9/11

[White Doors]

Patrick Swayze was in red Dawn? no shit!

[White Doors]

Anyone ever read about the mystery of Oak Island?

Much more interesting and credible than this.

check it out.

[GostHacked]

Anyway's, which foriegn soldiers could possibly do that, as the American's still have million's of members of the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, National Guard, and Coast Guard at home.

Many of them in other countries other than the United States.

So who are the foreign soldiers going to be anyways, what military could muster up enough manpower to bring all of North America under totalitarian control?

Those 'foreign soldiers' would be the United Nations 'Peace Keeping Force'. The proof in this is how the UN has taken control over certain areas of certain countries that are in turmoil. The funny thing is too that the US is training foreigners in urban military tactics. This will only expand as the 'war on terror' goes on.

Step one is to disarm the citizens of the said country. New Orleans citizens were stripped of their guns when they were found (the proof is there go look for it), this makes it easier for the 'patrols' to do their job with their own saftey in mind. Matrial Law was declared and there is still fallout from everything that happened durning Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. Those people who were stripped of their guns are the same people that are at risk from getting attacked from other citizens who are a little nuts and go insane during the crisis. They were the ones with arms trying to protect their homes (what was left) from would be robbers and looters.

http://www.fpif.org/papers/miltrain/expansion.html (not sure how this source is but...)

I will guess and say this is how the UN will eventually be doing things.

Also this whole thread can be cut down to 25% and still have all the points discussed covered. Rehash, rehash, nothing real new to offer from this thread. And I am in Polynewbie's camp on this. But I disagree with many things he talks about.

Planes DID hit the WTC 1,2. (bombs in the building is plausible, but a bomb on the planes themselves would have been more effective)

WTC 7 WTF?? Even if you disagree with the falling of WTC 1 and 2, #7 is still very peculiar in how it fell.

Remember the bombing on Oaklahoma and the Federal Building there?? Remember the damage to the building? Eventually they had to take down the building for it was not stable. But it remained standing after a good portion was blown away by a fuel bomb in a truck. Take that into account when you watch WTC 7 fall. Check out the relative damage compared to the Oaklahoma building (this may not be a fair comparison due to the difference in size of both buildings, but some similarities can be drawn).

I can tell you a 767 757 or any large civilian aircraft did NOT hit the Pentagon. I don't know what did. I am SUSPECTING a smaller aircraft, or a missle of some kind.

Pensylvania crash. There does not seem to be enough debris. If it all got buried in the dirt, then it should be extracted easily from the ground. Has that even been done or thought of?

I am really surpised this thread is still going after my 9/11 thread got buried. (Even I gave up on telling people that things are strange about 9/11 because well.... ah never mind).

[Canadian Blue]

Those 'foreign soldiers' would be the United Nations 'Peace Keeping Force'. The proof in this is how the UN has taken control over certain areas of certain countries that are in turmoil. The funny thing is too that the US is training foreigners in urban military tactics. This will only expand as the 'war on terror' goes on.

Isn't that from a Timothy LaHaye book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_Behind

I can tell you a 767 757 or any large civilian aircraft did NOT hit the Pentagon. I don't know what did. I am SUSPECTING a smaller aircraft, or a missle of some kind.

The American Society of Civil Engineers would disagree with you, but then again you know what do they know.

Remember the bombing on Oaklahoma and the Federal Building there?? Remember the damage to the building? Eventually they had to take down the building for it was not stable. But it remained standing after a good portion was blown away by a fuel bomb in a truck. Take that into account when you watch WTC 7 fall. Check out the relative damage compared to the Oaklahoma building (this may not be a fair comparison due to the difference in size of both buildings, but some similarities can be drawn).

Alright:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTC_7

In response to FEMA's concerns, the Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) conducted a three-year, US$24 million investigation into the structural failure and progressive collapse of several WTC complex structures, including 7 World Trade Center. The study included not only in-house technical expertise, but also drew upon the knowledge of several outside private institutions, including the Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers (SEI/ASCE), the Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH), and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEAoNY).[6]

NIST has released video and still photo analysis of Building 7 prior to its collapse that appears to indicate a greater degree of structural damage from falling debris than originally assumed by FEMA. Specifically, the NIST's interim report on 7 WTC displays photographs of the southwest facade of the building which clearly has suffered significant damage. The NIST interim report on 7 WTC details a 10-story gash that existed on the south facade, extending a third of the way across the face of the building and approximately a quarter of the way into the interior, but does not provide any photographs of the damage to the south facade.[1] A unique aspect of the design of 7 WTC was that each outer structural column was responsible for supporting 2,000 square feet (186 square meters) of floor space, suggesting that the simultaneous removal of a number of columns would lead to a severely compromised structure. Consistent with this theory, news footage shows visible cracking and bowing of the building's east wall immediately prior to the collapse, which started from the penthouse floors.[1]

The final report from NIST regarding the collapse of 7 WTC was due in July 2005, but study is ongoing.[7] NIST released a progress report in June of 2004 outlining its working hypothesis. On this hypothesis a local failure in a critical column, caused by damage from either fire or falling debris from the collapses of the two towers, progressed first vertically and then horizontally to result in "a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure".[8][9] In a New York Magazine interview in March 2006, Dr S. Shyam Sunder, NIST's lead WTC disaster investigator, said of 7 World Trade Center, "We are studying the horizontal movement east to west, internal to the structure, on the fifth to seventh floors.” and then added "But truthfully, I don’t really know. We’ve had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7".[10]

I can tell you a 767 757 or any large civilian aircraft did NOT hit the Pentagon. I don't know what did. I am SUSPECTING a smaller aircraft, or a missle of some kind.

So they hijacked a plane, and instead fired a missile or used a smaller aircraft, what's the point of that? Why not crash the actual plane into the Pentagon.

Many of them in other countries other than the United States.

Over 1,112,000 troops are still on active duty in the United States.

[GostHacked]

Canadian Blue

The American Society of Civil Engineers would disagree with you, but then again you know what do they know.

From your Wiki link.

“Loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening caused by fires on the 5th to 7th floors. The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue.” (Chapter 5, pg 31.)

In other words. It is inconclusive. So it does not say what did cause the collapse, but it does say what was the most probable cause. IOW, the officials are not 100% sure how/why the building came down. So anyone who keeps pushing the official story is deluding themselves for the fact that the officials are not even sure about WTC 7.

I will say that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition. Even the owner (rehash rehash, trying to pound it into anyones head) said they would pull the building. But that does not even throw a light switch in anyones head but the 'crazies'. If Silverstien was NOT talking about 'pull it' WTC 7. Then I wonder what he was refering to? Was that line taken out of context then? I am refering to the PBS documentary about 9/11.

Wait a minute here.

http://killtown.blogspot.com/2005/09/silve...ic-pull-it.html ... reading it now. Interesting.

[Canadian Blue]

So despite what the experts believe is the most probable cause, you're basing the opinion that it was a controlled demolition off of two words which were taken out of context.

[PolyNewbie]

GhostHacked...but it does say what was the most probable cause

No it doesn't ! It says the only thing they can imagine isn't really possible (low probability of occurance) ! They have no idea what happened to wtc7. They did not even come up with a hypothesis with a "high" degree of probability.

The official version is a lie (low probability of occurance), all the evidence is destroyed.

[PolyNewbie]

CanadianBlue:So despite what the experts believe is the most probable cause, you're basing the opinion that it was a controlled demolition off of two words which were taken out of context.

You have nothing for wtc7. No official report on what happened to wtc7. You just want to imagine that the engineers who wrote the FEMA report wanted to believe what they said had a "low probability of occurance"

was a viable explanation.

[PolyNewbie]

GhostHacked:But I disagree with many things he talks about.

Like what ? You don't think what I say about the banks is true ?

[GostHacked]

GhostHacked:But I disagree with many things he talks about.

Like what ? You don't think what I say about the banks is true ?

It's not that at all really. To me after about a year and a bit of looking into all of this and the bigger picture in which 9/11 was just a small part of. You can talk about the thermodynamicalphysics of the buildings all you want, but if you are not looking at the bigger picture and subdue the ADD tendancies for a moment it may help you with understanding the grand scheme of things.

MY PROBLEM with Polynewbie and his like is they rehash the bombs thing over and over but not give any real context to the possible of 'why' there were bombs in the building. Look Polynewbie, I agree with you, but if youi want to get people to understand the WHY of it all, you need to move onto the bigger picture of it all.

I will say the bankers along with elements of the government that all have large ties to main stream media (bear with me here) have something to do with it. WTC was a 'gold mine' if you will, of financial institutions (banks, investor groups, ect), government offices, well I will let this site speak for itself on the tenants of WTC.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/tenants1.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_World_Trade_Center_tenants follow the links for the other buildings. Now I know wikipedia is now considered as sketchy as for it's accuracy but this simplifies the search, and well, I guess there is no secret of who was tennants. Even the Secret Service had some offices there.

Strategicaly that place would be a #1 hotspot for a possible terror attack. But not from the point of view most are used to. If it was true terrorism, would you not think that maybe a bridge, or mall or something against a civilian place? Something in the water system? Airborne contaminate. Messing with the food supply something along that nature. A work office seems possible for a terror attack.

So let's begin shall we?

Years ago back in the 80's there was some scandals involving some really big companies. Something was done in the government to break up large monopolistic companies and tried to create a more competative market for everyone buy giving more people a small chunk of the pie. Some of those bankers would have lost out big time. (The military industrial complex fits into this as well, for some defence contractors would need investors in order to create new military hardware and applications, investors mean large banking/financial institutions)..... So now with bankers having a smaller chunk of the pie they would also have less say in said company they are a shareholder of. Many hands in the pot tends to not be good for business in that sense. ......... So fine, it was done, large companies were chopped up. Regan, Bush, Clinton, Bush Jr. Sept 11 2001, happens. ....... I suspect some shady deals were done here and there, and it end up creating a smaller band of people with something more in mind, they conspired together to influence the government by supporting Democrats as well as Republicans (Bankers know that they need to diversify their portfolio if they want to have the best turn around)

You can also put a good bet on those bankers having a good say in what goes on in the think tanks they decide to invest in. Think Tanks only exist to act as lobbyists for the coporations that the bankers control anyways.

I would hope that the tenants of the World Trade Center complex would have offsite and even possible off continent servers to store critical information. Anyone in IT understands that. If not many records would have been lost. Any wrong doings would have basicly been erased. Private, public and government records could have simply vanished. Not only that knowledge stored in some brains are permanently gone as well. Knowledge that could have shown the bankers involvement.

I need to mention the attack on the Pentagon here now too. Bankers would have a lot of pull in the Pentagon, since the position of Secretary of Defence is a civilian not military position. I would guess there are many civilains holding imporant positions in the Pentagon. Military Industrian Complex. Money has been pouring into the Pentagon for upgrades and improvements.

Fast foward to today.

Have you seen corporations today? They are getting monopolistic again. Not only that, the bankers have gotten away with basicly hijacking the economy of the United States on that fatefull day. They have the most to gain from this than anyone. With that control of money you can control government on any scale. That includes policies regarding how corporations function, the environment, and even foriegn policy. They also can control what information gets to you, the person sitting in that chair reading this right now. They can control the news outlets to say what they want to say. Take a look at the news that is delivered to you these days. Notice that the names of reporters are going away to be replaced by 'some news source entity' always by some annonymous source.

Government spending is out of control now as well. Guess who's cash is being spent or let's say reinvested into the private corporations in junction with an ever growing accelerating military industrial complex. Who is making the money off the war?

In a way this shows to me that the Iraq War is proof that 9/11 was an inside job.

But then again, some guy in a freaking cave and a walking stick managed to bribe some dudes, gave them BOX CUTTERS and managed to hijack planes and struck at the financial heart core of the United States..... all because they simply hate us?

[Riverwind]

But then again, some guy in a freaking cave and a walking stick managed to bribe some dudes, gave them BOX CUTTERS and managed to hijack planes and struck at the financial heart core of the United States..... all because they simply hate us?

That is the most rational explaination given the evidence. Muslims have been killing themselves for years in the name of some holy cause. The WTC attack was no different. Hijacking planes with box cutters was also not as hard as your might think because before 9/11 hijackers always landed the plane on the ground. This meant the passangers would have believed that sitting quietly was the safest course of action. Once the passengers figured out what was really going on they fought back and easily overwhelmed the men with box cutters.

[GostHacked]

But then again, some guy in a freaking cave and a walking stick managed to bribe some dudes, gave them BOX CUTTERS and managed to hijack planes and struck at the financial heart core of the United States..... all because they simply hate us?

That is the most rational explaination given the evidence. Muslims have been killing themselves for years in the name of some holy cause. The WTC attack was no different. Hijacking planes with box cutters was also not as hard as your might think because before 9/11 hijackers always landed the plane on the ground. This meant the passangers would have believed that sitting quietly was the safest course of action. Once the passengers figured out what was really going on they fought back and easily overwhelmed the men with box cutters.

I give up then.

[Canadian Blue]

But then again, some guy in a freaking cave and a walking stick managed to bribe some dudes, gave them BOX CUTTERS and managed to hijack planes and struck at the financial heart core of the United States..... all because they simply hate us?

Yes, you'd be surprised at how many people in history have been killed due to hate, and even over trivial things.

[PolyNewbie]

Ghost Hacked:...of 'why' there were bombs in the building.

I do understand why there were bombs in the building but answering the 'why' is not creating a fact based arguement. I'm argueing that 911 was an inside job on this thread not why they did it. I argue about why in my banking/ Wall street thread.

You and I do agree on things but wrt to banks and finances I look at a bigger picture. The fact is that the Federal Reserve banks controls the USA and the IMF. When people talk about corporate profits they are only seeing half the picture. There is a whole dark half of the economy that few people are aware of.

If you have not seen The Money Masters or read The Creature From Jekyll Island, I would strongly recommend both- as they are both fact based and 100 % true about banks. History has a strong monetary basis that has the most significant influence on things and that is ignored in education and media.

[PolyNewbie]

GhostHacked:But then again, some guy in a freaking cave and a walking stick managed to bribe some dudes, gave them BOX CUTTERS and managed to hijack planes and struck at the financial heart core of the United States..... all because they simply hate us?

No one is really dumb enough to believe that. I just wonder what peoples agenda is that try to convince others of it. Maybe they think their Haliburton stock is doing well so they want everyone to stay on the "Osama did it" train.

The economy is heading toward a crash that will make 1929 seem like a picnic. We will have food shortages and in a very short time after it all begins we will have starvation, high crimes, bodies on the streets, child kidnappings & violence everywhere. In a matter of a week North America will go from first world to worse than third world. We don't have the small farms anymore like they did in the 30's.

We can blame the people who thought of nothing but their stocks and bonds and watched too much TV. What is happening now is the result of 50 or more years of careful planning.

[Nina]

It is so easy and makes everyones lives so much more comfortable to just dismiss evidence that tells us all is definately not well with the official explanation regarding the events of 9/11.

I can understand why a large proportion of the world's population (especially those in the US) prefer to pretend that governments never lie to us, that they always have our best interests at heart and that they would never, ever allow their citizens to die to proceed with an agenda.

Unfortunately this world is full of physcopaths, who have little regard for human life and if you look at the definition of physcopathy, those in positions of great power fit the criteria perfectly.

Of course, that does not mean the US government planned and implemented 9/11, even if they did, we will probably never be privy to absolute proof that they did. What I do think we should do is take off our rose tinted spectacles and look at all the evidence that we are privy to (from both sides of the coin, if you do not look from both sides, you cannot hope to think rationally and logically and partisan politics has no place when you want to apply logic or rational).

If you look at 9/11 as a sordid crime and think about how our police force would investigate such a crime. what is the first aspect they look at? Who benefits.

Who has benefitted? really think about that one.

Then evidence, police do not only look at the 'in your face, obvious evidence, they look at the subtle evidence, which by the lay man is sometimes over looked. I am thinking here about the Insider dealing that went on in the run up to 9/11.

This evidence is not conspiracy theory, this evidence is concrete fact, cannot be disputed, between the 16th and 17th of September the Chicago Options Exchange received 4.774 put options that United Airlines would fall.

One 10th Sept, 4,516 of these bets were placed on the likelihood that the value of American Airlines would also fall, no other airline showed such activity. This is not conspiracy theory, this is fact.

Two tenants of the WTC also saw extrodinary put options on their shares, Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch.

All this activity was unprecedented and if you look at the odds of this happening they are almost off the scale. Ok, you could say, well anything is possible and I suppose it is, the strangest co-incedences do sometimes happen but, so many? at the same time?

The profit on this betting was $3. 17 million dollars, that amount by todays standards is not that much, this to my mind is not the problem or the smoking gun.

The smoking gun in my own view is the fact that the firm that placed the majority of these put options was Alex Brown Inc, until 1998 this company was headed by Buzzy Krongard, who was, at the time of 9/11 executive director of the CIA.

I ask you to think about this question, could Krongard have warned Alex Brown Inc that the attack was iminent, because Krongard knew it was? And that information was passed to certain employees, either intentionally or by accident, who took advantage of this information by placing put options on the airlines and on the two WTC tenants?

This is not a tin foil hat theory, this is a rational theory based on concrete evidence.

The question you then should ask is; if the CIA were privy to inside information regarding an attack and in my view the evidence tends to lead you to that conclusion based on serious, rational and logical thinking, then so was the US government.

This makes a lot of sense to me (we are still thinking rationally and logically I hope?).

And if the US administration knew and possibly lied to the populace about inside knowledge of an iminant attack, what else have they lied to us about.

[White Doors]

One popular theory suggests there was a suspiciously high volume of “put” trading of airline stocks in the days just before 9/11. Since “put” trading is effectively a gamble that the price of a stock will decrease, conspiracy theorists surmise that trading “insiders” knew about the coming events of 9/11 and placed their bets accordingly. While this may look suspicious in isolation, the general volume of put trading on these stocks reached similar levels at earlier points in the year. The spike in American Airlines trading was the highest of the all airline companies involved, but that’s hardly surprising considering that the company had just released a major warning about possible losses.34 Indeed, general bad news about the airline industry prompted investment companies to advise their clients to take the put options, removing any need to blame the trading options on foreknowledge of the attacks.

Funny how facts take the wind of of your paranoid sails eh?

source:http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-09-11.html

Sorry about that.

[Nina]

One popular theory suggests there was a suspiciously high volume of “put” trading of airline stocks in the days just before 9/11. Since “put” trading is effectively a gamble that the price of a stock will decrease, conspiracy theorists surmise that trading “insiders” knew about the coming events of 9/11 and placed their bets accordingly. While this may look suspicious in isolation, the general volume of put trading on these stocks reached similar levels at earlier points in the year. The spike in American Airlines trading was the highest of the all airline companies involved, but that’s hardly surprising considering that the company had just released a major warning about possible losses.34 Indeed, general bad news about the airline industry prompted investment companies to advise their clients to take the put options, removing any need to blame the trading options on foreknowledge of the attacks.

Funny how facts take the wind of of your paranoid sails eh?

source:http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-09-11.html

Sorry about that.

Please don't be sorry, you have posted nothing that takes any wind out of my sails at all. why should your post do that exactly?.

You have not given an explanation that covers my questions in the least, I suggest you read it again. There is another fact to consider here, the fact that you cannot resist pigeon-holing me, the fact that you do this, leads me to believe you have no interest in 'thinking' or debating, just insulting.

Whether or not put options had been placed before 9/11 at high rates does not answer in a satisfactory manner why almost all bets prior to 9/11 were placed by ONE company, who just happened to be intrinsically linked with the executive director of the CIA.

Oh as another point of interest, I suppose the same reasoning can be applied to the two tenants of the WTC too?

You will do yourself a big favour regarding the respect stakes if you refrained from trying to score cheap points by using a very poor attempt at ridicule and actually thought before you speak in such a manner.

[White Doors]

Wrong again

You said:

All this activity was unprecedented and if you look at the odds of this happening they are almost off the scale. Ok, you could say, well anything is possible and I suppose it is, the strangest co-incedences do sometimes happen but, so many? at the same time?

That is simply not true. This level of activity WAS reached before and you conveniently forgot that AA issues a profit warning the day before this activity.

[White Doors]

Oh yeah...

why almost all bets prior to 9/11 were placed by ONE company

Alex Brown is one of the biggest investment banks in the world.

[Nina]

Your source is quite useless, it gives a single persons opinion, it does not give facts at all.

If you want me to consider conflicting evidence, give me facts please, not the opinion of an individual by the name of Phil Mole.

As for Alex Brown being one of the biggest investment banks in the world, what on earth has that got to do with the price of eggs exactly?

Your rebuttal is poor to say the least, I give you facts, you give me opinion and conjecture.

Next time you might want to give me an unbiased, credible source if you please.

[Nina]

And for goodness sakes give me a break man.

Your website was founded and directed by Dr. Michael Shermer, a former fundementalist christian who happens to be a producer of FOX TV.

And you have the audacity to quote this source as a serious rebuttal to highly verifiable evidence?

The only thing this guy has going for him is that he supports Evolution rather than Intelligent Design.

[PolyNewbie]

nina:Unfortunately this world is full of physcopaths, who have little regard for human life and if you look at the definition of physcopathy, those in positions of great power fit the criteria perfectly.

A lot of them have investments and they have been watching their investments grow and the value of their homes grow so thing everything is just fine. Don't rock the boat, don't be a conspiracy theorist. But they think that the Dow Jones represents the real economy. The US dollar has dropped compared to European, the banks will be soon quadrupling the currency supply from 1999 and all this money that the Pentagon just loses - a trillion here, a trillion there, is comming right out of their pockets at some time or the whole thing is going to collapse.

What they don't see is that the whole economy is one great big paper ballon that will burst just like in 1929.

[White Doors]

As for Alex Brown being one of the biggest investment banks in the world, what on earth has that got to do with the price of eggs exactly?

Jesus. You guys really are that dense eh? You said alot of the put options were by one Company which sounds sinister and all conspiracy like. I state that Alex Jones is on of THE biggest investment banks in the world and the day before AA issued a profit warning and you STILL don't get it?

Then I can't help ya girl.

Your mind is already made up.

[White Doors]

And for goodness sakes give me a break man.

Your website was founded and directed by Dr. Michael Shermer, a former fundementalist christian who happens to be a producer of FOX TV.

And you have the audacity to quote this source as a serious rebuttal to highly verifiable evidence?

The only thing this guy has going for him is that he supports Evolution rather than Intelligent Design.

I see. attack the messenger not the message?

I get it. neat how that works in your little world.