New 9/11 Facts

[BTs_FahQ2]

It amazes me at what people consider to believe and not to believe. Do you really think the government had the capacity to do this (maybe, big maybe), but to keep all involved in this hush operation quiet about it. This is the same government that couldn't keep a blowjob within it's most secured walls secret, taped conversations that less that 5 people knew about suddently leaked, sealed congressional grand jury testimonies, defense weapons, the atomic bomb, "secret bunker" under washington, NORAD, military in laos and cambodia in vietnam, and many many more things that are hush hush and high level security items.

But for some super reason we believe our government and all the people that would need to be involved in a "mock" 9/11 are all keeping quiet about this covert OP. Along with the aliens, elvis, secret black helicopters and chubacabras. For some reason we can't get the "facts" because of our governments grand ability to keep secrets.

Please. Buildings can be designed for many things, and I read a shitload on many different theories about why the buildings fellt he way they did, but no building was designed to be hit by a plane, have burning air fuel go all the way down elevator shafts and have an expected collapse result. Not only this, but we are talking about a set of buildings that are uniquely designed with no other building structures like it in the world. They were based on a structural skin to hold them up.

So no, i can't tell you why buildings fell the way they did and I am pretty sure that peole can only "theorize" why they fell the way they did. Because the buildings were unique, the situation was unique and it's basically something that could never be reproduced.

So yes, i do accept the general story put forward to me about the events of 9/11. So Lone, since you don't believe buildings fell in the manner in which they should when hit by planes and fire, can you please share with us your theory of 9/11? Basically the who, what, where, why and when.

I have heard the iraq theories but even I can shoot holes in that reasoning.

[c| Spetsnaz.]

I'm not going to debate anything because I feel 9/11 is a very personal issue for all of us and we have to come to our own conclusions.

There is so much information out there, some designed to be misinformation to further discredit the 9/11 truth movement. It's all matter of determining the academic viability of the sources.

From a political science standpoint it is not unprecedented for a government to attack and murder its own people in order to achieve strategic objectives. In the American context see Operation Northwoods in which the DoD floated around the idea of starting a terrorist campaign in Miami to garner popular support for the invasion of Cuba. In the world context see the 1933 burning of the German Reichstag which set up the foundations of Nazi Germany by instituting martial law. It's the oldest trick in politics, fear always produces conformity.

I'll save you the dissertation on the anomalies surrounding the buildup to the attacks and the official explanation as purported by the 9/11 commission.

 If you seriously want to learn more about what transpired on 9/11 and why, check out the scholarly works of;http://www.amazon.com/11-Commission-Report-Omissions-Distortions/dp/1566565847/sr=1-3/qid=1159999597/ref=pd_bbs_3/002-9690017-2568037?ie=UTF8&s=books  and http://www.amazon.com/11-American-Empire-Intellectuals-Speak/dp/1566566592/sr=1-4/qid=1159999597/ref=sr_1_4/002-9690017-2568037?ie=UTF8&s=books.

Think of what the government has done as a direct result of 9/11; Invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq, Patriot Act, torture, secret prison camps, undermining of international law and the Geneva convention, the murder of more than 50,000 Iraqis, the death of almost 3,000 American troops, the roll back of the Bill of Rights and Constitution, the greatest defense spending buildup ever, blemishing of what the United States stands for, bankrupting the future and most recently the passage of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 which would permit an individual to be convicted on the basis of coerced testimony and hearsay, would not allow full judicial review of the conviction, and yet would allow someone convicted under these rules to be put to death, this includes US citizens.

Welcome to fascism.

[BTs_FahQ2]

k, so accept 9/11 as an action and result of our government. Now rationally think about those said results you stated and think to yourself, "why would they do this". And who did it?

From what you list all results of 9/11 would be profoundly negative and it would be hard to find a cause that it helped. You can't really blame democrat or replublican since all events amassed over the control and institutions of both parties. Economically we are no better, the economy pushed itself out of a recession but we are on the verge of another and we do have much more debt. We didn't gain more global stability, prowess, or anything else. And the control of our government is on the verge of changing hands once again without any clear cut victor (unless you are expecting some sort of rigged election that i bet you would claim across the bush election).

In the end we are still a government of the people and capitilism still reigns. Facism and it's leader is really nowhere in sight and if you say we are currently under it, it would end upon the next election wouldn't it? Or is this a new era that shall continue?

Now don't get me wrong, I am far from any sheep that follows the masses and I do see things from many lights. But skepticism should have bounds. Of course I take the official commission report with a grain of salt much like I do the kennedy commission's. But I am also aware that shit happens and predictions and analyzations of freak occurences can never 100% truly be explained with pure accuracy.

[BTs_FahQ2]

btw this is a line from the summation of one of your books

Bush administration "deliberately" failed to prevent the attacks or, more chillingly, "was actively involved in the planning and execution of the attacks." Why? To spur the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and the occupation of their valuable oil and natural gas resources.

erm....I am not sure what pump you get your gas at, but mine charges double from what it did before the war. And you could argue that it's for the oil companies profits. But actually British petroleum, citgo, and some other russian oil companies squeeze us for way more and they are against these actions.

mong the problems Griffin says the commissioners fail to address are discrepancies in the hijackers' identities;

this has been a well known problem in Islamic countries since the religions inception. They subsequently all use similiar biblical names and interchange them frequently across areas of birth, marriages, death of family members and so on and on. In addition, their record keeping of births, deaths and all else is vastly archaic. Hell I learned this is epidemiology class and the inability of accurancy in this area.

hrm....this is how i look at facts and your citations have more holes then the "official reports"

In addition the other book.....

Both the government and the mainstream media have since tried to portray the 9/11 truth movement as led by people who can be dismissed as "conspiracy theorists" able to find an outlet for their ideas only on the internet.

did the author actually write this? haahahahha. Jesus, that statement is so assbackwards. I am sorry to dismiss the books on simple items, but I would really have to read a whole one. I have read though tons of captions and pieces across the internet and in editorials and all the other talk radio stuff. Even the history channel will do a show about one every now and then. I think in a whole they pretty much all cover the same items.

[7.Dr.Cheap Shot]

Wow, this really took off didn't it.  Hey Fah, I was wondering if you actually saw these particular vids that were posted?  Now, personally I don't think our government was responsible for political reasons.  What I think is, let me stress MY thought, is that the main player was that real-estate tycoon guy who stood to gain the most from the destruction and re-build of the center, sorry don't remember his name, AND people in our government acting in their own intrests.  All those side companies these people have.  And since they work in our government, unfortunatly it points the finger at it.

See, you're right on the fact that our economy did not get better after the fact but, some people sure did get richer didn't they.

Heh, I just thought about after I saw these and I told my wife about them, she got very defensive and we ended up yelling at eachother because she didn't believe what I was saying I saw in these vids, and I was getting pissed off telling her how could you disagree with something you haven't seen.  Long story short I convinced her to watch them, I'll just say that she did appologize to me afterwards.

Now I haven't researched any of the stuff in these vids, like for example, were those people they interviewed really who they said they were and stuff.  If they were, then I don't understand how anybody could believe the so called truth that is advertised to us. 

If you havn't seen these particular ones, I urge you too, then post about it.  Also what I got from these is they weren't pointing a finger at anybody, they were disclosing the facts they got from their investigation and leaving you to make your own judgement.

Well, thanks for all the posts, I enjoyed reading all of them.

Cheap

[c| Spetsnaz.]

"why would they do this". And who did it?

Quite simply 9/11 was the "New Pearl Harbor" that Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and the rest of the PNAC chairs had dreamt about since the fall of the Soviet Union. If you want to know what philosophy these guys are all about look up Leo Strauss.

When the Soviet Union fell the demand for a massive military budget was mitigated. Ah, but the neocons had a wish list of policy objectives (including the democratization of the middle east and the world by the use of unfettered military power) that could not be realized by post cold war defense budgets. 9/11 fulfilled every objective.

9/11 was not about partisan politics, it was about the future of the American Empire.

The real question here is would the "elites*" murder 3,000 people and cower the population in to a frantic state of submission in order to insure American hegemony over global energy stocks by way of unfettered military force and to insure the existence of the American Empire for the next 100 years?

*By elites, I mean those in power, Red and or Blue, corporate heads; essentially not me or you or probably anyone you know.

When you look at it all objectively and from a much larger strategic stand point the attacks of 9/11 were necessary and imperative to the future existence of the United States. The elites knew this, they knew that the only way to garner popular support for the occupation of the second largest oil field on Earth was to scare the hell out of and anger the American public, they know that the American way of life is contingent upon the amount of cheap and free flowing hydrocarbon fuels, they know xenophobia is a powerful tool and they knew they could get away with it clean because they make the laws, enforce the laws and hand pick the commissions that investigate their crimes.

When you look at it all from a moral standpoint it was one of the most horrific and greatest crimes against humanity since the holocaust. It gave way to perhaps the most tragic era in United States history, an era where freedom is merely a word in a corporate slogan. And when I say welcome to fascism I mean in the way Mussolini best stated that it is the perfect merger of corporation and state.

I'm expected to believe that a group of Islamic fundamentalists with no professional training single handedly breached the most sophisticated intelligence apparatus in the existence of humanity and flew airliners into two prominent skyscrapers and the most heavily defended building on Earth in precision attacks after having no previous in flight experience.

And what is an Islamic fundamentalist anyway? Could it be something our government created and promoted in order to counter the Soviet encroachment on Afghanistan in the late 1970's? A seed planted by naive war mongers that came back to haunt us or a pawn in the complex game of geopolitics?

All I know is that 9/11 was not the work of amateurs, as the government wants me to believe. It was the work of calculating, professional and very sinister forces.

The government constantly wants more power and is willing to sacrifice 3,000 non-elties to preserve and augment that power as it has been willing to do in the past.

In any case nothing typed here will change any opinions, all I can do is encourage research.

[c| Lone-Wolf]

Who do I believe did it, Fah?  I dont know, but what I do know and what my main sticking point is, a lot of things do not add up and do not make sense, no matter how much I would like to believe the story that's generally accepted, I simply cant, so I question.  Right now my questioning points me towards something involving our own government, but how involved is nothing I think anyone will ever know for certain, if indeed this is the case. 

[BTs_FahQ2]

heh, this is getting quite fun.

Cheap - Yeah I've seen the videos and variations of them many time. And yes some people did get rich, but people get rich off of disasters all of the time. This about Katrina, millions will be made by construction companies, but I don't suddently believe the theories of a Yakuza involvement and then further that theory by blaming everyone else who made money off of the event. And you can apply that disaster to just about any man made or natural disaster. Hell, we made more money nuking and rebuilding Japan then you could ever believe. So did we bomb them for economic repercussions or to actually win a war?

Spetz - Let us take this all a step further to analyze your theories. But first a little other analysis. First you use the term neocon. So this rogue group of conservatives had the ability to amass this power and influence within a democratic government across 2 administrations that absolutely hate each other. And the term neocon is just a hyped up word with absolutely no meaning. I mean promoting US interests by installing democracy across the world? That is essentially impossible. Why would any elected government in another nation automatic choose to support the US and it's interest when any citizen of their own country would choose to advance their own interests. Almost every democratically elected government across the world hates the US and does all it can to not support it outside of Israel. And they only like us because we support them militarily, outside of that they think we are retarded as well.

The future of the American empire. Now this is a good one. Anyone with any bit of a higher education would know instability creates disaster amongst economic markets. Not only that, but destroys the chain of supply to meet demands. The future of the American Empire would be hurt by subsequent wars do to it's vast costs and creation of instability. All of which is happening now. Examples would be stagnation within Iraq and Afghanistan along with the lack of support among it's citizens. So how is it we can prosper from the vast amounts of oil in Iraq when we can't control a whole city to pipe it out of? this makes no sense.

In addition we are fighting the war with borrowing and deficit spending. The following has resulted in  us having to borrow capital from banks outside of our trusted lenders in Europe and Japan. In actuality we are now borrowing from banks deeper within asia including China, the fastest rising competitor to our "American Empire". So tell me this, why would we pay interest to a government we do not trust and who is in turn using that capital to invest in their own oil interests within Iran, Venezuela and Russia (also distrusted states). So to ensure our future we create a war that is strengthening our enemies? This also does not add up. In addition, our government is not buying oil at the same prices before the war much like you and me are not. So how can they ensure this vast american empire by spending more on oil which in turn leads to less essential and social programs within it's infrastructure which is necessary to ensure our dominance. Wouldn't it make mroe sense to not disrupt current markets to keep oil prices low, invest in schooling and sciences for an actual long term investment in our livelyhood, as well as many other necessary things.

Your morale argument. Well i guess this is your own opinion. There are people who lived through the Killing Fields of Cambodia, Mao in China, Socialist oppressions, ethiopia, somalia so on and so forth that have been the most horrific and greatest crimes since the holocaust. Someone listening to my phone calls of me not doing crimes that I do not involve myself in is a bit of an annoyance compared to these things. True, a loss of "freedom" to some, but maybe security to others. The stance on this is objective and is being fought out as we type. And since you sate this event this way, do you truly expect this on the horizon in your own lifetime, is this what you think you will see?

Islamic fundamentalist - Since the crusades and before there have been islamic fundamentalist. Since the Caliphs wanted to take jerusalem they used a fundamentalist ideal to inspire warriors upon battle. This is truly naive of you to blame it on some CIA inspired objective. What we consider a fundamentalist is ever changing from generation to generation. Christian fundamentalist today were just devout christians in other times.

Now to get a bit more insight and all questions here are genuine - Since you believe your government or whoever american was responsible for this catastrophe, do you trust anything governmental? Can you? And is there any real actions planned by people who believe like you that really want to expose the truth and install something new and just? Or is this shadow group too powerful and we are forced to live by their sway no matter what? Do you think you now have to go with the flow and look out for your own to prepare for the inevitable? I just want a sense of what the bigger picture is. Cause if you believe what is essentially in control of your daily life within it's borders so corrupt for the gain of a few, how far does this go?

[c| Spetsnaz.]

I'm not going to argue with you about my higher education, the perceived definition of words or textbook global economics. Nothing about 9/11 was textbook.

Let's simply agree on our disagreements.

• 9/11 was committed by an isolated group of islamic fundamentalist with no professional help.
I disagree.

• The roll back of essential liberties is for our personal security.
I disagree.

• Islamic fundamentalism has always existed in its current from.
I disagree, in fact it's well documented that it was encouraged by US interests as a catalyst for uniting the disparate Mujahadeen groups in Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion.

• Saddam Hussein had a hand in the 9/11 attacks and possessed WMD's.
I disagree.

• The war in Iraq was not about securing the second largest oil reserves on the Earth.
I disagree.

• The 9/11 commission answered all the questions surrounding this tragedy.
I disagree, in fact the commission was hand picked by the administration. Also notable is the fact that the commission claims who funded the attacks is of "no practical significance", when it is widely know that the head of the Pakistani ISI wired Mohammed Atta $100,000 weeks before. Interestingly enough this same man was in Washington meeting with Porter Goss the current head of the CIA on 9/11.

• The government actively heeded threats and pursued all leads diligently in the pre-9/11 timeframe.
I disagree, and its well documented that the government's incompetence at this time was unprecedented.

• The government is honest and is looking out for our best interest.
I disagree.

• It makes sense that the most defended building on Earth was attacked 1 hour and 20 mins after the initial hijacking began without fighter jets being scrambled out of Andrews Airforce base which is less than 10 mins away
I disagree.

• The notion of a government murdering its own people for strategic gain is unprecedented.
I disagree.

The attacks of 9/11 were successful because elements of the government wanted them to be. The mere perception of the masses that such a thing would be impossible is what made it possible.

9/11: Four Interpretations

• 1. Those who accept the official explanation, 9/11 was a surprise attack on the US government and its people by Islamic terrorists
• 2. Some feel there is a more complex meaning, while accepting the official interpretation they think the Bush administration opportunistically used 9/11 to extend American Empire
• 3. A third group believes that the Bush administration knew the attacks were coming and intentionally let them happen. A Zogby poll indicated that 49% of New Yorkers held this view in 2004.
• 4. According to a fourth view, the attacks were not merely foreknown by the Bush administration; they were orchestrated by it.

Personally, I fall some where in between the 3rd and 4th.

It's my duty as an American to question and be skeptical of my government and sometimes the most rational explanation is perceived as the most irrational.

Soon enough though our future will be an Orwellian panopticon in which we will have no right to speak freely. It is naive to think that our government is not in the hands of the most corrupt and despicable human beings to ever walk the Earth, who are more than willing to murder their fellow countrymen to preserve their power structure and would happily sell them into economic slavery under the guise of a foreign power.

And FYI my higher education consists of a BA in Political Science from The Ohio State University with a specialization in US foreign policy.

[BTs_FahQ2]

ummm spetz, at no point did i question your higher education....

I stated anyone with a higher education would know the fundamental principles of economics in that disrupting it's basic ability to function freely has a negative impact upong it. More a figure of speech then a direct slight at  your intellectual ability.

I'm a highschool dropout and sniff glue all day long. doens't make me better or worse.

But can you see that most people that follow the grand conspiracy ideal and their facts cannot be supported by events within a decent amount of time before and after 9/11.

For instance, we have Bush and Clinton both fighting publicly today over who had information about what involving terrorists and imminent attacks on Al Queda. To support your theories, all of this is public acting and drama. Basically both of them, their parties, cabinets, and all who are analyzing documents at the time are  basically doing a "wag the dog". All of this to support the grand scheme that was 9/11? Or did they all fall for a larger ploy?

In addtion it would be accepted the military was involved and any subsequent leader of the military would have to go along with this event. So any elected official here after would then either have to conform and continue this "empire", or else.....  Or are we no longer electing who we want by populous and are no longer in control of anything?

I dont' see the net gain from this event. It has yet to materialize.

[c| Spetsnaz.]

From the PNAC website: http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

June, 3 1997

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.

Singed

 Elliott Abrams    Gary Bauer    William J. Bennett    Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney    Eliot A. Cohen    Midge Decter    Paula Dobriansky    Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg    Francis Fukuyama    Frank Gaffney    Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan    Zalmay Khalilzad    I. Lewis Libby    Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle    Peter W. Rodman    Stephen P. Rosen    Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld    Vin Weber    George Weigel    Paul Wolfowitz

Wolfowitz and his fellow Straussians (followers of Leo Strauss), philosophically believe it is the right of the strong to dominate the weak and it is the duty of elites to do what ever it takes (lying, disinformation, domestic terror) to convince the non-elites that a particular policy is necessary. Straussians believe non-elites can never grasp the complexity of world affairs and therefore lying for political purposes is seen as morally acceptable.

We really haven't talked about the greater context of 9/11 which is Peak Oil. The world has expended half of the oil in existence and from now on production output will decrease on a yearly basis. The world is running out of oil. The government and the figures above have known about this since the 1970's and have been planning for such.

The existence of modern American society is based on cheap oil. Every plastic, pesticide, fertilizer, pharmaceutical ect. is petroleum based.

Imagine if oil supplies became so scarce that a gallon of fuel cost 5 or even 10 dollars. Food prices would rise, heating oil would become unaffordable and society would quickly become chaotic. It would be the end of American Empire.

But what if we had access to the world's largest unexplored oil fields and the world's proven 2nd largest oil field? American Empire would be assured for at least the next century. Of course PNAC members thought they would be greeted as liberators when in fact they were seen as occupational forces thus putting a damper on their grand imperial plans.

The members of PNAC knew that the only way American public opinion could be catalyzed for support of such ambitious use of the military is a "New Pearl Harbor" as they called it in a document entitled "Rebuilding Americas Defenses" written in 2000.

I don't have all the answers as to the specifics, but would a group of individuals who see themselves as pivotal historical figures sacrifice the lives of 3,000 people in order to preserve the status quo for the next hundred years?

9/11 has allowed for every foreign policy objective set out by PNAC to be realized and the benefits with regards to the 600 billion dollars in new military contracts and the consolidation of power in the executive branch are immeasurable.

 I'm not so sure that facilitating what happened on 9/11 would require much more than a stand down order from NORAD or having a probing FBI agent taken off the trail of Mohammed Atta or funding a band of insane people hellbent on mass murder.

What makes the notion that the government had a hand in 9/11 so inconceivable is that in the days following if you questioned the official account you suicided your credibility and patriotism in the views of others and were brandished a 'conspiracy theorists'.

Well which is more likely a conspiracy or a coincidence, the altruistic use of power or the fanatical abuse of power?

Also, I apologize for my misinterpretation of your higher education remark.