how many more??

Darn I was having fun bear, but its 1:47 here on the east coast, so Good
night man. Keep it right Peace Out man...

He said this White House is covering it up (911).



Here is some other questions
http://www.prisonplanet.com/911.html


just take them 1 by 1, I got plenty of time to hear your rebuttles, even
months and months, because I have been waiting for years for someone to
give me the answers to these questions and you two guys sound just
perfect to answer them...

Before I jump out to take a look at that list I want to mention on
thing.

I used to live in Las Vegas.

The prefered method of rebuilding a casino in Vegas is to implode the
old property and rebuild it.

It takes weeks of prepration to set a building up to implode. It can
not be hidden from prying eyes. It requires truckloads of equipment and
the explosives used must be handled very carefully.

When the building is actually brought down the effect is very clear.

I watched the towers fall as did most americans. After seeing several
casinos brought down I can tell you that what I saw did not look like a
man made implosion. It looked to me as if the weight of the floors
above the structual damage caused by the planes caused the supports to
fail.

One of the advantages of being a wanderer is working in many different
fields. I have worked with precast concrete. When precast concrete is
subjected to high pressure impact it crumbles and most of it becomes
dust.

well AB you might apprciate this website.

http://911scholars.org/

here is an excellent video with no soundtrack etc.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-609179074068244932&q=911+truth&hl=en

___________________________________________



another person out of 400+ who doesnt buy this goverernments story on
911

Congressman Curt Weldon – Former 10-term Congressman from Pennsylvania
1987 - 2006. Former Vice Chairman of the House Homeland Security
Committee. Former Vice Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

Fox News Article 8/28/05: Regarding the 9/11 Commission "There's
something very sinister going on here that really troubles me," Weldon
told FOX News on Thursday, blasting the Sept. 11 commission for not
taking the claims more seriously. He said some panel members were trying
to smear [Lt. Col. Anthony] Shaffer and Able Danger. "What's the Sept.
11 commission got to hide?" Weldon asked." http://www.foxnews.com


Press conference transcript 9/17/05: Regarding the 9/11 Commission
Report "There's something wrong here, something tragically wrong. The
American people, the families, the country and the Congress need to know
the truth, the whole truth, the complete truth. And so far we haven't
gotten it. … Somebody's got to connect the dots and answer the
questions. If the 9/11 Commission won't do it, then Congress has to do
it." http://www.gl


Speech on the floor of Congress 10/19/05: "I am not a conspiracy
theorist, but there is something desperately wrong, Mr. Speaker. There
is something outrageous at work here. This is not a third-rate burglary
of a political campaign headquarters. This involved what is right now
the covering up of information that led to the deaths of 3,000 people,
changed the course of history, led to the invasion of Iraq and
Afghanistan, and has disrupted our country, our economy and people's
lives." http://frwebgate


Editor's note: The 9/11 Commission Report asserts that only three of the
alleged hijackers were known to U.S. intelligence agencies prior to
9/11; Nawaf al-Hazmi, Salem al-Hazmi, and Khalid al-Mihdar. There is no
mention in the Report that the names and photographs of alleged hijacker
Marwan al-Shehhi and alleged ring-leader Mohamed Atta had been
identified by the Department of Defense antiterrorist program known as
Able Danger more than a year prior to 9/11 and that they were known to
be affiliates of al-Qaida. Able Danger also identified Nawaf al-Hazmi
and Khalid al-Mihdar. http://www.foxnews.com. See also Louis Freeh,
Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, Cap. Scott J. Phillpott, Major Erik
Kleinsmith, and James D. Smith.


Bio: http://www.montcogop.org

Look. Only an *idiot* believes that fire alone brought down the towers.
Or that it jet fuel could melt steel. Rocket fuel could, though. But
you're missing several key points.


1- The towers' steel WAS NOT ordinary steel. It was high-tensile
preasure resistant stuff. Anyone who knows metalurgy could tell you-
that stuff has lower heat resistance. Normal steel is too heavy, and too
brittle, to be used in super-complexes.

2- The heat doesn't need to melt the steel. Just warp it. A bent steel
beam (and under that weight, steel doesn't need much to warp it). Is
useless, and good as melted through.

3- The rivets. As the steel bends, the bolts holding it in place will
give, and pop out of the girders. End result- steel beams loose their
connection to one another. Chain reaction. Collapse.

4- The buildings did NOT fall in a "demolition" style. Only an idiot
who knows nothing of the materials or science behind demolition could
possibly believe it did. Part of the top few roofs sloughed over
sideways, and landed on other buildings. Which, of course, all but
demolished them.

5- A conspiracy like this is beyond profound. No force in the knowable
UNIVERSE could keep something like this secret. It would take GOD to
cover up 9/11's planning. Even if there was a human organization that
could- I promise you- the Bush administration isn't that smart.

ok....so tell us about building 7


nothing hit it.

The towers were built to withstand a plane crash, that much is true.
But when it was built, the largest (civilian) plane in the world was a
707. A 747 is a LOT leavier. Almost twice the weight, in fact.

It's a freakin' miracle that the crash alone didn't drop the buildings-
I think we got lucky, and the planes weren't moving at anywhere near
their top speed. It bought us time. But the structural beams were ripped
apart.

Those towers were already dead- a strong enough wind could have dropped
them after that. The fire probably couldn't have brought down the
buildings alone. But that collision could have.

There was nothing AT ALL suspicious about 9/11. Sad. Horrific.
Terrifying. But not suspicious. Conspiracy theorists are an easy
scientifically identifiable psychological profile. Inherently
suspicious, feelings of powerlessness, generally nervous, generally
unwilling to do anything but talk (they don't have the backbone to
actually take action), something of a superiority/inferiority complex.
They like to give themselves "power" over a situation (in their own
minds) by pretending they understand something about it that normal
people don't. Basically- borderline dellusional fantasy world.

Since you like psuedo-science so much, learn psychology.

OK

32 second clip of bush:
Pure propaganda.
Narrator put own spin on the words bush spoke. Narrators voice is
overlayed upon bushes speach using a much higher volume which partially
drowns the actual speach. The technique is called masking. Bush is
then shown in a repeat loop that draws the eye into his mouth and the
repeat loop is only of a single word spoken by bush in an attempt to add
credence to the point the narrator is trying to make.
I found it quite interesting that the advertisment headlining the page
is a political presidential campaign ad. (I won't say which party.
Wonder how much they payed. Oh yeah you said no one was making money
off this)

the Boogy man clip:

I am unsure of this one. I will pass on some knowledge I have learned
of devout Moslims. The right had (Left handed or not) is the hand they
use to do clean acts. i.e eating, writing, etc...did I say writing...
OMGosh this is the main point of the tape isn't it. (I hope no one
takes offense at this... the left hand is used for unclean things like
wiping their ass) therefore this tape could actually be what was claimed
by the us government.

Fox no plane: With out a frame of reference and some time I could not
say how large the object was that hit. It did not appear to be large
enoug to be a 757 however it was to large to have been a global hawk
based on the number of levels above ground at the pentagon. The video
quality is very poor.

CNN no plane: Just a guy putting out a theory. The hole behind him did
look a lot bigger than the 18 feet claimed and I noticed a link at the
bottom where you could BUY the video. Money crops up again.

Well, AB seems qualified to slice apart the videos. I'll stick to the
physics lessons. Not that I didn't thoroughly establish the point
already. The crashes make perfect sence.


You want a conspiracy theory that actually could be true, you should
date back to the time of WW1 and WW2. Plenty of "issues" there that a
rational person could believe. But not 9/11.

Oh, and kudos for knowing the left/right hand thing. Not many people,
anywhere, know that. A great many american muslims don't know that. Or
don't consider it an important custom, so they ignore it.

yep, just a bunch of theriores and since this government has a track
record with butchering the Indians I will continue that I dont trust
this governments 911 story and will continue to post to this thread and
I like having your input, thanks.


______________________________________

another man who has problems with this governments story about 911. He
was the head of the FBI


LOL


Louis Freeh – Director of the FBI, 1993 - 2001. Former U.S. District
Court Judge for the Southern District of New York, appointed by
President George H.W. Bush. Former Deputy United States Attorney in New
York. Former FBI agent. Former officer in the United States Army JAG
Corps Reserve.

Essay An Incomplete Investigation - Why did the 9/11 Commission ignore
"Able Danger"? Wall Street Journal 11/17/05: "Even the most junior
investigator would immediately know that the name and photo ID of Atta
in 2000 is precisely the kind of tactical intelligence the FBI has many
times employed to prevent attacks and arrest terrorists. Yet the 9/11
Commission inexplicably concluded that it "was not historically
significant." This astounding conclusion--in combination with the
failure to investigate Able Danger and incorporate it into its
findings--raises serious challenges to the commission's credibility and,
if the facts prove out, might just render the commission historically
insignificant itself. … No wonder the 9/11 families were outraged by
these revelations and called for a "new" commission to investigate."
http://www.opin


Interview Lou Dobbs Tonight 11/30/05: Regarding the Able Danger
anti-terrorism data mining program.

Lou Dobbs: Why is there this reaction to what is called by more than
half of our congressmen and women, to open up and to allow our elected
representatives to know what happened?

Louis Freeh: Well, it's a great question. I mean, the issue here, which
was the issue when the 9/11 commission first responded to this, is they
obviously missed something. They obviously didn't consider what at least
is a very important allegation.

Their response to it, it was historically insignificant. Historically
insignificant that an intelligence unit may have identified by name and
photo, Mohamed Atta a year before the 9/11 hijackings as a member of al
Qaeda in the United States.

Lou Dobbs: Tim Roemer, Slade Gorton, other members of the 9/11
commission have said they just had no hard evidence to deal with here.
How do you respond?

Louis Freeh: I disagree with that. I was a prosecutor and an FBI agent
for many, many years. I deal in facts. You have two witnesses. You have
United States Naval Academy graduate, Captain Philpot, you have
Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer, an army intelligence officer. These aren't
data loaders, these are intelligence experts who both have said,
unequivocally, this unit identified Mohammed Atta by name and possibly
photo in mid 2000.

To say that they don't have any documents to prove their case, these
aren't informants that we have to verify their credibility. We have
testimonial evidence, which, as a prosecutor, that's more potent
sometimes than documentary evidence.

Lou Dobbs: You were director of the FBI until June of 2001. Were you
ever aware of Able Danger? Was the FBI ever given any reason to sense
that there was some military intelligence or military intelligence
evidence or suggestion that there would be an attack or some
relationship to Mohamed Atta?

Louis Freeh: Absolutely not. Myself, but also my former colleagues and
current FBI colleagues, we read about this in the newspapers in August
of this year. And what is very significant here Lou -- which is a point
that has been made, and which I think you made -- we had officers at
Able Danger who made appointments, actually made appointments to go to
the FBI and share this intelligence in 2000 and those appointments were
canceled.

It had to be a very powerful stimulus, this intelligence and
information, to make these officers want to really breach the chain of
command and go directly to the FBI. We'd like to know why those
appointments were canceled." http://transcripts.cnn.com


Editor's note: The 9/11 Commission Report asserts that only three of the
alleged hijackers were known to U.S. intelligence agencies prior to
9/11; Nawaf al-Hazmi, Salem al-Hazmi, and Khalid al-Mihdar. There is no
mention in the Report that the names and photographs of alleged hijacker
Marwan al-Shehhi and alleged ring-leader Mohamed Atta had been
identified by the Department of Defense antiterrorist program known as
Able Danger more than a year prior to 9/11 and that they were known to
be affiliates of al-Qaida. Able Danger also identified Nawaf al-Hazmi
and Khalid al-Mihdar. http://www.foxnews.com. See also Rep. Curt
Weldon, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, Capt. Scott J. Phillpott, Major Erik
Kleinsmith, and James D. Smith.


Bio: http://www.fbi.gov/libref/directors/freeh.htm

here is an interesting site http://www.secretwarsinter.com/content.html


_______________________________________


and yet another of the 400+ officials that dont buy this governments
story about 911




Morgan Reynolds, PhD – Chief Economist, U.S. Department of Labor under
George W. Bush 2001 - 2002. Former Director of the Criminal Justice
Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis. Professor Emeritus,
Economics, Texas A&M University.

Video 6/2/06: "I first began to suspect that 9/11 was in inside job when
the Bush-Cheney Administration invaded Iraq. … We can prove that the
government’s story is false." http://video.goo


Essay 6/9/05: "It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific
debate over the cause(s) of the collapse of the twin towers [each 1300+
feet tall, 110 stories] and building 7 [610 feet tall, 47 stories, and
not hit by an airplane]. If the official wisdom on the collapses is
wrong, as I believe it is, then policy based on such erroneous
engineering analysis is not likely [to] prove to be sound."
http://www.l...


Bio: http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=bio

Yes. And I'm ready to believe what he said in that interview. But that
doesn't PROVE anything. Or even raise suspicions. It's just our pre-9/11
security at work. Slow, innefficient, lacking inter-opperational
communications, incapable of any for of pre-emptive reaction.

So, even if every word this guy spoke is absolutely accurate, it
doesn't help your point even in the slightest. Don't forget, however
true something is- if it's not relevant, don't bother bringing it up.

B&W>

Do you remember that day?

The buildings as they fell.

The upper portions remained intact up to the point they impacted with
the debrie field created by their falling through all the floors in
between.

Intact... How much do you think those upper floors weighed. When they
hit the pile of rubble at ground level they then TOPPLED. They did not
drop straight down but fell onto what was next to them. Perhaps bldg 7.
Oh but that would meen bldg 7 did get hit. Just not by a plane.

and the horrifying thing...

All I could think of...

Was HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE STILL IN THOSE UPPER FLOORS!

Americans. (yes I know there were people from other countries in those
buildings but at the time all I thought was my countrymen are dieing).
I for one applaud the president at that moment.

Cause if I had been president at that moment I would have ordered an
immediate nuclear strike on every single place where I even suspected
Bin Ladin was hiding.

Good thing I wasn't president ain't it.

Seriously. Quote all you like. I won't debate the accuracty if there's
nothing to debate. But accurate or not, please find something that
MATTERS to the discussion at hand.

Its all there, just go back and re-read the thread.

cheers.


____________________________________________

another of 400+ that doesnt buy this governments story about 911


Paul Craig Roberts, PhD – Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury under
Ronald Reagan, "Father of Reaganomics", Former Associate Editor of the
Wall Street Journal. Currently Chairman of the Institute for Political
Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. Former William
E. Simon chair in political economy, Center for Strategic and
International Studies, Georgetown University. Former Senior Research
Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. Author or co-author of
several books on economics and politics, including; The Supply-Side
Revolution (1985), Alienation and the Soviet Economy: The Collapse of
the Socialist Era (1990), The Soviet Union After Perestroika (1991), The
Capitalist Revolution in Latin America (2003).

Endorsement of 9/11 and American Empire (Vol I) – Intellectuals Speak
Out: "This is the most important book of our time. Distinguished
national and international scientists and scholars present massive
evidence that the 9/11 Commission Report is a hoax and that the 9/11
"terrorist attack" has been manipulated to serve a hegemonic agenda in
the Middle East. The book's call for a truly independent panel of
experts to be empowered to bring out the true facts must be heeded or
Americans will never again live under accountable government."
http://www.interlinkbooks.com


Essay 8/16/06: "We know that it is strictly impossible for any building,
much less steel columned buildings, to "pancake" at free fall speed.
Therefore, it is a non-controversial fact that the official explanation
of the collapse of the WTC buildings is false."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info


Essay 2/6/06: "There are not many editors eager for writers to explore
the glaring defects of the 9/11 Commission Report. One would think that
if the report could stand analysis, there would not be a taboo against
calling attention to the inadequacy of its explanations."
http://www.counterpunc


Bio: http://www.vdare.com/roberts/bio.htm

Dude. It didn't "pancake". THE MIDDLE PART FELL FIRST. The top half of
the building fell at freefall- because it WAS in free fall. The lower
half fell a lot slower- or didn't you watch the tape?

Conspiracy theorists. Always making up explenations for facts that
don't even exist.