9/11 : Ten Years?!

[Tricky Dicky]

i dont know why i have to watch the video *again* does Forbes say something he hasn't done before? there was a power outage in his tower the weekend before which he (though his hundreds of colleges dont) finds suspicious.

for conjecture, as i said earlier, watch some documentries on demolitions, where they take weeks to rig a completely empty, bare site. also find expert demolitions who have stated a demolition would be unfeasible and theres also comments that thermite wouldn't work. theres also data out there that the amount of explosives required for such a building would be hundreds of tons. for every engineer or architect counted as supporting the theory theres something "wrong" with the collapse, theres a dozen or more that dont. are they supposed to all be in on it, or have they looked at the data and decided that (as unlikly as it seemd) the collapse is prossible and pluasible so no further enquiry is required?

If you watched the documentary on BBC3 last night, very credible experts displled all the problems surrounding the collapse of the 2 towers. No problems with the way it fell, the thermite argument was blown away ('scuse the pun), which would have taken many tons of material and hundreds of man hours to plant, and very difficult to ignite. The 5 conspiracy theory subjects of the program were all muppets (not because of what they believed, but they just came across as idiots, surely they could have found better people to represent that side of the argument) - but even the most vehement of those regarding the buidling collapse changed his mind in light of this testimoney.

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

Let's face it, IF this was all organised by the US government for whatever reason (which I believe is horse shit), they would have miraculously had a warning put out hours before claiming to have interpreted the terrorists intentions. Everyone within a mile would have been evacuated and the "Missiles" cleverly disguised as aeroplanes, would have just destroyed the buildings.

There is NO BLOODY WAY that the American government would have willingly killed that many people. No way. It was a terrorist attack.

 

[tezz79]

Cheers fella. Just read it. That seems pretty thorough.

No worries mate, yeah I thought it gave a pretty good explanation.... Admittedly I know nothing about architecture but it all sounds reasonable

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

The 5 conspiracy theory subjects of the program were all muppets (not because of what they believed, but they just came across as idiots, surely they could have found better people to represent that side of the argument)

Hmmmmmmmm.

 

[thejackal]

i dont know why i have to watch the video *again* does Forbes say something he hasn't done before? there was a power outage in his tower the weekend before which he (though his hundreds of colleges dont) finds suspicious.

for conjecture, as i said earlier, watch some documentries on demolitions, where they take weeks to rig a completely empty, bare site. also find expert demolitions who have stated a demolition would be unfeasible and theres also comments that thermite wouldn't work. theres also data out there that the amount of explosives required for such a building would be hundreds of tons. for every engineer or architect counted as supporting the theory theres something "wrong" with the collapse, theres a dozen or more that dont. are they supposed to all be in on it, or have they looked at the data and decided that (as unlikly as it seemd) the collapse is prossible and pluasible so no further enquiry is required?

I didn't ask you to watch it again. I just stated that I didnt think you had watched it in the first place, and I stand by that assertion.

As I said before, I don't necessarily believe explosives were placed in the building, so it's a bit of a red herring if you ask me.

That said, you're figures are bollox. There's never a 'dozen or more to one'. You made that up.

But, like I said, I think it's a mistake to focus on factors that are very hard to prove either way. In any criminal investigation you follow the money: 'cui bono', or 'who benefits' from this crime, and you focus on assertions that can be proved, such as the lies from the White House.


EDIT - In any case, the point must be this:

If the US govt had allowed a criminal investigation then we wouldn't be having this argument because we would know the truth.

What is absolutely clear - and this really cannot be denied - is that we don't know the truth.

We know the White House lied, refused to answer questions and obfuscated the facts. This is accepted by both sides. So, the story we have now, or large elements of it, is patently false.

 

[thejackal]

Let's face it, IF this was all organised by the US government for whatever reason (which I believe is horse shit), they would have miraculously had a warning put out hours before claiming to have interpreted the terrorists intentions. Everyone within a mile would have been evacuated and the "Missiles" cleverly disguised as aeroplanes, would have just destroyed the buildings.

There is NO BLOODY WAY that the American government would have willingly killed that many people. No way. It was a terrorist attack.

Well, they did it in the 1993 WTC bombing. They did exactly that.

In fact, history is replete with examples of governments killing their own citizens (as well as other country's citizens, but we accept that without question) for political gain.

Can't you see that your last statement is just an assertion of your opinion?

In any case, it's not the 'goverment' that's accused of being complicit in 9/11, but rogue elements within government. If you didn't know anything about rogue US government groups then have a read of this, it's not very long:

Iran Contra Affrair - Wiki

 

[sten_super]

I didn't ask you to watch it again. I just stated that I didnt think you had watched it in the first place, and I stand by that assertion.

As I said before, I don't necessarily believe explosives were placed in the building, so it's a bit of a red herring if you ask me.

That said, you're figures are bollox. There's never a 'dozen or more to one'. You made that up.

But, like I said, I think it's a mistake to focus on factors that are very hard to prove either way. In any criminal investigation you follow the money: 'cui bono', or 'who benefits' from this crime, and you focus on assertions that can be proved, such as the lies from the White House.

The problem that I have with your approach (and that of many other 'conspiracy' theorists as well) is two-fold;

1) You go into the debate expecting to find evidence of a conspiracy. In an earlier post you say that 'Just because this [a power outage] happens in the course of normal life doesn't mean that it coudn't be used as cover for something else.' Any occurance that 'could' have sinister motives is automatically assumed to do so. Relationships which are in all likelihood completely irrelevant (see the Bushs' relationship with people in charge of security in the towers) are automatically assumed to have had nefarious purpose without any evidence.

2) The evidence-picking is very selective. Evidence that can in some way back up your supposition is bought into the fold - anything which backs the official story is dismissed. Your dismissal (quoted above) of beorhthelm and ignorance of Bold Seagull's pretty comprehensive explanation of the collapse is evidence of that. The same is not (on the evidence of this thread) true in reverse.

 

[wallyback]

Israel's involment in 9/11

Does anyone know anything about the Israelites who were discovered filming the twin towers attack. Also seem jumping for joy when the planes hit. Apparently were arrested at the time for acting suspiciously. Released over a month later, and were found to be linked with Mossad.

Also on 9/11 a bomb warning was phoned in to the police dept stating a white van full of explosives was going to go off on a NY bridge. The caller said it was being carried out by Palestinians. The bridges were sealed off and the terrorists were found to be Israelites not Arabs.

Anyone know more about this?

 

[thejackal]

The problem that I have with your approach (and that of many other 'conspiracy' theorists as well) is two-fold;

1) You go into the debate expecting to find evidence of a conspiracy. In an earlier post you say that 'Just because this [a power outage] happens in the course of normal life doesn't mean that it coudn't be used as cover for something else.' Any occurance that 'could' have sinister motives is automatically assumed to do so. Relationships which are in all likelihood completely irrelevant (see the Bushs' relationship with people in charge of security in the towers) are automatically assumed to have had nefarious purpose without any evidence.

2) The evidence-picking is very selective. Evidence that can in some way back up your supposition is bought into the fold - anything which backs the official story is dismissed. Your dismissal (quoted above) of beorhthelm and ignorance of Bold Seagull's pretty comprehensive explanation of the collapse is evidence of that. The same is not (on the evidence of this thread) true in reverse.

I'm sorry but you're wrong on three counts.

1) I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I base my judgments on fact. I have friends that have worked in the secret services of several countries and my father was once a diplomat for a fairly unstable south american country. I know shit-loads about secret governemt and the crap they get up to, that you will NEVER see on the news. That's just the reality of life, but ALL of my assertions of conspiracy are based on credible testimony, agreed facts and my own personal experiences.

2) I never expected to find a conspiracy. I was living in the US at the time, and was caught up in the emotion of the thing. It tooks me years of reading, and paying attention to the lies etc, before I came to the conclusion that the official story is a load of old bollox, which it is. Honestly, you won't find many people alive now that believe the whole story 100% Its just not believable.

3) As I have said, I don't believe the buildings were necessarily rigged with explosives so that last point is fairly moot. The whole issue of whether they're telling us the truth does not rest on whether the buidings were rigged or not. It's not central to the unnofficial 'conspiracy', if indeed there was one.

 

[thejackal]

Does anyone know anything about the Israelites who were discovered filming the twin towers attack. Also seem jumping for joy when the planes hit. Apparently were arrested at the time for acting suspiciously. Released over a month later, and were found to be linked with Mossad.

Also on 9/11 a bomb warning was phoned in to the police dept stating a white van full of explosives was going to go off on a NY bridge. The caller said it was being carried out by Palestinians. The bridges were sealed off and the terrorists were found to be Israelites not Arabs.

Anyone know more about this?

Yes I know quite a bit about the 5 Israelis.

They were seen in a car park across the water from New York, as the attacks were happening, dancing, filming and high-fiving each other.

When they were arrested, shortly afterwards, because they 'looked like terrorists':

1) The 'removal van' that they were travelling in was registered to a removal company "Urban Moving System" which is a known front operation fot the Mossad (Israeli secret police). Most of the employess of the company were Israeli;

2) According to ABC news, upon being stopped they are quoted as saying "We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem.";

3) A few days after their arrest, Urban Moving System's Israeli owner, Dominick Suter, dropped his business and fled the country for Israel. He was in such a hurry to flee America that some of Urban Moving System's customers were left with their furniture stranded in storage facilities

4) The Jewish weekly The Forward reported that the FBI finally concluded that at least two of the detained Israelis were agents working for the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, and that Urban Moving Systems, the ostensible employer of the five Israelis, was a front operation. This was confirmed by two former CIA officers, and they noted that movers' vans are a common intelligence cover.

5) Several of the detainees discussed their experience in America on an Israeli talk show after their return home. Said one of the men, denying that they were laughing or happy on the morning of Sept. 11, "The fact of the matter is we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event."

This article is a reprint from the North Jersey News, now taken down from their site:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/12/WTC_Mysteries3.html

There are plenty of other credible accounts online, if you care to google for them.

 

[wallyback]

Yes I know quite a bit about the 5 Israelis.

They were seen in a car park across the water from New York, as the attacks were happening, dancing, filming and high-fiving each other.

When they were arrested, shortly afterwards, because they 'looked like terrorists':

1) The 'removal van' that they were travelling in was registered to a removal company "Urban Moving System" which is a known front operation fot the Mossad (Israeli secret police). Most of the employess of the company were Israeli;

2) According to ABC news, upon being stopped they are quoted as saying "We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem.";

3) A few days after their arrest, Urban Moving System's Israeli owner, Dominick Suter, dropped his business and fled the country for Israel. He was in such a hurry to flee America that some of Urban Moving System's customers were left with their furniture stranded in storage facilities

4) The Jewish weekly The Forward reported that the FBI finally concluded that at least two of the detained Israelis were agents working for the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, and that Urban Moving Systems, the ostensible employer of the five Israelis, was a front operation. This was confirmed by two former CIA officers, and they noted that movers' vans are a common intelligence cover.

5) Several of the detainees discussed their experience in America on an Israeli talk show after their return home. Said one of the men, denying that they were laughing or happy on the morning of Sept. 11, "The fact of the matter is we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event."

This article is a reprint from the North Jersey News, now taken down from their site:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/12/WTC_Mysteries3.html

There are plenty of other credible accounts online, if you care to google for them.

So am I right in saying that the Israelies/Mossad were aware of 9/11 before it happened and did not pass on vital info as they knew the USA would react by attacking the Arab nations?

 

[beorhthelm]

That said, you're figures are bollox. There's never a 'dozen or more to one'. You made that up.

yes, its made up. on the basis of one of the videos posted (or ive seen in the last few days) that claim 1200 engineers and architects question the offical version of the collapse. there are at least tens (hundreds?) of thousands of qualified engineers and architects in the US alone, so i think "dozen or more to one" seems a understatement. and since you dont know the difference between "your" and you're", i will ignore your opinion on the basis of lack of education.

though to note the demolition theory is far more than a red herring. its pretty central to all 9/11 conspiracies.

 

[thejackal]

So am I right in saying that the Israelies/Mossad were aware of 9/11 before it happened and did not pass on vital info as they knew the USA would react by attacking the Arab nations?

I can't say that for sure but there's a lot of evidence to suggest that it may be true.

Have you heard of the 'Odigo Messenger' incident?

Odigo Messenger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This, again, may be a bit of a red herring as the story seems to have changed a little over time.

 

[thejackal]

yes, its made up. on the basis of one of the videos posted (or ive seen in the last few days) that claim 1200 engineers and architects question the offical version of the collapse. there are at least tens (hundreds?) of thousands of qualified engineers and architects in the US alone, so i think "dozen or more to one" seems a understatement. and since you dont know the difference between "your" and you're", i will ignore your opinion on the basis of lack of education.

It was a typo, you cretin. I have a Masters and an Honours degree, so go f*** yourself, you idiot.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

This is accepted by both sides. So, the story we have now, or large elements of it, is patently false.

What an absolutely ridiculous argument. Just because you don't know everything, means what you do know is false ?? What rubbish.

 

[thejackal]

What an absolutely ridiculous argument. Just because you don't know everything, means what you do know is false ?? What rubbish.

No, that's not what I said. Enough of the story is known to be false, that the whole offical story cannot be taken at face value. Read (at least some of) the offical commision report, and then you'll understand what I'm saying.

Anyway kids, I've got to go out for the rest of the day. Enjoy, and I'll try to catch up with all this nonsense later tonight. Peace.

 

[Basil Fawlty]

I think this debate will rumble on for years and years. There is nothing in my mind, that it was a Terrorist Attack and it should never happen again. I will always remember what I was doing ten years ago, like the others will.

 

[beorhthelm]

It was a typo, you cretin. I have a Masters and an Honours degree, so go f*** yourself, you idiot.

you're very abusive for someone so highly educated. but a nice evasion from the point being made.

 

[colinz]

 

[wallyback]

But many New Yorkers saw the 2nd plane hit for sure, plus other video cameras