PolyNewbie

Seven Hours In Sepetmber shows how the investigative group for the three trillion dollars that dissapeared from the Pentagon were all killed off except for one. The one remaining member of that group has been heavily promoted. The investigation is no longer being done and the three trillion dollars that magically dissapeared is gone. That is over 10,000.00 of additioal debt for every man, woman, & child living in the USA.

You are saying that the airplanes hit just the righjt spots at the top of the building to cause the necessary supports to fail at the base and throughout the building to cause a perfect downward colalspe at freefall speed - twice in one day. Where is the energy to produce the dust ? Where did the enrgy come from to project it upwards and outwards ? Where did the energy come from to cause massive chunks of building to be thrown outwards and upwards ? I think the only possibility is bombs. If the potential energy of the building caused it to collapse at very near freefall speed, an energy deficit exists to produce all these other effects. Energy deficits are not possible. Have you read Seven Hours In September She is a Pentagon Colonel that was there at the time of the "crash". I'm sure you guys on this forum could teach her a few things but have a look at the document anyways. Just because she is a colonel does not mean she knows as much as you do - with all your expertise in physics & economics but have a look at it anyways.

You are just a typical lawyer and you couldn't argue your way out of a wet paper bag. Thats why our legal system is all about procedure and little else. We have morons that can only see as far as their own wallet in the profession. You just another idiot lawyer that is full of hot piss and vineger and has absolutely nothing of even the smallest detectable degree of intelligence to say. I do not like you, you are absolutely right about that one thing but nothing else.

You may be a bit slow so let me help you out. The economy is an important part of federal politics and this thread is about federal monetary policy.

Riverwind: I don't know where you got this quote from I suspect that you got it from a money establishment site and haven't compared its words with what is actually going on and has been since the 70's. I'll just point out a few things: (1) Steadily declining hospital care since mid 70's (these stats in number of beds vs people widely available) (2) Steady increase in national debt (3) It now takes two average middle class incomes to buy a house, have the necessary cars and go on vacations when in the 70's it took only one. (4) Increase in the difference in incomes between the poorest and the richest. CEO's used to earn about 40 times the average worker in their business, now that ratio is above 400. (5) Increased poerty levels, every where you go there are beggers on the streets. (6) Increased university tuition - drastically increased. (7) Corruption is way up. 3 Trillion dollars have gone missing from the Pentagon since Bush was elected. Many other scandals from Bre-X to Enron. (8) Drug abuse among young people is going up (9) The real economy - manufactering capabilities is being exported. The politicians have openly said we are converting to a service economy. A service econmoy cannot last long because nothing useful is being produced. We will soon be nations of people that serve coffee and a few CEO's that get all the money. (10) A much higher percentage of the populations live in prisons since the 70's (11) National debt has taken a big rise since the 70's. (12) Wars are now necessary to keep the economy afloat. (13) Huge increase in speculative investment - derivatives. This is what lead to the crash of 1929. Sometimes its good to just open your eyes rather than read about the establishment telling you it isn't corrupt. Currently 28 % of your income tax goes to private bankers and they give you nothing in return. They use this money to control our society and have been doing it since it all started in 1913 (in the USA). Bankers got a big increase in their control of Canadian society since the mid 70's when Trudeau started using private banks to finance government rather than the governments own bank. Thats because you are a hockey puck and you live in a fish bowl and are so weak minded that you cannot imagine anything else. Monetary Reform - that is the government using its own bank to finance operations would result in little visible change in our society for the first few months. Your income tax would decrease, the quality of hospitalization and education would drastically increase and there would be more jobs available that have higher pay. They would lose control of the media and you would get more fair news reporting instead of every news station giving you the same opinions rather than reporting on facts. We would also have fewer wars because we wouldn't have bankers lobbying for them.

Back on topic: Another good site on monetary reform: Comittee On Monetary and Economic Reform Its always nice to see folks like mad max who never really consider things beyond what they are told. If we meet, shall I bring a 3 card monte table ? Debate me on the 911 thread on issues around 911 in the US politics section. Once again another poster on this forum feels qualified to dispute senior people at the top of their fields. I feel honored to post among people that think so highly of themselves. This thread is about monetary reform.

The truth about Israel and the Palistinians kind of jumps out at you. We get enough pro Israeli information from the mainstream media. Its time for a little balance. Besides there are plenty of Israelis who would agree that they mistreat the Palistinians.

Lets get back to the banks and financial oligarchy on this thread.

Most - actually all - of the intelligence experts that I have heard dissagree with the idea of thousands of people in on the deal. I've heard figures of around 20 people. There are a few intelligence experts that think 911 was an inside job. Are you an intelligence expert or just another "know it all" with a computer in your moms basement ? Have you looked at Here is what the ex German secratary of defence thinks, Andreas Von Buelow, Phd. Article/Interview: "The planning of the attacks was technically and organizationally a master achievement. To hijack four huge airplanes within a few minutes, and within one hour to drive them into their targets with complicated flight maneuvers! This is unthinkable without years-long support from secret apparatuses of the state and industry." William Christison – Former National Intelligence Officer and Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis. 29-year CIA veteran. Essay: "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. An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them." Perhaps you and a few of the other neoliberal sycophant fascists on this group should show these guys and others like him a few things. Its really amazing the level of intelligence you find on these news groups. There are people on this group that are obviosly qualified to called top scientists in their field incompetent, Phd's in economics fools and intelligence experts on the subject of 911 wrong- saying what they belkieve is impossible. It is my honor to share this forum with yourself and others who feel as qualified to criticise as you do.

Its post like this that let me know (and evryone else) that I am winning. It shows you cannot argue with facts so you turn to stupidity - a common tactic for neoliberal sycophant fascists.

First of all the government involvement has come out in congressional hearings. Cheney repeatedly gave a stand down order for defences for the White House and Pentagon after the towers were hit. He did not want defences up for the Pentagon. Many others have come out, colonels from the Pentagon see "seven hours in September" and hear what the colonel has to say about 911. As far as thoudsands of people being involved, that is your assumption. Also intelligence experts here also think it was an inside job. Read through this list. Intelligence operations run on a need to know basis. Many people would not know why they are doing what they are doing and would resist connecting dots to 911 - look at all the people that got killed after the Kennedy assasination. 911 is a separate but related topic, pls post your comments on my 911 thread in US politics.

No, I show that 911 had a severe energy deficit if the official version is correct. The buildings could not collapse that way unless there were bombs. If this is fact (which it has been proven many times) then the only logical conclusion is that government was in on it because no one could set this up without government co operation and governments are known throughout history for doing things like this to get people to want war.

I get most of my info by listening to alternative media interview ex top memebers of the establishment like Paul Craig Roberts, Robert Bowman, etc - all people that have had top positions in the establishemnt and are now speaking against it. This also happened in Germany but you would not be familiar with people like this because mainstream ignores them because mainstream is controlled media.

Knowing the cause of a building collapse is not the same as modelling one. I can tell you that if you cut some main supports on any structure that it will collapse - but exactly what would the mess look like when its over - I don't know. You have a hard time understanding this. My guess is that thermate was used to cut critical beams and a nuclear device was dropped from the top of the building and fell through the core vapourizing all the center core steel. Nuclear technology in the formn of mini nukes used for building demolition were developed in the 50's. This would explain the radioactive dust. Fortunately someone figured out how to do CD's and nukes are not commonly used. Judy Wood, a Phd civil engineer and materials engineer supports the nuke theory with Morgan Reynolds, an ex economist for the Bush Jr. White House. I think wtc7 was demolished using conventional explosives but the energy deficit associated with wtc1 & wtc2 may not be explained by conventional explosives. Prof Stephen Jones thinks it could have all been done with a ton of thermate. Obviosly he doesn't agree with Hoffmans energy calculations. Hoffman says that he cannot explain the incredible energy required to bring down those buildings and he has worked on a few theories. Your site that you quote doesn't use good arguements and its not obvious who created the site. Likely the CIA. Most of its arguements can be shown to be misleading by misrepresenting the facts or just "carefully worded" like the link you supplied. 911 Myths can always be neatly dissected and shown to be a shill for the establishment. I wonder why somne establishemnt engineers don't get on borad that site and explain their views a little more carefully.

Some people make it obvious that they are working for the establishment when debunking my "theories", then I get mean. If you sink so low as to call me an anti semite I will ignore you, but I don't mind contradictory theories that are thoughtful. -Thanks.

Everything I say about the banks is verifiably true in documentation and in history. How the banks operate is information that is out there, its just carefully hidden and carefully stated.

Essentially thats it, but they don't do it because it would drive the economy into hyper inflation and collapse it and they would not be able to collect on their loans. They did this in the 20's to cause the great depression and accumulate hard assets with foreclosures. I don't deal in conspiracy theories, I deal in fact only. You must be another government apologist that will always make excuses for governments, no matter what they do.

In a controlled demolition, concentrated explosive enrgy is used on critical supports and the building collapses under gravity due to the missing supports. There are pictures of the remains of wtc1 & wtc2 that show the pictures of these perfectly cut beams using CD explosives. You don't need 200,000 tons of TNT to demolish a building using CD, as anyone who knows anything about CD can attest to. A comparitively small amount of explosives is used.

So you are saying that it is better for governments to be accountable to private bankers than their public constituents. That is rediculous. What is to stop private bankers from implementing bad policy ? What is there to guarentee private bankers implement policy that is beneficial to the country rather than themselves ? Do you not understand that the current system at some point must fail ? Its a mathematical fact and because the system must fail it is not being managed in our interest by the private bankers.

The energy deficit proves the official version wrong. Stephen Jones as well as many other people from the intelligence community have provided realistic scenarios as to how the explosives could be planted. Just because you think its impossible doesn't mean it is impossible. An investigation is an investigation and the NIST report was not an investigation it was a white wash. I do not have to explain exactly how 911 was carried out to show that the official version is a great big fat lie and a white wash. Once that is shown a most reasonable conclusion is that it was an inside job because of the coverup and the fact that gov would be the only ones to have the kind of access needed to set of a demolition without being busted for it. Scott Forbes as well as others have pointed out mysterious shut downs of the world trade center buildings and shut downs of all security cameras and such plus the removal of bomb sniffing dogs. See 911 Mysteries Part1: demolition to learn about 911.

The buildings could not have fallen the way they did due to their own potential energy. There isn't enough potential energy in a building to pulverize it. Therefore another energy source must have been present, which means the buildings didn't collapse because of terrorists. The fact is that very few civil engineers would ever model a building collapse, same as few nuitritionists study how to treat someone for lack of nutrition. Nutritionists keep you eating right so you don't get sick from lack of nutrition. Civil engineers build buildings that do not callapse therefore do not spend much time modelling actual collapses when they do occur. I can't help you any more than that Black Dog. If you do not understand I suggest watching less TV and doing more reading.

Any governemnt that ries to nationalize its banks gets into a war with the USA. Awareness of monetary reform must occur globally so that people are aware of whats going on and war can be prevented. If Canada nationalized its banks tomorrow we would eb at war with the USA by Monday and labeled as a rouge nation. All the rogue nations are nations that are not under control by private banks now. Awareness of this leads to more opposition to wars and more opposition to controlled media that sells the wars. The media outlets go out of business because people realize they are nothing more than tools of propoganda. This is already happening. TV news is losing while alternative internet media is gaining.

The government should be accountable to voters not private internationalist bankers. If the bankers were not financing government they would not have the profits to control media and education and the public would be better educated in government policies. Economics would be taught correctly and if we had monetary reform our educational system would be used to educate all students of these perils. If the government caused hyperinflation, people would be pointing that out in various uncontrolled media outlets and people would become aware and vote them out. There is no advantage in having governments answer to private bankers except for the private banker agenda.

CAP just thinks we can run our economy without paying 28 % income tax to private bankers. Why should we be beholding to private bankers to mine our own natural resources and build our own country ? The fact is that paying private bankers all this money just to print currency makes no sense at all but its the way the world works because of the power bankers have.

Having the government print the money needed is no different than having the private bankers do it as they do now. Money is money and a dollar is a dollar and the holder doesn't care where it came from. We are taxed partly to control the money supply and would be taxed to control the money supply if gov printed off the money. The only difference would be that 28 % of your income tax would not be going to pay interest demanded by private bankers. Of course if the government just printed money to pay off the debt we would be into inflation just like the above quote says but this is a perfect example of how the powers that be can be misleading. You can expect the usual group of government apologists to take things gov says at face value or to bend the facts but the facts of monetary reform cannot be argued against affectively even if one has only a rudimentary knowledge of the subject as I do. This is a simple concept that anyone can learn, just watch The Money Masters and read the CAP website. The CAP party has Phd's in economics and very highly experienced people developing its policies. Why are you not president of a University or a large country ? You are saying the Phd's in physics are all wrong on my 911 thread now the Phd's that determine CAP policy are all wrong wrt economics. In discussing these subjects with you, all I ever do is end up pointing out your lack of knowledge in the subject areas, even though you lack the necessary knowledge you always rush to defend the governments, war mongers and banks. Who is paying you for this ? Why don't you start asking questions like a responsible citizen instead of argueing about things you clearly do not understand ?