (http://www.911blogger.com/2006/06/former-cia-member-robert-baer-comments.html)

Sibel Edmonds (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibel_Edmonds)
FBI Translator; Fired FBI Whistleblower; reported security breaches to supervisors

Interviewer: "You wouldn't be surprised if elements or criminal elements or private contractors were involved in 9/11?"

Edmonds: "No, I wouldn't be surprised."

Interviewer: "So you wouldn't be surprised like many others, because of the evidence and the cover-up you've seen, if 9/11 was an inside job?"

Edmonds: "At this point, I'd have to say no, I wouldn't be surprised."

Interviewer: "Do you think the evidence is leaning towards that?"

Edmonds: "Well, again, considering the level of cover-up and the length at which they have gone to gag people and prevent information-- this information from coming out, I would say yes."
Article/Transcript - July 2006 (http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/edmonds_discusses_possibility_attack_inside_job.ht m)

Major General Albert Stubblebine III (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Stubblebine)
Commanding General of the US Army Intelligence and Security Command 1981-1984

“One of my experiences in the army was being in charge on the army’s Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence during the cold war. I measured pieces of soviet equipment from photographs. It was my job. I look at the hole in the Pentagon, and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon, and I said the plane does not fit in that hole. So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What’s going on?”
VIDEO: Excerpt from film "One Nation Under Siege" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9CNToaP2Ew)

William Christison (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=William_Christison)
Former CIA Analyst

“…After spending the better part of the last five years treating these theories with utmost skepticism, I have devoted serious time to actually studying them in recent months, and have also carefully watched several videos that are available on the subject. I have come to believe that significant parts of the 9/11 theories are true, and that therefore significant parts of the “official story” put out by the U.S. government and the 9/11 Commission are false. I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe…”
Article: August 14, 2006 (http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Aug06/Christison14.htm)

Michael Meacher (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Meacher)
Member of British Parliament; Former Minister for the Environment

“[The 9/11 Commission Report] was a 580 page avoidance of any serious explanation…”
VIDEO (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8274552561914055825)

“This war on terrorism is bogus”
Article: London Guardian - September 6, 2003 (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html)

Andreas Von Bulow
Former National Minister of Defense (Germany), Minister of Technology


“...I can only say, the official story is so inaccurate and far fetched that there must be a different one...”
VIDEO (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8274552561914055825) - (same video as Michael Meacher above)

http://www.prisonplanet.com/021104vonbuelow.html

General Leonid Ivashov
Former Chief of Staff of the Russian Armed Forces
Former Chief of the Department for General Affairs in the Soviet Union's Ministry of Defense
Chief of the Military Cooperation Department at the Russian Federation's Ministry of Defense


“…terrorism is not something independent of world politics but simply an instrument, a means to install a unipolar world with a sole world headquarters, a pretext to erase national borders and to establish the rule of a new world elite. It is precisely this elite that constitutes the key element of world terrorism…

…The organizers of [the 9/11] attacks were the political and business circles interested in destabilizing the world order and who had the means necessary to finance the operation….

…Only secret services and their current chiefs… have the ability to plan, organize and conduct an operation of such magnitude…

…Osama bin Laden and "Al Qaeda" cannot be the organizers or the performers of the September 11 attacks. They do not have the necessary organization, resources or leaders. Thus, a team of professionals had to be created and the Arab kamikazes are just extras to mask the operation…” Article: January 17, 2006 (http://www.voltairenet.org/article133909.html)
http://www.axisforpeace.net

April Gallop (http://www.guardian.co.uk/september11/story/0,,1267558,00.html)
Former Pentagon Administrative Specialist with Top Secret SCI Clearance


“At random times, there would be drill exercises utilizing an alarm for us to evacuate the building. Yet on that particular day no alarm. [This is] especially [odd] considering the fact of what had already taken place at the World Trade Center.”

Interviewer: “Do you have any theory about how a Boeing 757 could have hit such a secure building without any anti-aircraft defenses being activated or any warning alarms sounded?”

Gallop: “I have thought about this very question numerous times. And then I realized I needed to rephrase the question. The real question is what is the probability or likelihood that no anti-aircraft defense, warning alarms or additional security mechanism functioned on that particular day? And then we need to think how likely is it then there was a glitch in all the security mechanisms, anti-aircraft defense and warning alarms? You know, it takes a while to get around that building. And I remember being so disgusted at the frequency of random drill exercises taking place for us to evacuate the building. It seemed as if they always happened when I had to take care of certain things. Yet on September 11th, the day when our lives were threatened, not one alarm.”

Interviewer: “…I have heard that, as of 9/11, the anti-aircraft batteries were automated, in other words, that they would have automatically fired against any incoming aircraft that did not transmit the appropriate friend or foe signal. Is that true?”

Gallop: “Yes that is true. They are either to attempt to guide the incoming aircraft that has violated the airspace to a safe location to land. Making reasonable effort to guide it down. Or shoot it down.”

Interview - July 2006 (http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/07/interview-with-april-gallop.html)

George Nelson
Retired United States Air Force Col; Aircraft Crash Investigation Authority

“In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. This is because every military and civilian passenger-carrying aircraft have many parts that are identified for safety of flight. That is, if any of the parts were to fail at any time during a flight, the failure would likely result in the catastrophic loss of aircraft and passengers. Consequently, these parts are individually controlled by a distinctive serial number and tracked by a records section of the maintenance operation and by another section called plans and scheduling”
http://www.physics911.net/georgenelson.htm

[El Blanco]

And again, you cut and paste more things you haven't read.

I want your words, moron. Tell me what really happened and how.

[Grislygus]

As an admitted conspiracy theorist when it comes to the JFK assassination, I'm really having trouble swallowing this. I want facts, I want actual discrepencies that I can look at. I want patterns, I want things that I can pinpoint.

Here we have people telling us that we shouldn't believe what the government says about 9/11 simply because they're the government. "Governments lie all the time". Maybe so, but until I see some damn proof, no, not even proof, I'd settle for a single actual discrepency, I'm going with their explanation.


Personally, I hear these people when they complain about being derided as conspiracy theorists. I myself have been accused of it. And I don't say; "OMG TEH GOVRNMENT KILLD JFK". All I point out is that the official FBI X-rays and autopsy photos don't match up. That's it. And still I am accused of being a leftist conspiracy theorist wacko.

However, I do not angrily demand that people simply take my word for it, or belittle them for disagreeing. I give them discrepencies to look at. I don't hammer them with other people's words, I simply state observations that I have made.

So please, in simple, short terms, explain what one main focal point your argument rests on. And please, I don't need ironclad facts, but I need logic, real logic, in order to side with you.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

That post should be the conspiracy theorist clause for this board.

[Geggy]

Let's focus on the pentagon hit.

How long does it take for hijackers to gain control of the crowd with boxcutters, break into the cockpit, force out the co-pilots, take control of the plane, turn off transponders, etc? Long enough period of time for NORAD to respond. American Airline 77 took off from Dulles Airport in DC, and after it had been hijacked, the hijacker pilot diverted AA77 back to DC for full 45 minutes before hitting the pentagon. So where was NORAD on this one? Not one single fighter jets were scrambled to either intercept AA77 nor protect the skies in DC. Remember, the pentagon impact occured 35 minutes after the 2nd hit in NYC when it became obviously apparent to anyone that america was under attack. The only possible explanation was that the air force was given a stand down order. Who has the authority to order a stand down? Those inside the government.

Here is the catch, Dick Cheney was given direct order by W. Bush in may of 2001 to schedule and operate military exercises along with the help of Generals Ralph Eberhart and Richard Myers. In august of 2001, several fighter jets from virginia's langley air force base were deployed to Iceland for a guardian operation, which was scheduled to last until december of 2001. On the morning of 9/11, several fighter jets from DC's andrew air force base were deployed to North Carolina for scheduled wargame exercises. These jets were not recalled until 11 am, after the attacks were completed. While W. Bush was stranded in florida, take a wild guess who was already in DC and took over as the acting commander in chief? Cheney, the person who directed the responses from an emergency bunker.

Norman Mineta, the secetary of transportation had arrived into PEOC at 9:20 am on 9/11, and claimed in a damaging testimony in front of the commission in 2003, that Cheney was already there with the staff.

Mineta: "During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President...the plane is 50 miles out...the plane is 30 miles out...and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president "do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said "Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!??"

Mineta assumed the "the orders still stand" statement by cheney was a reference to shooting down the plane. But that obviously didn't happen and there was not a single fighter jet in the air. The only conclusion is that it was a reference to a stand down order coming from Cheney.

This caused Cheney to to testify to the commission along with Bush in closed session, with no transcript, no witnesses, and no public accountiblity. Mineta's testimony was completely omitted from the 9/11 report and the time of Cheney's arrival at PEOC had been changed to 9:58 am.

Since 9/11 had opened the doors for the military industrial complex such as KBR and Halliburton in which Cheney is linked to, for Project for New America Century in which Cheney is also linked to, who stood to benefit the most from the attacks?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Were aliens involved?

*snort*

[Geggy]

http://www.geocities.com/iseepee57/cheney1.jpg

Just look at this guy's face...how could you NOT think he is criminally capable of pulling off 9/11?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

http://www.geocities.com/iseepee57/cheney1.jpg

Just look at this guy's face...how could you NOT think he is criminally capable of pulling off 9/11?

Okay, so yeah, aliens WERE involved.

Dick Cheney is a vile POS, but at least he's funny.

[Geggy]

Yeah but rumsfeld is way funnier though. I could watch him speak about some boring subject like taxes and social security and still laugh my ass off. His hand gestures and facial expressions are priceless.

[Geggy]

What's the deal with all the alien stuff anyway?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

What's the deal with all the alien stuff anyway?

Just trying to get into the conspiracy theory frame of mind, is all.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Yeah but rumsfeld is way funnier though. I could watch him speak about some boring subject like taxes and social security and still laugh my ass off. His hand gestures and facial expressions are priceless.

Heh. Let me know when Rummy tells a senior senator to "go fuck himself".

Better yet, let me know when he drunkenly shoots a lawyer in the face.

Rummy = funny.

Cheney = funnier.

[kahljorn]

I don't know guys all this, "Just give me one discrepency" stuff is kind of weird. Geggy points out discrepencies all the time, I dare say that's about all he does! The entire 9/11 conspiracy theory is based on various discrepencies, whether it's from the lack of a report, the lack of scientific analysis of the rubble, lack of "Evidence" towards anything etc..
Those are discrepencies, if mixed up medical reports are a discrepency than all of those are discrepencies.

Also why do you demand that he explain the conspiracy theory in his own words? Did he commit the crime? Does he need to have some special trademarked form of truth that he invented? What's wrong with taking the "most educated" ideas and running with them? You don't need to be Isaac Newton to believe in or talk about gravity, so it doesn't really make sense that Geggy would have to write his own story/ideas for this conspiracy theory in order for it to be true. Regardless of if geggy explains this to your liking or not, the situation and the truth of the matter doesn't really change :(

[El Blanco]

Well, atleast you are within a country mile of answering my question. Still not giving me what I want but what the hell, you aren't going to anyway.

I'm not even 100% sure your timeline is correct, but I'll take a few swings.

How long does it take for hijackers to gain control of the crowd with boxcutters, break into the cockpit, force out the co-pilots, take control of the plane, turn off transponders, etc? Long enough period of time for NORAD to respond.

What on earth gives you reason for that assumption?

American Airline 77 took off from Dulles Airport in DC, and after it had been hijacked, the hijacker pilot diverted AA77 back to DC for full 45 minutes before hitting the pentagon. So where was NORAD on this one?

Still getting a bead on all the planes in the sky. Do you have any idea how much air travel happens over the US, especially the East Coast?

Not one single fighter jets were scrambled to either intercept AA77 nor protect the skies in DC.

Prior to 9-11, there were 14 fighter jets responsible for defending the skies over the continental US.

Do you know their best response times? Do you know how long it is supposed to take orders to go through the chain of command?

Besides, what if fighter jets intercepted 77? What then?

Remember, the pentagon impact occured 35 minutes after the 2nd hit in NYC when it became obviously apparent to anyone that america was under attack.

Yes, then you have to get your bearings together and find other missing planes

The only possible explanation was that the air force was given a stand down order.

No, not at all. They could have very well been caught asleep at the switch. Not that I'm comfortable with that either, but its well short of the scifi you're writing.



Mineta's testimony was completely omitted from the 9/11 report

Really? (http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing2/9-11Commission_Hearing_2003-05-23.htm)

Want to read the part of his tesitmony you are refering to?

MR. HAMILTON: We thank you for that. I wanted to focus just a moment on the Presidential Emergency Operating Center. You were there for a good part of the day. I think you were there with the vice president. And when you had that order given, I think it was by the president, that authorized the shooting down of commercial aircraft that were suspected to be controlled by terrorists, were you there when that order was given?

MR. MINETA: No, I was not. I was made aware of it during the time that the airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Well, at the time I didn't know what all that meant. And --

MR. HAMILTON: The flight you're referring to is the --

MR. MINETA: The flight that came into the Pentagon.

MR. HAMILTON: The Pentagon, yeah.

MR. MINETA: And so I was not aware that that discussion had already taken place. But in listening to the conversation between the young man and the vice president, then at the time I didn't really recognize the significance of that.

And then later I heard of the fact that the airplanes had been scrambled from Langley to come up to DC, but those planes were still about 10 minutes away. And so then, at the time we heard about the airplane that went into Pennsylvania, then I thought, "Oh, my God, did we shoot it down?" And then we had to, with the vice president, go through the Pentagon to check that out.

MR. HAMILTON: Let me see if I understand. The plane that was headed toward the Pentagon and was some miles away, there was an order to shoot that plane down.

MR. MINETA: Well, I don't know that specifically, but I do know that the airplanes were scrambled from Langley or from Norfolk, the Norfolk area. But I did not know about the orders specifically other than listening to that other conversation.

MR. HAMILTON: But there very clearly was an order to shoot commercial aircraft down.

MR. MINETA: Subsequently I found that out.



Seriously, do you even look into this yourself, or are you just taking other people with no relevent experience in the matter at their word?

[Grislygus]

Also why do you demand that he explain the conspiracy theory in his own words? Did he commit the crime? Does he need to have some special trademarked form of truth that he invented? What's wrong with taking the "most educated" ideas and running with them? You don't need to be Isaac Newton to believe in or talk about gravity, so it doesn't really make sense that Geggy would have to write his own story/ideas for this conspiracy theory in order for it to be true. Regardless of if geggy explains this to your liking or not, the situation and the truth of the matter doesn't really change :(

HE is trying to convince OTHER PEOPLE that there was indeed a conspiracy on 9/11. If I was even to begin to take him seriously, he needed to simply explain his own opinion, in his own words, something which I think he has now done, even if I myself am not convinced.

You speak of the using most educated ideas and running with them, that you "don't need to be Isaac Newton to understand gravity".

Maybe so, but if I'm trying to convince someone else that gravity exists, I say to them "you know when an apple falls to the ground? That is because the earth exerts a gravitational pull on said object". I'm not going to throw out every single damned scientific document I can get my hands on, nor pull in five million experts that are going to say very intelligent sounding things with very subtle points that are going to go right over my audience's head.

Because, since I am 'in the know', and I want to prove it to my audience, it is therefore my job to translate these facts simply, and in my own words, so that my heretofore ignorant audience can understand.

NOW, that being said, he had previously made ginormous posts quoting many, many experts that I have never heard of. I requested that, in the interest of convincing me, that he simply state, in his own words, what a main focal point of his argument was.

He did so admirably, and I now know that he does indeed know what he's talking about, and he's not just mindlessly spouting off other people's work.


I don't know guys all this, "Just give me one discrepency" stuff is kind of weird. Geggy points out discrepencies all the time, I dare say that's about all he does! The entire 9/11 conspiracy theory is based on various discrepencies, whether it's from the lack of a report, the lack of scientific analysis of the rubble, lack of "Evidence" towards anything etc..
Those are discrepencies, if mixed up medical reports are a discrepency than all of those are discrepencies.

As I have before stated, many of these discrepencies rely on the assumption that the government is lying. I was eager to hear a single, simple discrepency that he himself pointed out, instead of merely quoting someone. He has now done so, I am satisfied.

Now, I should really, really let the "mixed up medical reports" comment go, because this thread is about 9/11, not JFK. However, I can't, because I'm human and your statement irks me.

Let me explain this "mixed up medical reports" thing once again, in more detail.

According to the offical FBI x-rays, there is a giant hole in JFK's head. According to the official FBI autopsy photos, there is not.

Either the FBI f*cked up on a scale previously unheard of in the entire history of mankind, or something funny's going on.

(Sorry guys, please continue.)

[El Blanco]

I don't know guys all this, "Just give me one discrepency" stuff is kind of weird. Geggy points out discrepencies all the time, I dare say that's about all he does!

No, he cuts and pastes stuff from other websites without reading it through himself.

The entire 9/11 conspiracy theory is based on various discrepencies, whether it's from the lack of a report, the lack of scientific analysis of the rubble, lack of "Evidence" towards anything etc..

No, its based on lots of mental problems


Those are discrepencies, if mixed up medical reports are a discrepency than all of those are discrepencies.

Oswald acted alone.

Also why do you demand that he explain the conspiracy theory in his own words?

Because I want to know what he is saying. Hell, I want him to know what he is saying.

Did he commit the crime?

He is making accusations.

Does he need to have some special trademarked form of truth that he invented?

No, but I would like a coherent line of thought.

What's wrong with taking the "most educated" ideas and running with them?

If you actually read them and understand what is being said or implied, nothing at all. However, when you just cut and paste the shoddy work of others without even reading it fully yourself, there is a problem.

You don't need to be Isaac Newton to believe in or talk about gravity,

No, but you should know what he actually said.

so it doesn't really make sense that Geggy would have to write his own story/ideas for this conspiracy theory in order for it to be true.

I just want to know what he thinks happened. It doesn't have to be his own special theory, but he should understand it.

Regardless of if geggy explains this to your liking or not, the situation and the truth of the matter doesn't really change :(

No, but lousy thinking is a bad thing. That leads to Flat Earth Theory, White Man's Burden, nd the Salem Witch Trials. And unfortunatly, because of the wonders of communication, it spreads faster than ever these days. Especially when its spreading a sexy, exciting, but patently false version of went down 9/11.

[kahljorn]

"many of these discrepencies rely on the assumption that the government is lying."

Isn't that what all "discrepencies" in conspiracy theories boils down to? OH THERE WASNT A REPORT THEY MUST BE COVERING IT UP. THE REPORTS AREN"T ACCURATE TO THE WITNESSES CLAIMS. Some people find bigger, more substantial discrepencies and people think they are smarter and closer to the truth, but really everybody is just trying to fill in the blanks, that, for some reason, the people whom are responsible won't fill in; that is the greatest DISCREPENCY of all conspiracies.


"No, its based on lots of mental problems "

Mental problems are discrepencies.

"I'm not going to throw out every single damned scientific document I can get my hands on"

You guys act like this is some pivotal moment in geggy's 9/11 imockery conspiracy theory history and the tides are finally turning, will geggy FINALLY insert his own words on a single message board post? IT HASNT BEEN DONE BEFORE.

I just don't see how him stating his opinion in his own words is going to make his accusation stronger. I guess personal conviction and the courage to make a difference really go far in todays reality... and yes he does need to start reading the stories he posts but somehow I think asking him for his opinion isn't going to do that.

[Grislygus]

kahljorn wrote:
"many of these discrepencies rely on the assumption that the government is lying."

Isn't that what all "discrepencies" in conspiracy theories boils down to?


Okay, I'll stick with the one clear point of your argument. No.

Far too many conspiracy theories mention irregularities that are merely suspicious, and means that the government is lying... but only if you felt that way in the first place.

If you find a discrepency that is ironclad proof that something odd is going on, then this might make a previously neutral observer decide that the government is lying. Of course, the word "government" is taken in the broadest possible sense here.


kahljorn wrote:
I just don't see how him stating his opinion in his own words is going to make his accusation stronger.


It won't. It helps him make the accusation in the first place.

[kahljorn]

Okay I think we are having some linguistic difficulties here.

Accusations don't require a well written and well thought out plan behind them. All accusations require is that somebody is perceived of doing wrong and somebody publically announces it. That's an accusation. The well thought out and well written parts come 'after' that when people try to prove their accusation is correct.

Secondly let's get to what a Discrepancy actually is:
"an instance of difference or inconsistency" So if we had TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF A STORY, like with your JFK story, then that's discrepancy.

Here's some examples of discrepancies in the 9/11 conspiracy theory case:
GOVERNMENT CLAIMS ONE THING EVERYBODY ELSE CLAIMS SOMETHING ELSE. DISCREPANCY.
WITNESSES CLAIM ONE THING GOVERNMENT CLAIMS ANOTHER.
EXPLOSIONS AND OTHER EVENTS SURROUNDING 9/11 MAKE IT SEEM LIKE A PLANNED OUT ATTACK ON OUR SIDE RATHER THAN A SLIP UP ON DEFENSE LIKE THE GOVERNMENT SAID.
OH LOOK GUYS THAT WASNT A PLANE THAT FLEW BY MY HEAD AND HIT THE BUILDING IT SOUNDED LIKE A MISSILE NOT LIKE WHAT THE GOVERNMENT SAID.
THERES EVIDENCE MISSING HERE THAT MAKES US THINK IT'S A CONSPIRACY

What are those all examples of?

HEY LOOK THE MOON LANDING GUYS THIS HAS TO BE FAKE BECAUSE THE SHADOW OF THE SPACECRAFT IS AT THE WRONG ANGLE FOR THEM TO BE IN SPACE AT THIS PLACE AND TIME.

DISCREPANCY.

"If you find a discrepency that is ironclad proof that something odd is going on, then this might make a previously neutral observer decide that the government is lying."

Okay.. but that doesn'tmean it's the only type of discrepancy in the world. It just means that it's the type of discrepancy powerful enough to change somebody's mind, and who knows if it's even "Valid" then, just because they are SUPPOSEDLY neutral and got outraged? That's not proof, nor does it do anyone any good unless you just like to lead people by their emotional nostrils.

I'm going to repost this from my last post:

Some people find bigger, more substantial discrepencies and people think they are smarter and closer to the truth, but really everybody is just trying to fill in the blanks, that, for some reason, the people whom are responsible won't fill in; that is the greatest DISCREPANCY of all conspiracies.[
IF the government filled in the "Blanks" there would be no "Discrepancies", instead they leave discrepancies behind, thus inciting people to point them out and wonder. That in itself isn't necessarily a sign of guilt, but moreover it isn't a sign of any type of proof or evidence to the truth of what happened. Regardless of what holes there are, except for a few smart people, most people are still shooting in the dark at what really happened.
The government not filling in the holes is a type of discrepancy.

[Grislygus]

Okay I think we are having some linguistic difficulties here.

Accusations don't require a well written and well thought out plan behind them. All accusations require is that somebody is perceived of doing wrong and somebody publically announces it. That's an accusation. The well thought out and well written parts come 'after' that when people try to prove their accusation is correct.

And yet, things seemed a bit hazy when it came to the actual accusations, didn't it? I saw a lot of quoting, and a lot of citations, and a lot of THERE'S A CONSPIRACY HERE, and the actual accusations became muddled. Therefore, simply and concisely expressing what you think happened will help you make the accusation and get your point across. I requested that he do this, he did, and I fail to see the problem.

Secondly let's get to what a Discrepancy actually is:
"an instance of difference or inconsistency" So if we had TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF A STORY, like with your JFK story, then that's discrepancy.

Here's some examples of discrepancies in the 9/11 conspiracy theory case:
GOVERNMENT CLAIMS ONE THING EVERYBODY ELSE CLAIMS SOMETHING ELSE. DISCREPANCY.
WITNESSES CLAIM ONE THING GOVERNMENT CLAIMS ANOTHER.
EXPLOSIONS AND OTHER EVENTS SURROUNDING 9/11 MAKE IT SEEM LIKE A PLANNED OUT ATTACK ON OUR SIDE RATHER THAN A SLIP UP ON DEFENSE LIKE THE GOVERNMENT SAID.
OH LOOK GUYS THAT WASNT A PLANE THAT FLEW BY MY HEAD AND HIT THE BUILDING IT SOUNDED LIKE A MISSILE NOT LIKE WHAT THE GOVERNMENT SAID.
THERES EVIDENCE MISSING HERE THAT MAKES US THINK IT'S A CONSPIRACY

What are those all examples of?

And did they have any logical basis? I didn't know, all I saw was a bunch of quotes, and very little arguments previously made by the poster himself.

Hell, I can quote people who insist that Elvis is alive, and yet that contradicts what 'The Man' says.

I did not just merely ask for discrepencies. I asked for "patterns, things that I [could] pinpoint." You can dig up any amount of discrepencies that you want, but they have to be enough to stand on it's own. Which brings me to the next point..


Okay.. but that doesn'tmean it's the only type of discrepancy in the world. It just means that it's the type of discrepancy powerful enough to change somebody's mind, and who knows if it's even "Valid" then, just because they are SUPPOSEDLY neutral and got outraged? That's not proof, nor does it do anyone any good unless you just like to lead people by their emotional nostrils.

HE was trying to convince OTHER PEOPLE. The discrepencies he brings up had damn well better be powerful enough to change people's minds, or else he doesn't have a strong argument, doesn't have enough back up, and is quite possibly wrong.

And who said anything about proof? Once again, my biggest problem was that he seemed to be parroting flimsy information, and I asked that he clarify and back up his position. And if you personally think that it's pointless to convince other people to see the 'truth', then I guess that's why Geggy was talking about the 9/11 conspiracy theory, and not you.

I'm going to repost this from my last post:

Some people find bigger, more substantial discrepencies and people think they are smarter and closer to the truth, but really everybody is just trying to fill in the blanks, that, for some reason, the people whom are responsible won't fill in; that is the greatest DISCREPANCY of all conspiracies.[
IF the government filled in the "Blanks" there would be no "Discrepancies", instead they leave discrepancies behind, thus inciting people to point them out and wonder. That in itself isn't necessarily a sign of guilt, but moreover it isn't a sign of any type of proof or evidence to the truth of what happened. Regardless of what holes there are, except for a few smart people, most people are still shooting in the dark at what really happened.
The government not filling in the holes is a type of discrepancy.

Then I'll just repost this from MY last post:

"Far too many conspiracy theories mention irregularities that are merely suspicious, and means that the government is lying... but only if you felt that way in the first place."

[Geggy]

Blanco

Lookit...you had me there for a while cuz I swear that I remember mineta testimony had been edited out of the report.

The link you've provided leads to the hearings that took place on that date which included mineta testimony. This is the 9/11 report (http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm) in which mineta testimony was completely omitted. In the report, it stated cheney arrived the PEOC at 9:58, the pentagon impact occured at 9:37.

Either you're attempting to falsely contradict my claim or you made a mistake...either way you shot yourself in the foot.

I'm think I'm done here...

[kahljorn]

I just think it's funny you guys play fringe cowboys with conspiracy theories like you're fighting some uphill battle.

"Far too many conspiracy theories mention irregularities that are merely suspicious, and means that the government is lying... but only if you felt that way in the first place"

But I don't feel that way at all and as a reasonable person I find the lack of information involved in something that started a war and is responsible for the current political atmosphere unreasonable. I also find all the recent news about how the administration has been lying and falsifying reports to us indicative of some type of "conspiracy" or a "pattern of discrepancy". Obviously the government was lying, about what I'm not making any real claims.

but you guys continue to argue vague notions of reality like "Opinion".


" The discrepencies he brings up had damn well better be powerful enough to change people's minds, or else he doesn't have a strong argument, doesn't have enough back up, and is quite possibly wrong. "

You can have a strong argument and people will still disagree with you if they are naturally predisposed to disagree with you, infact usually people will disagree MORE SO if they are naturally predisposed.
Why do you expect him to have a wealth of information on an issue that the fundamental issue is the lack of conclusive information.
None of that really would make it right or wrong anyway, just because people are convinced you're right doesn't make it right. Remember when bush won the election BUT LOOK WHERE WE ARE NOW in fact sometimes whats right might be the last thing people want.

You guys are crazy, first you ask for his opinion to verify what he's saying then you say the conspiracy theory might be wrong because he can't state his opinion about somebody else's conspiracy theory.

Great job discussing conspiracy theories guys or should I say inspecting geggy's scrotum for pubic hairs.

[El Blanco]

Blanco

Lookit...you had me there for a while cuz I swear that I remember mineta testimony had been edited out of the report.

Obviously its still there

The link you've provided leads to the hearings that took place on that date which included mineta testimony. This is the 9/11 report (http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm) in which mineta testimony was completely omitted.

That very same website you link, the offical 9-11 comission investigation, has Mineta's testimony. what are you trying to prove? If the government was trying to hide it, why is it there?

A lot of people's testimony isn't in there, but the things they said and they themselves are refered to. Many times, it was because the testimony was reduntant or not all that relevent.

In the report, it stated cheney arrived the PEOC at 9:58, the pentagon impact occured at 9:37.

No, it says he arrived at the main conference room at 9:58. Read the reports, he was already communicating with the President, NORAD, Pentagon etc etc in the White House and then continued to do so in what seems to be a small anteroom outside the main part of the shelter on the phone. He had been in there since about 9:30 or so(all times estimated according to witnesses' best estimates).

Besides, Mineta testified that fighter jets had already been scrambled when he heard Cheney's associate counting down. So, this is moot since there obviously wasn't a stand down order.

Either you're attempting to falsely contradict my claim or you made a mistake

Option 3, you just refuse to read things fully

....either way you shot yourself in the foot.

By pointing out how completly wrong you are? What are you smoing and where can I get me some? Cuz that must be some good shit.

I'm think I'm done here...

You've been done a while.

[Grislygus]

I just think it's funny you guys play fringe cowboys with conspiracy theories like you're fighting some uphill battle.

Uphill battle? The only thing I asked from Geggy was his own, solid opinion, he gave it, and the conversation between him and myself was closed. I was convinced that he was a capable individual who knew what he was talking about.

Since then, the only "battle" on my part involved you not liking requests to back up arguments. All of my subsequent comments have been directed at you, and it is your arguments that I currently have a problem with.

"Far too many conspiracy theories mention irregularities that are merely suspicious, and means that the government is lying... but only if you felt that way in the first place"

But I don't feel that way at all

I noticed.

and as a reasonable person I find the lack of information involved in something that started a war and is responsible for the current political atmosphere unreasonable. I also find all the recent news about how the administration has been lying and falsifying reports to us indicative of some type of "conspiracy" or a "pattern of discrepancy". Obviously the government was lying, about what I'm not making any real claims.

Exactly. You aren't making any real claims, you don't have any real idea of what's going on. You are merely suspicious of the government, and think the government is lying just because it's the government. Therefore, you rely on more intelligent 9/11 theorists like Geggy to provide real arguments, and rise to their defense if someone has the audacity to question them.

but you guys continue to argue vague notions of reality like "Opinion".

No, YOU continue to argue about opinions, because YOUR opinion is vague at best. You will notice that Geggy had absolutely no problem posting his opinion. Because, unlike you, he has a solid, legitimate opinion.

And I've got news for you, my half-baked friend: If you're a conspiracy theorist on the internet, you have only two things; facts, and your opinion based on those facts.


" The discrepencies he brings up had damn well better be powerful enough to change people's minds, or else he doesn't have a strong argument, doesn't have enough back up, and is quite possibly wrong. "

You can have a strong argument and people will still disagree with you if they are naturally predisposed to disagree with you, infact usually people will disagree MORE SO if they are naturally predisposed.

So is that why you have a problem with opinions?

Why do you expect him to have a wealth of information on an issue that the fundamental issue is the lack of conclusive information.
None of that really would make it right or wrong anyway, just because people are convinced you're right doesn't make it right. Remember when bush won the election BUT LOOK WHERE WE ARE NOW in fact sometimes whats right might be the last thing people want.

One: I DON'T expect him to have a "wealth of information". Haven't you been paying any attention at all? ALL HE DID was offer a wealth of information from OTHER PEOPLE, and I asked that he give his own opinion. WHICH HE DID ADMIRABLY. You had a problem with it because you don't know what you're talking about.

And if you really feel that talking about your theories won't do any good, then feel free to keep quiet.

You guys are crazy, first you ask for his opinion to verify what he's saying then you say the conspiracy theory might be wrong because he can't state his opinion about somebody else's conspiracy theory.

Allright, let's go over this scenario. Again.

"You guys are crazy, first you ask for his opinion to verify what he's saying"
Point A: We ask him to provide his own opinion.

then you say the conspiracy theory might be wrong because he can't state his opinion about somebody else's conspiracy theory.
Point B: He provides other people's opinions. We once again ask him to provide his own

The request is clarified, he gives his own opinion on one aspect of the attacks.

Why do you have a problem with this?

[El Blanco]

Another problem is he obviously isn't reading what he posts. Either its not related to the cryptic message he types himself, contradicts wat he says, or contradicts a post he made very recently.

[kahljorn]

"The only thing I asked from Geggy was his own, solid opinion, he gave it, and the conversation between him and myself was closed."

Pretty gay conversation huh? Like i said, you guys argue in the land of opinions which don't really matter :( Besides I can't believe you guys have read through this forum for however long and you've never seen geggy make a "Solid opinion" or point out a single decent discrepancy.
You guys are sitting here acting like you're having a powow SMOKEM PEACE PIPE we're coming together and finding the truth about geggy's opinion! I just thought it was lame, like something little kids would do. I don't really give a damn about the conspiracy theories themselves.
I don't know I guess I just think you guys have the mental capacity of a four year old, in this instance. You guys can be pretty bright on other topics.

"back up arguments"

BACK UP YOUR ARGUMENT WITH A NICE OPINION NO BETTER WAY TO BE JUSTIFIED

"You aren't making any real claims, you don't have any real idea of what's going on. You are merely suspicious of the government, and think the government is lying just because it's the government. "

If I wanted to argue opinions and pretend to know things about things that nobody except the people there could possibly know(see conspiracy theory) I really could.
But that's not the case, I actually agree with you when you say that stuff like this is either a fuck up or..something. People can still create "Conspiracies" over "Fuck ups" though.
Moreover the entire issue of 9/11, regardless of if there was any actions on our government's part to actually destroy the world trade towers, is that the Government USED the emotional soft spot of Americans to take us into an unjust war, along with the creation of todays socio-political climate. As far as that war goes, and it's justification, THE GOVERNMENT HAS ALREADY ADMITTED TO LYING ABOUT IT.

"Therefore, you rely on more intelligent 9/11 theorists like Geggy to provide real arguments, and rise to their defense if someone has the audacity to question them. "

:LOL Great job bringing out the REAL ARGUMENTS from geggy by asking him for his PERSONAL OPINION. GREAT JOB.
I don't really care about 9/11, I haven't even once really talked about a single conspiracy theory I've been talking about the nature of a conspiracy theory and the logic of your gay "ARGUMENT' which in it's classic terms isn't even a real argument. You do get that that's my problem with your argument is that it's dumb and not really an argument, right? I guess not because you think I'm a conspiracy theororist.
Basically my problem is that your guy's idea of a good argument is when somebody states their personal opinion.
Great "Opinion" you forged there by the way about my being a conspiracy theororist did you develop that while I was talking about the great conspiracy theory of DISCREPANCIES or the great conspiracy of OPINIONS?

"So is that why you have a problem with opinions? "

lol. Is this even worth answering? I have a problem with opinions because they are OPINIONS.
Let's look at the definition of opinion:
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
You asked for his "judgement that rests on insufficient grounds" to produce complete certainty that you know that he knows what he's talking about so he'll have the strength to convince neutral minds otherwise.

"you have only two things; facts, and your opinion based on those facts. "

You guys asked for his opinion on facts but his opinion didn't really matter at all. You see this is the catcher, it's not the damned opinion that matters. It's the "fact" that there was a "Discrepancy" that matters. Geggy didn't really "State his opinion' he stated a "Discrepancy", that's what you guys were convinced of. One that I'm sure he didn't discover through investigative journalism but by reading a bunch of different articles about 9/11.
So why ask for his own words and his own opinion when what mattered most was the discrepancy that was discovered by somebody else? If he stated his opinion without the discrepancy would it have been so valuable? no. it would've had no value, because it wouldn't have had a discrepancy behind it.

And if all you guys needed was a decent discrepancy to convince you that there's justification for considering what happened on 9/11.. i don't know. I give up on life if that's the case :( because there's plenty of decent discrepancies floating around to at least give you the inclination to be interested in what actually happened. I mean, discrepancy alone should be enough to make any normal, healthy person wonder. Especially when it comes down to something important.

"And if you really feel that talking about your theories won't do any good, then feel free to keep quiet."

SORRY ILL EVEN GO BACK AND EDIT MY CONSPIRACY THEORIES OUT OF MY OTHER POSTS

"Why do you have a problem with this?"

Because his opinion has nothing to do with what actually transpired on 9/11?
Because the inevitable pointlessness of asking for opinions has already occured because your conversation is CLOSED. So do you believe everything geggy says now? ARE YOU GOING TOLOOK AT WHAT HE SAYS A LITTLE MORE CLOSELY? NO IT WAS ALL POINTLESS DRAMA.

You guys are little cockteases.

Also I should add that discrepancies in and of themselves don't prove a damned thing.

Oh yea and didn't you guys want him to state his own opinion so he'd have a strong argument, so you guys wo uld know that he knows what he's talking about? So you guys could maybe continue the argument? Why is it that the conversation is now closed, instead of you guys continuing to bring up points?
See, I don't really need to do anything to make my point that your guys stance on this was ridiculous and pointless, the conclusion of this thread and "Argument" is enough. I don't need an "Opinion" to prove that, the discrepancy is clear.
I think it's pretty obvious you guys were just being bitter cunts.

The funniest thing is that I know for a fact if I visited a few other threads I'd find el blanco demanding that geggy stop stating his opinion and supply sources.

[Grislygus]

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present the first volley of the "condescending and rambling" responses, the last stages of an internet argument! Be sure to take notes, you'll be quizzed on this later.

"The only thing I asked from Geggy was his own, solid opinion, he gave it, and the conversation between him and myself was closed."

Pretty gay conversation huh? Like i said, you guys argue in the land of opinions which don't really matter :( Besides I can't believe you guys have read through this forum for however long and you've never seen geggy make a "Solid opinion" or point out a single decent discrepancy.

If you may recall, this thread was awlays entirely about Geggy's opinion.

Could you tell me all about 9/11? Why did America and the Jews blow up the towers?

Ah, memories.

And since the responses were long, inconclusive, the discrepencies vague, with the accusations even more so, I asked for a simple and concise argument. Which seems to enrage you for some reason.

You guys are sitting here acting like you're having a powow SMOKEM PEACE PIPE we're coming together and finding the truth about geggy's opinion! I just thought it was lame, like something little kids would do. I don't really give a damn about the conspiracy theories themselves.

I wasn't under the impression that having intellectual conversations was something that lame little kids do. Maybe we should have played tag instead.

I don't know I guess I just think you guys have the mental capacity of a four year old, in this instance. You guys can be pretty bright on other topics.

Yep. Should have played tag.

"back up arguments"

BACK UP YOUR ARGUMENT WITH A NICE OPINION NO BETTER WAY TO BE JUSTIFIED

If the argument is hazy and unclear, it's nice to be certain of what the person is getting at. Oh, whoops, should have put that in Caps Lock.

"You aren't making any real claims, you don't have any real idea of what's going on. You are merely suspicious of the government, and think the government is lying just because it's the government. "

If I wanted to argue opinions and pretend to know things about things that nobody except the people there could possibly know(see conspiracy theory) I really could.

But if the facts are there, the opinion is sound, and obviously has sound backup, then the truth can be quite clear. However, it is up to the conspiracy theorist to provide this.

But that's not the case, I actually agree with you when you say that stuff like this is either a fuck up or..something. People can still create "Conspiracies" over "Fuck ups" though.

WHICH IS WHY I ASKED HIM TO CLARIFY HIS POSITION. There we go. Nuthin' like caps lock to make an argument more sound.

Moreover the entire issue of 9/11, regardless of if there was any actions on our government's part to actually destroy the world trade towers, is that the Government USED the emotional soft spot of Americans to take us into an unjust war, along with the creation of todays socio-political climate. As far as that war goes, and it's justification, THE GOVERNMENT HAS ALREADY ADMITTED TO LYING ABOUT IT.

Which is why many of these theories rely on people blindly assuming that the government lies about everything, as I have said umpteen billion times.

"Therefore, you rely on more intelligent 9/11 theorists like Geggy to provide real arguments, and rise to their defense if someone has the audacity to question them. "

:LOL Great job bringing out the REAL ARGUMENTS from geggy by asking him for his PERSONAL OPINION. GREAT JOB.

But if the facts are there, the opinion is sound, and obviously has sound backup, then the truth can be quite clear. However, it is up to the conspiracy theorist to provide this.

:LOL


I don't really care about 9/11, I haven't even once really talked about a single conspiracy theory I've been talking about the nature of a conspiracy theory and the logic of your gay "ARGUMENT' which in it's classic terms isn't even a real argument. You do get that that's my problem with your argument is that it's dumb and not really an argument, right?

Do you even listen to yourself? The reason that you're angrily debating me is because my dumb gay little argument isn't really an argument?

How? So far I've refuted everything you've thrown at me. And how is it that I have remained on my one argument the whole time, yet yours jumps around more than Tom Cruise on a coke binge?


"So is that why you have a problem with opinions? "

lol. Is this even worth answering? I have a problem with opinions because they are OPINIONS.
Let's look at the definition of opinion:
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
You asked for his "judgement that rests on insufficient grounds" to produce complete certainty that you know that he knows what he's talking about so he'll have the strength to convince neutral minds otherwise.

Once more...
But if the facts are there, the opinion is sound, and obviously has sound backup, then the truth can be quite clear. However, it is up to the conspiracy theorist to provide this.

:LOL (again)

"you have only two things; facts, and your opinion based on those facts. "

You guys asked for his opinion on facts but his opinion didn't really matter at all. You see this is the catcher, it's not the damned opinion that matters. It's the "fact" that there was a "Discrepancy" that matters. Geggy didn't really "State his opinion' he stated a "Discrepancy", that's what you guys were convinced of. One that I'm sure he didn't discover through investigative journalism but by reading a bunch of different articles about 9/11.

He stated his opinion based on the discrepency he provided. Why the hell is this so hard to understand?


So why ask for his own words and his own opinion when what mattered most was the discrepancy that was discovered by somebody else? If he stated his opinion without the discrepancy would it have been so valuable? no. it would've had no value, because it wouldn't have had a discrepancy behind it.

Of course not. If his opinion HADN'T HAD SOME SOUND BACKUP AND EVIDENCE, his opinion would have been worthless, and he would have been dismissed. You don't seem to realize that people are, by nature, curious.

And if all you guys needed was a decent discrepancy to convince you that there's justification for considering what happened on 9/11.. i don't know. I give up on life if that's the case :( because there's plenty of decent discrepancies floating around to at least give you the inclination to be interested in what actually happened. I mean, discrepancy alone should be enough to make any normal, healthy person wonder. Especially when it comes down to something important.

We needed a discrepency, one that he proved that he understood, to prove that he wasn't just pulling things out of his ass, Mr. "I don't know anything about 9/11 conspiracies".

"And if you really feel that talking about your theories won't do any good, then feel free to keep quiet."

SORRY ILL EVEN GO BACK AND EDIT MY CONSPIRACY THEORIES OUT OF MY OTHER POSTS

You've got me there. But my point still stands. If you really think that this is futile, then why are you talking about it?


"Why do you have a problem with this?"

Because his opinion has nothing to do with what actually transpired on 9/11?
Because the inevitable pointlessness of asking for opinions has already occured because your conversation is CLOSED. So do you believe everything geggy says now? ARE YOU GOING TOLOOK AT WHAT HE SAYS A LITTLE MORE CLOSELY? NO IT WAS ALL POINTLESS DRAMA.

What, and what you're doing isn't pointless drama? As I have before stated, any moron can pull a conspiracy theory out of his ass, and if Geggy was to be taken seriously, he needed to prove that he understood the subject and wasn't some thirteen year old with a copy/paste button. It's still up to him to convince me, but at least now I know that he shouldn't be simply dismissed.

You guys are little cockteases.

Totally not pointless drama.


Also I should add that discrepancies in and of themselves don't prove a damned thing.

Oh yea and didn't you guys want him to state his own opinion so he'd have a strong argument, so you guys wo uld know that he knows what he's talking about? So you guys could maybe continue the argument? Why is it that the conversation is now closed, instead of you guys continuing to bring up points?

It's not closed between the people still engaged in the debate, idiot. I am not well-versed in the event, therefore am unable to refute arguments. However, as a theorist myself, I brought up my initial reaction to his theories, and his way of presenting information.

See, I don't really need to do anything to make my point that your guys stance on this was ridiculous and pointless, the conclusion of this thread and "Argument" is enough. I don't need an "Opinion" to prove that, the discrepancy is clear.
I think it's pretty obvious you guys were just being bitter cunts.

In that case, feel free to stop arguing, if it's that obvious that my argument is ridiculous. Furthermore, YOU are the only one who's being bitter about anything. The fact remains that Geggy gladly complied with my request, and YOU just want something to yell about.

[El Blanco]

The funniest thing is that I know for a fact if I visited a few other threads I'd find el blanco demanding that geggy stop stating his opinion and supply sources.


How I spotted this amongst that mountain of rambling insanity, I'll never know.

Go right ahead. Geggy has yet to post an original thought. He always cut-n-pastes other people, so I never had to search for his "sources".

[Grislygus]

And, that wraps up all of your arguments, Kahljorn.

[kahljorn]

What I don't get is why you can't just take what he posts and develop your own opinions without asking him for his opinion(el blanco did that to the 9/11 commission report thing and look how much better the argument developed, there were actual responses :O). His opinion and the facts are seperate. Most of everything else was me just acting like you guys.
Instead you have him pull some "Opinion" out of his ass that you were satisfied with wherein which the "Opinion" was 1/32nd of the post he made, whereas the other part was what he has learned from news sources. Do you know how I know this? Because I know that he wasn't standing there with dick cheney. Did you read any of the reports he classified as relevant?

Did you read the opinion/discrepancy you stated as satisfying? Didn't el blanco tear it apart in something like five minutes? And that satisfied you that you knew that he knew what he was talking about? And somehow I'm the bad guy between you two. Hilarity.

So after he satisfied you with that did you go back and read everything he's posted? Or even read the post he made in this thread wherein "Officials" commented on the 9/11 incident? Just curious.

"How I spotted this amongst that mountain of rambling insanity, I'll never know."

PROBABLY BECAUSE IT WAS AT THE END OF IT, USUALLY YOU REMEMBER THE END OF THINGS BECAUSE THATS WHERE YOU STOP DOING THEM.

I have to admit el blanco has the most solid position between you two as a redundant asshole. I'm not even sure most of the time if el blanco is talking out of his ass, were there really 14 jets to defend the united states? Did he actually refute what geggy said? This mystery will always stand. However, most of it seemed to make sense to me.

And it's not necessarily in this instance that i belive there's some conspiracy theory. The conspiracy theory to me is the fact that something bad happened and information is withheld and distorted, causing a war and bad political atmosphere- right? that's bad. See, I agree entirely that it's a fuck up or something funny's going on with big discrepancies like this, except to me they serve the same purpose, because regardless of if you have a fuck up in office or someone fucking people over that person needs to be removed from office.
You see, regardless of what happened, to me, the situation needs to be accessed to see if that's deserving. That's how logical and reasonable people deal with things, because you don't want fuck ups and fuck overs in responsible positions, you don't want anything but the normal kind of fucks. Procreative fucks. It's natural and healthy.
I think in light of the evidences there is some room for feeling that way. We tried to impeach somebody for getting a blow job and then lying about it.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Holy shit, this may be the dumbest discussion in this board's infamous history.

Kahl, Geggy DOES NOT read what he posts! He often provides links, intended to support his arguments, that have nothing at all to do with the discussion. As Blanco did on the 9/11 testimony, you can often refute Geggy's claims using the same links he has provided.

I don't care about anything else said here, but these things are frequent and undeniable, and it's the most obvious annoyance when it comes to Geggy, imo.

[kahljorn]

I know he does that ;/ I even mentioned that in a few of my posts.

I was mostly making fun of grislygus.

[Grislygus]

Dammit, I was hoping that you would ignore what Geggy wrote.

[kahljorn]

I'll pay less attention next time :(

[Grislygus]

Oh, well. It worked for a little while.

[kahljorn]

By the way I forgot to comment on the little kid thing you see the reason I mentioned that is because despite this little encounter you guys had: you apparantly still haven't read anything geggy posted or responded to any of the material, thus satisfying that there was no "argument" or debate; el blanco still isn't particularly satisfied by geggy and probably never will be.
Also the thing that bothers me the most is that the discrepancy you seemed most satisfied with is the most obvious one. Do you know what I'm referring to?

[Ant10708]

I think the government is behind kahljorn not having a hobby.

[kahljorn]

I've never even met the government, you liar.

[Grislygus]

By the way I forgot to comment on the little kid thing you see the reason I mentioned that is because despite this little encounter you guys had: you apparantly still haven't read anything geggy posted or responded to any of the material, thus satisfying that there was no "argument" or debate; el blanco still isn't particularly satisfied by geggy and probably never will be.
Also the thing that bothers me the most is that the discrepancy you seemed most satisfied with is the most obvious one. Do you know what I'm referring to?

I didn't pay attention to Geggy's posts, I was too busy being pissy with you.

[kahljorn]

but you said you had resolved your quarrel with him, and you were satisfied of his opinion that cheney did it for money- the most obvious and convenient theory.

Geggy is obviously just compulsive by nature. he gets BRAINSTORMZ.

[Grislygus]

I knew his argument had something to do with Jets not being deployed. That's about it.

I like arguing.


Besides, my beef wasn't with the subject matter, just the way in which it was presented.

[kahljorn]

My guess would be that the jet deployment is one of millions of reasons for geggy's argument.

[El Blanco]

Damn, I'm an idiot and ashamed I missed this.

Geggy, nobody's testimony transcript is in the Report itslef. There are references and some excerpts, but the 9/11CR is about the findings and conclusions of the panel. Its like a judge's ruling.

A judge will refer and occassionaly quote witness testimony, but the document he issues is not a trial transcript. Those are available seperatly.