GostHacked

It sounds like a kind of spy novel entertainment, which is exactly what this is to the conspiracy-theory types. The sad thing is the damage that it does to public institutions. How do you explain Silverstien saying 'I made the decision to pull it' ?? It's on video, google it.

If you don't ask questions, you will never learn anything. Even if you learn that you might be wrong. Like I said, I am hoping I am wrong about 9/11. WTC site was cleaned up in 6 months. you figure in a crime scene you would want to block off the area to do a full investigation before you just blindly haul out the materials. This is done for every other crime sceen. Why not this one? Here are some buildings getting demo'd. http://www.implosionworld.com/cinema.htm

Puppet regimes can be necessary evils when fighting the soviets. They did it too - in fact it was a commen tactic on both sides to avoid direct confrontation. Check your Social Studies grade 10 text under "spheres of influence" Now please give me an example of something in the present context or stop with this incongruent reasoning. Why are the necessary evils? I would assume there would be a serious draw back to this. Yes I understand that Afghanistan was home to the Taleban. And the US supplied them with tech and weapons to combat the Soviets. Now that the Soviets have fallen, the US felt is was safe enough for them to clean up the mess they helped make. Karzai is a damn puppet and you damn well know that. The government was elected sure, but the law of the land remains the same. In effect, no change at all. Only difference now is that the US can pull his strings from the saftey of the White House.

Monty, meet Oliver North and the Iran-Contra affair. NEXT !!

I hear a laugh but no debunking, no real rebuttle, nothing to show otherwise. I have seen your rebuttles before, this time I would like a bit more substance to them. If you told me you had aliens in your basement I would laugh, and wouldn't bother debunking. Again, more laughter, not enough debunking. Nothing to prove you are correct or I am wrong. Just nothing but laughter. Is that all I am expected to get out of you in this thread? Other than the fact that you guys are ridiculous, yes...that is all you can expect. Actually spending any time to debunk your speculations would award this conspiracy-theory garbage with far more credit than it deserves. Again, thanks for the entertainment value guys. Thanks for playing Jerry. You can exit stage left where we have some nice consolidation prizes for you. NEXT !!!!

Yes, very interesting. However, planes hit the towers and they fell down. If not from the planes and the resulting structural trauma then what? You can discount government involvement unless of course you can somehow portray a scenario how the operation would have taken place, then provide a motive, then providea risk vs reward assesment. Of interest as well would be how the government would turn a blind eye to al this, preferring to risk being executed for treason and murder as well as risking a revolution in the USA with the republican party dead forever while they controlled the executive and two houses. Strange behavior indeed. And, also explain why the Clinton administration would have been in on it as they immediately knew who did it, blaming Al Queda rather than the CIA or other secret organizations. Guess what I'm saying is that if you can work this idea from the other end, you might find a more receptive audience for this stuff. As it stands right now, it is of mild coincidental interest. Not ground breaking. When things happen, strange things often happen too. Present some rationale and method, not just coincidences. Rationale and method is something I am working on. I am over 4 months into this and still need more proof or some kind of evidence. I would like to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that WTC #7 came down by controlled demolition. Then we can start on 1 and 2. Eventually leading to the Pentagon and Pensylvania. But to me, WTC # 7 is the key to unraveling everything. Now ...The Windsor Tower in Madrid Spain suffered mugh higher temperatures and heat damage comared to WTC 1 and 2. So you can say the combination of a plane and fire may take it down. Well the Windsor tower was just gutted from a fire. That much we know. And the top part of it collapsed, but not taking down the whole structure. This, I think is important. Check out the official 'pancake' theory, and how it applies to 1,2 compared to #7.

Another point Jerry, Do you recall the bombing of the WTC back in 1993? I would guess after that bombing it would send a sense of OH SHI.. through the CIA, FBI and the US Government. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/s...000/2516469.stm http://www.adl.org/learn/jttf/wtcb_jttf.asp Looks like they hoped to kill up to 30,000 people that day. They thought that bomb would be enough to take down the WTC. From http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/reports/wtc93.htm Here is the killer it seems More to come....

I hear a laugh but no debunking, no real rebuttle, nothing to show otherwise. I have seen your rebuttles before, this time I would like a bit more substance to them. If you told me you had aliens in your basement I would laugh, and wouldn't bother debunking. Again, more laughter, not enough debunking. Nothing to prove you are correct or I am wrong. Just nothing but laughter. Is that all I am expected to get out of you in this thread?

I hear a laugh but no debunking, no real rebuttle, nothing to show otherwise. I have seen your rebuttles before, this time I would like a bit more substance to them.

It's not hyporcrisy when you understand the point of the article (and the sub title of my topic), which is that Islam sees itself as different from and superior to other religions which deserve no respect, which is completely different from the other religions on earth. What about the Jews? Christians? You do remember the crusades right? And jews see themselves as God's chosen children.

For the skeptics This may not provide definate proof, but it will give you something to think about. NOW I want to leave out The Pentagon and Pensylvania. I want to focus on 1 and 2 being hit and pay attention to the debris field in relation to #7. My key points that bug the hell out of me. I shall refer to official story timeline here. http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/chronology.attack/ ------- 1 - WTC 1 was hit at 8:45 AM, collapsed at 10:28 AM (North Tower) Total time from hit to collapse 1h 42mins. 2 - WTC 2 was hit at 9:03 AM collapsed at 10:05 AM (South Tower) http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/fig1.gif Total time from hit to collapse 1h 2 minutes. 3 - WTC 7 was hit buy falling debris from possibly both towers. Fires discoverd at 4:00 PM (approximate) Collapsed at 5:20 PM. ------ Now WTC2, how big is that fireball? How much fuel was burned off in that? Look at the angle of which the plane hit. Look at the exoskeleton of the building and the core of the building. The exoskeleton of the building was made up of staggard steel frames bolted together. Elevator core http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/innovation2.html You can clearly see on the outside of WTC 1 and 2, there are dark rings around the floors in which points out the elevator meeting points. Also note that there were solid floors (speculation by me untill I find proof) under each elevator section. Not like if an elevator fell (cable and emergency systems failing, the elevator would NOT crash to the bottom of the tower. They had the elevator shafts stacked. Hermedicly sealed. So the fireball from the top went straight down taking out 2 hard floors before hitting the bottom. Compared to that fireball outside how much of the fireball managed to travel down the entire elevator shaft and cause damage to the inside of the lobby on the first floor? Exoskeleton http://www.boulder.nist.gov/div853/Program...es/image017.jpg Exoskeleton with core http://www.wtc7.net/store/books/wakingup/s...2/site1099c.jpg Even something I was noticing last night is the difference HUGE difference in which 1,2 compared to the way 7 went down. This, pay attention too : 1,2 Exploded and peeled like a banana all the way down (were is that main core?) debris all over the place and conctrete pulverized to dust. You can hear Julliani saying 'the concrete was pulverized into fine dust that was all over lower Manhattan" (this can be seen in a documentary 9/11 Revisited, find it on google videos) And why was there still a hot core under the rubble 2 months afterwards? 7 came straight down. Straight down. WTC 7 was hit buy falling debris from possibly both towers. Fires discoverd at 4:00 PM (approximate) Collapsed at 5:20 PM. They were reported as small fires. Mardid Spain 2005 - Windsor Tower. Want so see what a real kick ass fire does to a skyscraper? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windsor_Tower 32 storey building caught fire on the lower floors, consumed the building, burned for some say a minimum 16 hours. The Windsor Tower did not fall. They had to take it down. WTC 5 and 6 had to be taken down, for them not being safe when 1 and 2 fell on them. After the fact of everything else happening. OH and you know where was a fire in 1975 in WTC http://www.total911.info/750215nytimeswtc.jpg Read the article, only after this 6 storey fire burned for more than 6 hours according to some reports. http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pictures/Apr05/100405WTC.jpg Only after this fire did the Fire Chief of NYC decided that the WTC needed a fire sprinkler system. It seems that 5 million dollars was spent to bring the building up to code. Here is the aftermath of the World Trade Center complex. http://ftp.die.net/mirror/wtc/satellite_aftermath.jpg I should not have to point out where 1,2,5,6 and 7 are. Why are the two buildings beside 7 not sitting in a neat little pile on the ground? Why did 5 and 6 not fall to the ground due to debris clearly hammering those two buildings. Anyone else find that from time to impact to collapse was under 2 hours odd? When the same buiding had a fire covering 6 floors THEN needed a fire suppression system? OK I spent more time on 1 and 2 than needed, but it helps. I am sure this will all get debunked. I welcome this. I would love to be proved wrong. This really should go in my 9/11 thread too. But I am going to add more to it. This was the best I could do in an hour.

Didn't it come down later on the day of the attacks ? Yes it did. It was reported to have fallen at 5:20 PM. I can 100% vouche for this, I was watching this live at a friends place that day. We heard another building was going to fall and looked at each other in confusion. Another one? Was it hit?

All you need to do is look at Building # 7 How , why and most importantly WHEN it came down. I am working on something for that right now.

Silverstein was given a 99 year lease about 2 months before 9/11. Notice the two buildings on either side of WTC #7, you will find out Silverstein does not own those properties. And you may be right, he may have had to pay out. But every company that did buisienss in the WTC complex had their own insurance. If they did not have insurance, then they are quite stupid. So the money payed out from Silverstein would be low. Arg! This is another misunderstanding of insurance. The insurance company of the liable party pays out, otherwise they'd be sued by the others. Silverstein would be liable for much of the damage because his buildings fell down and destroyed everything. Never the less, the price tag on a couple of towers like those in downtown New York could easily be close to $7B to rebuild, which would be the basis of the insurance payout, on top of which any possible claims from tenants. I'm actually suprised the payout is so low. Silverstein was not a 9/11 conspirator and hired the hijackers to kill thousands so he could make money. Find another motive. And this is what I want to find out. Building #7 find out why it fell, then go from there. Trust me.

Well the truth is, media IS biased. Let's say Incident Q took place. You can find Media Oultet 1 saying a different story from Media Outlet A, Or you can find both of them using Media Outlet C's information. There is bias in the news. This I can and do agree with Monty Burns. Oh I'm not arguing that the media isn't bias. I'm arguging you don't have to watch it if you don't like it. There is news for everyone in this country. When the news outlets are biased, you have to be smarter and cut through all the shit. And the way things get worded confuse the issue. I have to read 3 to 4 sites to get the big picture of what is going on, for every media outlet is either saying the EXACT same thing, or changing some words here and there to show their biasness (if that is a word hehe) Also you say media bias is rediculous in a free country and yet say that you agree their is bias. This is a contradiction.

It's called civilization. The constant struggle between us and the barbarian hordes, between those who build and those who tear down. At this particular point in time the West, unhappily led by the US, are those who build. Most of those who want to destroy appear to be Muslims. Make of that what you will. Cambodia. Vietnam. Korea. Ukraine Belarus Kosovo.... ect. Now that there is no more global threat of communism, there needs to be another enemy to keep the military industrial complex going. And the Muslims are getting the brow beating. If you want to bring peace you should be nurturing these people. Helping them come into the 21st century. Bringing freedom through military might will not solve those issues, not this time. The US does alot of tear down as well. The US builds where they see they have the advantage.

Your lacking in your understanding of insurance. You can't just insure for an event to happen, you insure for damages to your property. It's not like you get "tower attack insurance" and because it was two attacks you get twice as much. No, you get paid for the worth of the towers and the liabilities that exist in event of a structural failure. The owner would also have to pay damages and back rent to all those tenants, that $7+ billion is more than he lost that day. No profit scheme was involved. Silverstein was given a 99 year lease about 2 months before 9/11. Notice the two buildings on either side of WTC #7, you will find out Silverstein does not own those properties. And you may be right, he may have had to pay out. But every company that did buisienss in the WTC complex had their own insurance. If they did not have insurance, then they are quite stupid. So the money payed out from Silverstein would be low.

Well the truth is, media IS biased. Let's say Incident Q took place. You can find Media Oultet 1 saying a different story from Media Outlet A, Or you can find both of them using Media Outlet C's information. There is bias in the news. This I can and do agree with Monty Burns.

The US cannot be a war mongering country forever. We would KNOW that the war on terrorism does not stop with Iran either. Yes I did say Iran. The US government (mostly the CIA) IS a terrorist organization. I don't trust their faulty intelligence at all. Hell I don't even trust our intelligence community. There is no real world terrorist threat to the US. IF that was the case, alot more 'domestic terrorism' would be going on. But thanks to 9/11 the Patriot Act and the NSA helped to thwart other attacks. America is once again safe. The US will always be war mongering but thats their job I guess, I honestly have to admit I do not trust Bush either but he is not an evil terrorist liek the media iis saying. THe only reason people think he is an evil war monger is because he is fighting the war on terror they do the same to Gore if he was the president of the United States today. As for the CIA I trust them they are not going to lie in the name of the president. What is wrong with out inteligence community? CSIS is finding terror cells within Canada as the US CIA are in their country. THeir is mroe terrorism going on Mandrid bombings, Australian bomb, 911, and after the british transit bombings that really pissed the world off and now we are fighting a war. We are fighting a war it is no different from World War 2 We are fighting for freedom. What is it going to take for you people to realise that their is terorism goign on? When we Canada are attacked on our own soil. WE ARE FIGHTING THIS WAR TO PREVENT THAT! So this brings to the front of a 'perpetual war' no distinct enemy, no distinct location. This is dangerous ground, this can drag out forever, and when would you know that you are done??

Politika Afghanistan has the same rule of law under the new government as they did under the Taliban. And you are saying they are free now? Yes free to do the same thing they HAVE been doing. Liberation ment nothing. The US cannot be a war mongering country forever. We would KNOW that the war on terrorism does not stop with Iran either. Yes I did say Iran. The US government (mostly the CIA) IS a terrorist organization. I don't trust their faulty intelligence at all. Hell I don't even trust our intelligence community. There is no real world terrorist threat to the US. IF that was the case, alot more 'domestic terrorism' would be going on. But thanks to 9/11 the Patriot Act and the NSA helped to thwart other attacks. America is once again safe.

Desparate for who? Like I said, the Left has been talking for years. Bush Doesn't seem desparate From your 'proof' on the 72% thread. Oh ya, he's sweating bullets. To bad they could not connect the dots before 9/11 happened.

When MSM is not giving the whole truth, or being left or right, you need to get to other sources. If all you do is rely on CNN NYTIMES CBC ect ect, you are not getting the whole picture.The only difference is that the MSM uses nice fluffy words to confuse people and hide the facts. Like politicians when they speak. Reporter askes a question. Politician beats around the bush with words that make no sense and really does not say what is what. This does not drive you nuts? Makes me quite batty.

We do not have a hug military industrial complex running the show. Out military has been downgraded since the 80's. And if you think the US Military is able to deploy 150,000 troops to the Iraq border without civilan commercial aircraft you need to relook at that. Both US and Canadian troops were flown to Afghanistan in some commercial aircraft. The reason was that the Canadian Goverment wanted to creat a small well armed totaly mobile/deployable peace keeping unit. Mobility and readyness was the key issues for that decision. Also out Military budget is small in comparison to the US's , even if you look at it with the difference in population/defence spending ratio. Those numbers will knock you on your ass. And being a G8 country means we must have a large self sufficient army? I guess I forgot to read that fine print.

Constitutional Law is above all else when it comes down to it. Even the Patriot Act cannot stand up the the legal might of the Consitution. I think the wiretappings are illegal and should be stopped. They are listing in on terrorists, but nothing to do with international terrorism. They are keeping tabs on the American population. I want Bush impeached. I really really do. And I have been hearing/saying impeachment to people for the last 4 years or so myself. AS soon as we started going on with Iraq, I knew he should be impeached, along with his entire cabinet. They all need to be taken out, because they are all in this together.