Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition

Related threads:
Sept 11, 2001 - 10 yr anniversary thread (39)
BS: Remember 9/11 (123)
BS: Building What? 9/11 (68)
BS: Firefighters for 9/11 Truth: Press Conference (311)
BS: Did We Imagine 9/11??? (128)
BS: An Investent And Momento Of 9/11, Not! (12)
BS: The Legacy of 9/11 (25)
BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job (715)
BS: David Ray Griffin's 9/11 debunking book (1)
BS: 9/11 Solved-Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Confessed (121)
BS: 9/11 eyewitness in WTC sub-basement (23)
BS: Five years after 9/11 (88)
WTC survivor - virus (Hoax) (2)
BS: Did the FBI bomb the WTC in '93? (111) (closed)
BS: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories (24) (closed)
BS: why did the wtc fall down (62) (closed)
BS: Were the 9/11 Hijackers Gay? (161) (closed)
BS: Great Collection of 9/11 Related Stuff (2) (closed)
BS: WTC Attackers: An Alternative View (14) (closed)
Is this the WTC? (19)


GUEST,Scary Kerry 23 Apr 07 - 09:09 PM
Charley Noble 23 Apr 07 - 09:21 PM
Mr Happy 23 Apr 07 - 09:27 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 23 Apr 07 - 09:30 PM
Amos 23 Apr 07 - 09:39 PM
The Fooles Troupe 23 Apr 07 - 09:47 PM
Amos 23 Apr 07 - 09:49 PM
The Fooles Troupe 23 Apr 07 - 10:08 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 23 Apr 07 - 10:10 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 23 Apr 07 - 10:17 PM
Ebbie 23 Apr 07 - 10:18 PM
Bill D 23 Apr 07 - 10:20 PM
Don Firth 23 Apr 07 - 10:20 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 23 Apr 07 - 10:49 PM
Little Hawk 23 Apr 07 - 10:55 PM
Lonesome EJ 23 Apr 07 - 11:12 PM
Stilly River Sage 23 Apr 07 - 11:16 PM
Amos 23 Apr 07 - 11:33 PM
Ebbie 23 Apr 07 - 11:37 PM
Little Hawk 23 Apr 07 - 11:41 PM
Sorcha 23 Apr 07 - 11:51 PM
Lonesome EJ 23 Apr 07 - 11:52 PM
Amos 24 Apr 07 - 12:03 AM
Sorcha 24 Apr 07 - 12:04 AM
Peace 24 Apr 07 - 12:37 AM
Sorcha 24 Apr 07 - 12:50 AM
Stilly River Sage 24 Apr 07 - 01:04 AM
Peace 24 Apr 07 - 01:07 AM
The Fooles Troupe 24 Apr 07 - 06:00 AM
catspaw49 24 Apr 07 - 07:27 AM
Charley Noble 24 Apr 07 - 07:59 AM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 24 Apr 07 - 09:20 AM
Bill D 24 Apr 07 - 10:40 AM
Ebbie 24 Apr 07 - 11:27 AM
Stringsinger 24 Apr 07 - 11:36 AM
Amos 24 Apr 07 - 11:41 AM
catspaw49 24 Apr 07 - 11:47 AM
Peace 24 Apr 07 - 11:47 AM
Big Mick 24 Apr 07 - 11:51 AM
GUEST 24 Apr 07 - 12:05 PM
Donuel 24 Apr 07 - 12:20 PM
catspaw49 24 Apr 07 - 01:20 PM
Little Hawk 24 Apr 07 - 01:29 PM
Donuel 24 Apr 07 - 01:53 PM
Peace 24 Apr 07 - 01:56 PM
Ebbie 24 Apr 07 - 02:00 PM
beardedbruce 24 Apr 07 - 02:03 PM
Stilly River Sage 24 Apr 07 - 02:08 PM
Donuel 24 Apr 07 - 02:12 PM
beardedbruce 24 Apr 07 - 02:18 PM
Little Hawk 24 Apr 07 - 02:25 PM
beardedbruce 24 Apr 07 - 02:29 PM
Bill D 24 Apr 07 - 02:32 PM
beardedbruce 24 Apr 07 - 02:33 PM
Peace 24 Apr 07 - 02:52 PM
Little Hawk 24 Apr 07 - 02:58 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 24 Apr 07 - 03:00 PM
beardedbruce 24 Apr 07 - 03:00 PM
Little Hawk 24 Apr 07 - 03:03 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 24 Apr 07 - 03:14 PM
dick greenhaus 24 Apr 07 - 04:42 PM
Little Hawk 24 Apr 07 - 05:13 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 24 Apr 07 - 05:25 PM
Little Hawk 24 Apr 07 - 05:31 PM
Bill D 24 Apr 07 - 05:59 PM
Bill D 24 Apr 07 - 06:22 PM
Bill D 24 Apr 07 - 06:26 PM
Donuel 24 Apr 07 - 06:31 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 24 Apr 07 - 07:21 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 24 Apr 07 - 07:53 PM
Bill D 24 Apr 07 - 08:01 PM
Peace 24 Apr 07 - 08:04 PM
Bill D 24 Apr 07 - 08:18 PM
The Fooles Troupe 24 Apr 07 - 08:41 PM
Peace 24 Apr 07 - 09:55 PM
Donuel 24 Apr 07 - 09:56 PM
Big Mick 24 Apr 07 - 10:27 PM
Donuel 24 Apr 07 - 10:34 PM
Peace 24 Apr 07 - 10:41 PM
Little Hawk 24 Apr 07 - 10:50 PM
Bill D 24 Apr 07 - 11:16 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 24 Apr 07 - 11:18 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 24 Apr 07 - 11:34 PM
Keith A of Hertford 25 Apr 07 - 04:18 AM
Greg F. 25 Apr 07 - 08:42 AM
Alice 25 Apr 07 - 10:02 AM
Peace 25 Apr 07 - 10:14 AM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 25 Apr 07 - 01:31 PM
Big Mick 25 Apr 07 - 01:40 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 25 Apr 07 - 02:08 PM
Peace 25 Apr 07 - 03:59 PM
Bee-dubya-ell 25 Apr 07 - 04:32 PM
Bill D 25 Apr 07 - 04:45 PM
Wesley S 25 Apr 07 - 05:07 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 25 Apr 07 - 05:11 PM
Wesley S 25 Apr 07 - 05:12 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 25 Apr 07 - 05:26 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 25 Apr 07 - 09:13 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 25 Apr 07 - 09:54 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 25 Apr 07 - 10:17 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 25 Apr 07 - 11:38 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 26 Apr 07 - 07:34 AM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 26 Apr 07 - 09:19 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Apr 07 - 09:20 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Apr 07 - 09:58 AM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 26 Apr 07 - 12:40 PM
beardedbruce 26 Apr 07 - 12:51 PM
Peace 26 Apr 07 - 01:09 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Apr 07 - 01:09 PM
Peace 26 Apr 07 - 01:17 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Apr 07 - 01:22 PM
Bill D 26 Apr 07 - 01:37 PM
Peace 26 Apr 07 - 01:41 PM
beardedbruce 26 Apr 07 - 01:41 PM
beardedbruce 26 Apr 07 - 01:44 PM
Peace 26 Apr 07 - 01:45 PM
beardedbruce 26 Apr 07 - 01:50 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Apr 07 - 01:54 PM
beardedbruce 26 Apr 07 - 03:19 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Apr 07 - 03:25 PM
beardedbruce 26 Apr 07 - 03:30 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Apr 07 - 03:49 PM
beardedbruce 26 Apr 07 - 04:22 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Apr 07 - 04:52 PM
beardedbruce 26 Apr 07 - 05:14 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 26 Apr 07 - 07:18 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 26 Apr 07 - 07:43 PM
Peace 26 Apr 07 - 07:46 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 26 Apr 07 - 09:00 PM
Peace 26 Apr 07 - 09:04 PM
Bill D 26 Apr 07 - 10:57 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 27 Apr 07 - 10:56 AM
beardedbruce 27 Apr 07 - 11:06 AM
Bill D 27 Apr 07 - 11:10 AM
Donuel 27 Apr 07 - 12:43 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 30 Apr 07 - 11:45 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 30 Apr 07 - 11:49 PM
GUEST,Podkayne 01 May 07 - 02:29 AM
Sorcha 01 May 07 - 02:38 AM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 01 May 07 - 01:28 PM
Wesley S 01 May 07 - 01:36 PM
Bill D 01 May 07 - 01:39 PM
Ebbie 01 May 07 - 01:49 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 01 May 07 - 09:44 PM
CarolC 02 May 07 - 06:52 AM
Wesley S 02 May 07 - 09:12 AM
GUEST,Scarry Kerry 02 May 07 - 01:53 PM
beardedbruce 02 May 07 - 01:58 PM
Wesley S 02 May 07 - 02:00 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 03 May 07 - 01:20 AM
Ebbie 03 May 07 - 11:10 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 04 May 07 - 12:45 AM
Wolfgang 04 May 07 - 06:28 AM
Don Firth 04 May 07 - 02:58 PM
Lonesome EJ 04 May 07 - 04:51 PM
Don Firth 04 May 07 - 05:12 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 04 May 07 - 08:32 PM
GUEST,beardedbruce 04 May 07 - 08:39 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 04 May 07 - 11:45 PM
Peace 04 May 07 - 11:54 PM
Lonesome EJ 05 May 07 - 12:42 AM
Lonesome EJ 05 May 07 - 01:12 AM
Ebbie 05 May 07 - 05:25 PM
Peace 05 May 07 - 05:26 PM
Don Firth 05 May 07 - 06:13 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 06 May 07 - 11:21 PM
GUEST,Scary Kerry 12 May 07 - 07:33 PM

Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum Child
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:













Subject: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 09:09 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn4Yx1MTgfQ&mode=related&search=

Another conspiracy nut. A link to a Youtube clip that's 1:00 long. John Kerry saying they had to brind down WTC7 in a "controlled fashion."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Charley Noble
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 09:21 PM

I must be really obtuse. Could someone or "Scary Kerry," explain why what John Kerry is saying indicates some kind of conspiracy is involved? What I'm hearing is Kerry saying he assumed the building was dangerously damaged and had to be brought down in a controlled demolition rather than repaired.

Charley Noble


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Mr Happy
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 09:27 PM

brind?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 09:30 PM

The questioner laid out the series of events carefully then asked his question. Kerry answered that the building had to be brought down rather than repaired.

Problem is, the building was brought down in a perfect demolition on the afternoon of 9/11. It takes WEEKS to plant demolition charges in a building that size. The government has been saying the building fell, like WTC 1 and 2, as a result of damage. They've changed the story 5 times so far, too. But Kerry just admitted it was a demolition job, the day of the attacks. So, who planted the charges? You see the corner he painted himself into?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Amos
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 09:39 PM

Your whole argument rests on the assertion that it takes weeks to plant demolition charges.

If the building was already badly weakened, it may have only taken hours, to an expert eye, to see what wopuld have to be done.

Your conclusion is presented with entirely too little supporting data.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 09:47 PM

We like the moon!


We like the moon!
cause it is close to us
We like the moo-oo-oo-oo-n
But not as much as a spoon
Cause that's more use for eating soup


And a fork is not very useful for that
unless it has got many vegetables
and then you might be better off with a
chopstick - unlike the moon!


it is up in the sky
it's up there very high
but not as high as maybe
dirigibles or zeppelins or lightbulbs!
and maybe clouds - and puffins also
I think maybe they go quite high too
Maybe not as high as the moon
cause the moon is very high


We like the moon
The moon is very useful everyone
Everybody like the moon
because it light up the sky at night
and it lovely
and it make the tide go and we like it
but not as much as cheese

we really like cheese we like zeppelins
we really like them
and we like kelp and we like moose
and we like deer and we like marmots
and we like all the fluffy animals


We really like the moon!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Amos
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 09:49 PM

Jaysus, you really are a thread creep sometimes, Robin...


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 10:08 PM

I thin the carefulyy crafted artistic explanation I posted is just as rational as most of the stuff I have heard about 911 mate!

:-)

Robin


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 10:10 PM

That building could not have been wired in hours. It was a building built on top of a con-ed generator building. A 47-story lattice of enormously heavy steel girders sunk into bedrock. Plus, the govt said it was on fire, so why would people have been allowed inside with explosives during a fire? It was not wired on the day of the event, nor could it have been wired on a single day under the best of circumstances.

The way the govt dealt with the issue was to not talk about it. The collapse of WTC 7 is not even discussed in the NIST report. Yet the lease holder, Silverstein, squeezed out a crocodile tear and said they were forced to "pull" it...a demolition term.

Impossible to have wired it, yet admittedly demolished (by Silverstein and now by Kerry), so this is a problematic area. Who wired it, and when? And why did the government lie about the circumstances surrounding its collapse? And MOST importantly, if they lied about the collapse of THIS building, then what else did they lie about regarding 9/11?

What'd it take...a day or two for Bush to put that fat old gangster Tom Ridge in charge of an investigation into the Virginia Tech shootings? (Ridge is a coverup expert). Yet it took 411 days for Bush to appoint a commission to look at 9/11..."the day that changed America forever."

Kerry just put his foot in it bigtime. Then he said it wasn't in his "jurisdiction." A freakin' U.S. Senator, and 9/11 isn't his problem. His career is over because of this. I just hope he now spills the beans on what REALLY happened on 9/11.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 10:17 PM

Oh, and this was the building that the BBC and CNN reported had fallen (past tense) 20 minutes and an hour before it actually did. Film all over the place on that...the building standing in the background while Jane Standley and Aaron Brown talked about it in the past tense before being alerted that their asses were hanging out on international television.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 10:18 PM

Gracious. When did John Kerry become part of the conspiracy?

I too listened to the YouTube link. I too heard John Kerry respond to the statement and question. He "admitted" nothing; he was going along with the question as posed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 10:20 PM

I don't hear Kerry 'acknowleging' ANYTHING....why would he even know anything about it?

The longer clip right below that ends with Kerry saying "I really don't know that much about it"

Kerry was shrugging in an off-the-cuff remark sorta saying that 'the building was in danger' maybe NEEDED a controlled removal....that is WAY short of any confirmation that anyone planned it in advance.


Get real!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 10:20 PM

I notice that all these threads having to do with conspiracies about the WTO attacks are started by "GUEST,some sort of pseudonym," (most likely all the same person).

How do these nuts get in, anyway? And why are coming here?

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 10:49 PM

why would he even know anything about it?

Well...because he represents the state of Massachusetts and Logan airport was involved in the "attacks."

And if this was the "event that changed America," he should know ALL about it. The true set-up came with the question before, when the woman talked about Dr. Steven Jones' evidence of thermate bombs at the WTC complex and asked if Kerry would be open to investigating that, and he said he would. So yeah, he was shrugging it all off, but he's on film saying WTC 7 was brought down the DAY OF THE ATTACKS through demolition procedures, and he's agreed to look at Jones' conclusive evidence. Now his feet will be held to the fire. He'll never be elected again after this. He might be an appointed reichmarshall or something, but the 9/11 Truth movement is going to break over America this summer when Loose Change hits the theaters, then all this footage will be resurrected, and Kerry's a goner. A great day for America.

I mean, the owner of the building said it was demolished, there was no time to plant the charges, then the government covered it up. Short of Mohamed Atta screaming in your good ear that he didn't do it, you can't get much more conclusive. This was set up ahead of time.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 10:55 PM

The usual set of reactions and quick "logical" conclusions from the usual participants, I see...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 11:12 PM

Scary Kerry, you want the truth? We all knew John Kerry was involved in the destruction of WTC7. In fact, he was complicit in the entire 911 caper, including financing the planting of the demolition charges that brought down both WTC1 and 2. He helped rig the detonators on the noses of all three airliners. The entire 911 scheme involved a plot by co-conspirators including Kerry, both Bushes, the Saudis, and George Steinbrenner, and all of us who voted for Kerry in the 04 election. Its too late now for you to do anything about it now, though, much too late HA HA...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 11:16 PM

Lonesome EJ, you let that cat out of the bag way too soon. I bet you could have teased this poor sod for 100 more posts.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Amos
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 11:33 PM

DAMMIT, Ernie!!! Now we'll have to take care of him too!! I'll call Guido. Never mind, I understand how tempting it was...



A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 11:37 PM

We missed a good date though when we passed April 6th. I wonder why we haven't heard any more about it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 11:41 PM

Oh, and the usual humor too. How nice. ;-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Sorcha
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 11:51 PM

Oooo, do they sing 'Soprano' too?????

I think I prolly should tell you that JFK was involved in the demoliton. He is in a Nursing Home in the Bahamas and the aliens told him the building was unsafe for them. They even gave him the explosives to give to Sylvester. See, Rambo placed those charges. He knows all about that stuff.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 11:52 PM

While there is nothing funny about 911, I do find the endless conspiracy speculation ridiculous. What fools we mortals be.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Amos
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 12:03 AM

Nice recovery, there, man. That was close.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Sorcha
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 12:04 AM

Exactly, Ernie. I miss you. You still in CO?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 12:37 AM

What horseshit. First people here--HERE--said it fell down. Now they are blase about it being brought down. A fuckin' month ago I was being called a 'tin foil hat' person because I siad it was BROUGHT down. What a fuckin' joke. Shit or get off the pot.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Sorcha
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 12:50 AM

Actually, I have NO idea. Just shooting off my mouth again. I'll go to bed now. Nite.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 01:04 AM

Careful, Bruce, that tin foil is a little too tight. ;-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 01:07 AM

I wish people would make up their minds.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 06:00 AM

"How do these nuts get in, anyway?"

A nonny mouse lets them in.

"And why are coming here?"

Because they are deluded that anybody here cares...

We like the moo-oo-oo-oo-n....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: catspaw49
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 07:27 AM

Kerry also has all the inside dope on who killed Marilyn Sheppard in Bay Village, Ohio in 1954.

First, Kerry represents Massachusetts and they also have a Bay, a really big one too! Also, Sam Sheppard was represented in his second trial by a Massachusetts lawyer! Let's all hold his feet to the fire on that one too.

Scary Kerry, I'm with you all the way to the Funny Farm. Just let me out at the gate and you can go on....................(you really are a complete dumbfuck).......

Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Charley Noble
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 07:59 AM

Spaw-

Are you suggesting that Kerry was coordinating the demolition from eBay? I have to admit that I'm reading typo's into your above post but that's beginning to make more sense to me thanthe way it reads now. Follow the money trail!

Charley Noble, on his way to the funny farm


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 09:20 AM

What's being done is that the participants (active and passive) in 9/11 are being caught on tape admitting to complicity. At these public events, the people who were in charge are being asked specific questions about 9/11 and their answers being filmed. That way, when the Nuremberg trials come, they'll be convicted by their own words.

The U.S. Senate voted 100-0 to give Americans an internal passport to "fight the war on terrorism" (the Real I.D. Act). The borders are wide open, but law-abiding Americans are going to be made safer by being forced to carry "papers." This act was a direct result of 9/11. And Kerry, as a senator, voted for it. Why? If he doesn't have all the facts, or any of the facts, why did he vote for it?

You'll see more and more of this. The killers won't break down and admit their complicity, but you'll see bits and pieces of the unwitting admissions over the next few months.

As one person said, they keep TELLING us about September 11, so it's only right they should have to answer some questions about it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry mumbles abot WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 10:40 AM

you wouldn't know a 'confession' from a poem by e.e. cummings.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:27 AM

"The U.S. Senate voted 100-0"- When has the Senate ever voted 100 to 0? On anything?

As for our not being able to agree on what happened, neither does anyone else.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Stringsinger
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:36 AM

Lonesome EJ

The only reason that these speculations continue is that the government has not given a credible account of what actually happened on 911. The fools are those who are content to swallow the Bush Party Line on this issue. The supposed bi-partisan efforts at an explanation in Washinton culminated in a whitewash. This fuels the interest.

The word "demolition" being used and reused here should make any questioning American who has something going on upstairs wonder.

Frank Hamilton


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Amos
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:41 AM

I think we all wonder, Frank, but that is not the same as asserting less-than-probable explanations with inadequate evidence.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: catspaw49
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:47 AM

Bravo Amos!

Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:47 AM

'The word "demolition" being used and reused here should make any questioning American who has something going on upstairs wonder.'

I am one of the tinfoil hat people, or so I have been told by some folks on this thread, either by direct statement or their silence when others have done so. The party line here is that the building fell down because it was damaged by one of the towers when that collapsed. The partyline is that there WAS no demolition. So all of you, please STOP using that term, otherwise I will be getting tinfoil for YOU!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Big Mick
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:51 AM

Well said, Amos. If folks would take themselves out of the "conspiracy mode" for a while, they would see that most of this is very easily explained. There was a great deal of confusion, as there always is with tragedies of this magnitude. Remember all the theories and "proof" after Oklahoma City? The idea that anyone had foreknowledge of the attacks by the extremists, the idea that anyone built the buildings, or altered them, for some future destruction during a terrorist attack is beyond what any reasonable person would accept. As time goes on, the story will correct itself, and we will get as close as we can to the truth. And those that take every opportunity to find a conspiracy will become less and less relevant. That is, until the next time.........

When I store my tinfoil hat, should I throw some mothballs in the box?

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 12:05 PM

It simply does not matter.

Carry on.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 12:20 PM

Amos,

OK who are the demolitionists who worked for only 2 hours in WTC7 ?

You would think they would be deemed heros for working under those conditions. God knows we are desperate to celebrate heros of 9-11.

Why don't we know them. Why didn't the 9-11 Commision know them


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: catspaw49
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 01:20 PM

Wait! I'll bet Kerry really knows a shitload about that plane that didn't hit the Pentagon since he was a war hero and all!

Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 01:29 PM

Hum...de..dumm... (humming a merry tune)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 01:53 PM

http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.tv/orwellrolls.php


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 01:56 PM

OK. One question for the poo-pooers: Did WTC #7 just fall down or was it taken down by placed charges?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 02:00 PM

Guesses - even educated ones - tend not to be as knowledgeable as one would like.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 02:03 PM

Peace.

In answer to your question:

The reason that WTC7 fell is not known FOR CERTAIN. The higher probablity reasons are the fire, and controlled demolition (not of equal weight, though). Lower probability reasons exist, such as a micro earthquake and activity by the Martian invaders.

If anything POSSIBLE must be considered, please don't leave out the Martians. We.. THEY object to being ignored.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 02:08 PM

Mick, no mothballs. Have Rin Tin Tin guard it, that's your best bet. He was there, helping the explosives folks, I bet Kerry could shed some light on that. . .

(But I fully agree with Lonesome EJ at 23 Apr 07 - 11:52 PM)

SRS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 02:12 PM

bearded bruce is talking out of his ass on this one.

There is legal proof it was pulled. Pulled is the term given buildings that are to undergo demolition.

The legal proof are the archived NYC FD audio tapes of the orders being given.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 02:18 PM

All faked by us ... THOSE martians, to fool you.


Besides, have YOU heard those tapes?

And Pull also means to get people out of a dangerous situation, such as a burning building about to collapse. Especially after the two main towers HAD collapsed, with so many firefighters still inside.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 02:25 PM

It was apparently (and really, quite obviously) brought down by a controlled demolition.

There was not the time available to properly set up such a controlled demolition on 911. Not even close to the time available. No way they could have done it in the time available on 911.

If it had been a legit demolition operation done on 911 to protect lives and property we would have been introduced by now in the media to some of the professional "heroes", the explosives experts who did it and managed to pull it off successfully. We haven't been.

Figure out the rest for yourself.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 02:29 PM

"It was apparently (and really, quite obviously) brought down by a controlled demolition."


Well, I did admit thet we... THE martians brought it down.

But other than THAT how did you find out? We... THEY need to do a better job if it was so obvious, given the lack of real information available.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 02:32 PM

WTC7 fell down because of fire damage...(there are pictures & videos of it from several angles, showing major fires.....if you look beyond the angles & vids the conspiracy folks provide)

'pull' is just a word...it can be used in many ways. "That building is in trouble..'pull' the guys out"...)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 02:33 PM

Hush, Bill. You might wake the dreaming little ones..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 02:52 PM

"And Pull also means to get people out of a dangerous situation, such as a burning building about to collapse."

Uh, excuse me, but you just got onto my turf. Pull is NOT used by firefighters when there is a general order to evacuate a building. What happens is three sirens AND an order over the radio to evacuate immediately. (That is signaled by the speaker saying, "Emergency traffic, emergency traffic, emergency traffic". It's used to clear everyone off the radio net (keep them silent) until the emergent situation is transmitted.) The causes of an order like that are usually imminent danger of structure collapse or imminent danger of explosion or flashover.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 02:58 PM

Ta-tum-te-tum... (humming my little tune)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 03:00 PM

"Pull is NOT used by firefighters when there is a general order to evacuate a building."

I assume that is true. Did any of the firefighters use the word "pull" on 9/11?? The only person I heard utter the word was Silverman, who is not a firefighter as far as I know.

"It was apparently (and really, quite obviously) brought down by a controlled demolition."
No, it is not "really, quit obviously". That is your opinion, and I have yet to see evidence that it was controlled.

It seems that if we believe the "official" version we are goosestepping supporters of the current regime. If we do not believe the "official" version, we are wearing tin foil hats.   

What ever happened to common sense and logic?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 03:00 PM

Pull is NOT used by firefighters to indicate the controlled demolition of a building, either, is it?

It is used by demolition people. And "Pull" IS used by managers to indicate the resorces should be removed from a non-worthwhile effort.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 03:03 PM

Total lack of respect for other people's opinions is the rule when it comes to this subject. Note the tone of most of the posts on this thread. Ridicule. Smart ass jokes.

Don't be surprised when your total lack of respect for others ends up destroying longtime friendships and destroying even any further attempt to continue communicating with someone about something.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 03:14 PM

We forgive you for the "Ta-tum-te-tum"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 04:42 PM

Haven't been convinced by any conspiracy theories so far, but I would like to hear a convincing explanation of how a building collapsed vertically after being damaged on one side. And please don't quote Pop Mechanics at me---I used to write for them.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 05:13 PM

Thanks, Ron. ;-) You're a great guy.

It's the people who mention aluminum hats every time certain viewpoints they don't agree with come up that I was mostly referring to, not you. I'd like to shove an aluminum hat up their collective asses. Same goes for people who mention "little green men" or stuff about "Mars" in a context where it has no merit whatsoever.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 05:25 PM

I agree Little Hawk, and I do apologize for any "conspiracy nut" comments or the like that I may have mentioned in the past. I have respect for people like you and Peace who LOGICALLY look at the issues. While we may not agree on what we see, I think the search for the truth is very important.

My pet peeve is when people start lumping everyone who happen to agree with the basics of the "official" report along with the current regime.   It is not a support of Bush and his activities to believe that a group of people hijacked planes, crashed them into buildings, and the buildings collapsed. We may look at the evidence differently than you, but our search for answers is no different than yours.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 05:31 PM

Thanks again, Ron. We are in full agreement as to how the subject might best be discussed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 05:59 PM

"...a convincing explanation of how a building collapsed vertically after being damaged on one side. "

It HAS been given....the building was not just damaged on one side, it was engulfed by multiple fires on many floors. *I* posted the website with pictures taken from all sides, showing how extensive the problem was.... *sigh*...maybe I can find it, along with the explanations.

(and I believe Silverman has been quoted as DENYING that he asked for 'demolition'...maybe I can find that also.....I don't do this everyday....)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 06:22 PM

Look at this site.....there's a LOT there, you'll have to read for awhile. It has quotes from people on the scene, including firefighters. It explains in detail how & why WTC7 fell and what was said & what was MEANT by what was said...and who decided...and why WTC7 was different from 5&6...etc..etc...


...and read this...

""NIST has released video and still-photo analysis of Building 7 before 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 façade of the building that show it to have significant damage. The NIST interim report on 7 WTC details a 10-story gash that existed on the south façade, 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 façade.[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 severely compromise the structure's integrity. Consistent with this theory, news footage shows visible cracking and bowing of the building's east wall immediately before the collapse, which began at the penthouse floors.[1]

NIST "anticipated that a draft report will be released by early 2007".[9][10] NIST released a progress report in June 2004, outlining its working hypothesis, which was that 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".[11][12] 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"; he added "But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7".[13]

Despite FEMA's preliminary finding that fire caused the collapse, conspiracy theorists believe the collapse was the result of a controlled demolition. When asked about controlled demolition theories, Dr. Sunder said, "We consulted 80 public-sector experts and 125 private-sector experts. It is a Who's Who of experts. People look for other solutions. As scientists, we can't worry about that. Facts are facts."[14] In answer to the question of whether "a controlled[-]demolition hypothesis is being considered to explain the collapse", NIST said that, "[w]hile NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, it would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements."[10]"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 06:26 PM

and it has diagrams, videos, pictures,..lots of 'em.

will it convince the conspiracy folks? Of course not! They have their entire credibility invested in the idea that someone not only used explosives, but planned it in advance.

It's hard to back down when you get WAY out on a limb, hmmm?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 06:31 PM

Yes I have personally heard those tapes.
First there were questions as to when to pull the building and there were several pauses followed by the order 'Yes pull it now'

The funniest thing (if funny can apply to media monopoly cooperation in criminal acts of mass murder) was when the BBC was reporting live the collapse of building 7 with their UK reporter on the scene while building 7 was still standing. Minutes later the building did fall.

Talk about propoganda over reaching.
Next time media better keep it local.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 07:21 PM

Donuel, I have to disagree with your "media monopoly" theory. Having worked in the business (which I guess would make me "suspect" in your eyes), I cannot see how this would be pulled off. There are simply too many people involved. I would bet good money that the BBC reporter was reading a teleprompter that was displaying a story written by a news associate who was getting information from another reporter or wire service.   If you remember the day, you will remember that WTC 7 was being discussed early on as being in danger of collapse. It is not at all surprising that the reporter gave out wrong information.

Having been in newsrooms when major stories are breaking, I can tell you that it is a scene of chaos and a question of trying to get the information out fast and first. Unfortunately, accuracy goes out the window. It is all a symptom of the times and technology.   In the past they would wait until the 6pm news, now they are on 24/7.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 07:53 PM

This will be the 6th attempt by NIST to address what happened at WTC 7. None of the reasons make sense. That's why they keep changing the story.

I can run the photos of WTC 5 & 6 again, if people need that. Burned out steels husks still standing until they were methodically demolished. WTC 7 has NO fire coming out of it on 9/11, when compared to 5 & 6, and the only difference between 7 and the others was that it was MORE sturdy than any other bldg in the complex.

Ebbie...for the tenth time I'll post this. It is such common knowledge now that it's even on your beloved Wikipedia govt brainwashing site:

The Real ID act started off as H.R. 418, which passed the House (261-161-11) and went stagnant. It was then attached as a rider on a military spending bill (H.R. 1268) by Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R) of Wisconsin (the author) and was voted upon (100-0). It was signed into public law (109-13) on May 11, 2005....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_id (click on the 100-0 link to see the names of the unanimous voters).

The Senate has voted 100-0 on several rights-killing laws, but look at the one above. Research it. The U.S. Senate voted unanimously that you won't be able to work, drive, have a bank account, enter a federal building, etc. unless you have your Nazi-style papers on you.

The Real I.D. Act is such a stinking turd that the U.S. govt ran this bit of terrorism the day after it was signed into law:

...As the plane approached, authorities evacuated the White House and other federal buildings.

"Run, this is no joke, leave the grounds," a Secret Service agent told CNN's Suzanne Malveaux....

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/11/evacuation/index.html

The plane incident was the thing that made believers out of the holdouts in my family (I'd convinced about half that govts through history terrorize their own to create support for policy, as the US military-industrial complex did on 9/11). And on May 12, 2005, those holdout members of my family were regurgitating on me tha "fact" that a "pilot" had flown a Cessna over D.C., and "you'd think after 9/11 that couldn't happen." So I printed out the story and had them read it. A FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR was in the plane (talking heads failed to mention that on TV), visibility was perfect, and the instructor was flying toward the most recognizable landmarks in the U.S. Zero possibility of it being a "mistake." Yet the feds got 35,000 federal employees to panic and run for the cameras the DAY AFTER A LAW WAS ENACTED TO FORCE NAZI INTERNAL PAPERS ON AMERICANS. And now, when I mention the Real I.D. Act to people, and they don't know about it, I ask if they remember the Cessna. They do. I pick up the story from there.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 08:01 PM

The BBC has issued an explanation of their 'early' call! They simply had bad information from a VERY busy correspondent! They MADE A MISTAKE!

I do not get the impression that anyone, so far, has looked 'carefully' at the site I posted...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 08:04 PM

I have.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 08:18 PM

ok...great. Any opinions?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 08:41 PM

I just might believe our friend Scary Kerry but for one thing - his need for being anonymous on every subject he posts here - and his need for a different handle for each one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 09:55 PM

I agree that the news people screwed up.

But, I had never seen that footage before a few months ago, Bill. Footage I did see way back when has Silverstein (? hope I'm not screwing up that name) saying, "we pulled it". Guilani said something similar. The expression IS used by blasters. (I have a good friend here who worked as one for years.) I know of few other uses for the term in that context. Professionals who have to drop buildings take their time. It does take days to get a structure to fall straight down. Gravity alone, and the so-called pancaking where one floor falls to the next (ad infinitum) makes a building fall straight down--well, three out of three times by chance? Nope, even physics doesn't explain that. The hard questions about 9/11 have been ignored. I will agree that many of the conspiracy theories out there are 'out there', but that doesn't mean that all the theories out there are 'out there'.

The thing that makes me distrust government studies and makes me believe that people can be convinced of anything is Kennedy's assassination. The puff of smoke from the bushes on the knoll has never been satisfactorily explained. It has caused people who ask about it to be ridiculed, but the question still remains. It is possible to tell people what they see, and I think the Rule of 48 proves that. The best intelligence services in the world do their thing and the best people get about 9/11 is that mistakes happened. Doh, yeah!

A normal DOT investigation into a plane crash can take over a year. The plane, as much as can be salvaged, is reconstructed and to the best of their abilities, the investigators determine what caused the crash. Hell, play this game!

It's another grassy knoll. We are told what we see (or DON'T see) is not there or is.

So, while I'll say I think the news story was a screw up as some of you have said, it was never that news story that made me think something just ain't right.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 09:56 PM

Here is a short film about the media shift since 1970 and how it now works from the top down. http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.tv/orwellrolls.php

It works from the top down. A reporter's life may be the same on the street but getting his story past an editor is the test.


My point is that to coordinate such a "reichstad fire scenario" and cover it live trans Atlantic is virtually impossible...but the mistakes they made trying are hilarious in a macabre manner.


A good lawyer always asks "is it possible"

Could all the evidence I have seen, that is contrary to the offical 9-11 Commission reports, have been tampered with or spun out of whole cloth in seamless multimedia masterpieces?

Yes is it possible.

but martians posting as bearded bruce is also 'possible'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Big Mick
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 10:27 PM

Peace and Little Hawk, if my tinfoil hat and mothballs comment offended you, I sincerely apologize. It was meant as a tongue in cheek comment, a poor attempt at humor. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, and whether we agree or not, insults are not necessary.

And Bill, I don't think most of the folks here will take the time to read it, but it is important to have it in the record for those that will. Thanks for taking the time.

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 10:34 PM

The only fools are the ones spreading a known lie for free. Its a quid pro quo market and nothins fo nothin anymore.

I would be surprised if even one of Bill's 125 private sector experts who claim that the collapse of 3 steel buildings is normal under the circumstances....did it for free out of the goodness of their hearts without any credit, accolades or money changing hands.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 10:41 PM

"Peace and Little Hawk, if my tinfoil hat and mothballs comment offended you, I sincerely apologize."

Mick, no need for that on my account. Hell, I KNOW I'm crazy.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 10:50 PM

That's okay, Mick. Understood.

Like Peace says...we're ALL crazy. Each in our own special way. And we all lose our temper now and then. I don't mind people being crazy as long as it's not dangerous-crazy....cos, after all, I'm crazy too, right? ;-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:16 PM

WT7 was not a standard steel building...it had a structure similar to WTC 1&2. WTC 7 did not fall 'straight down'...it leaned, then fell. It fell because heavy fires had burned in it lower floors for over 6 hours, and it had 30 floors ABOVE where the fiercest fires were...and, to repeat, it was NOT a standard steel structure.
That is what *I* learned from reading that extremely detailed site.

On the site are interviews/quotes from firemen saying that they 'knew' it was weak and gonna fall...NOT that they were going to MAKE it fall. Silverstein and the brigade commander were not demolition people...they were not using technical jargon. 'Pull' was an unfortunate word they used.

It is not reasonable to base such a huge, scary conspiracy on an out-of-context word usage when there is so much physical evidence pointing to the fires and building structure.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:18 PM

Donuel, you are right - anything COULD happen. I could also win the lottery tonight, or get hit by lightning, or spontaneously combust. Nothing is out of the realm of possibility.

Realistically, I will blow another couple of bucks on tickets, there are no clouds in the sky, and I'm not feeling the slightest bit warm. From what I know of newsrooms and the personnel involved, the government will not be able to plant stories of that magnitude.

I also heard Guiliani and Silverstein say "pull it". IF these individuals were involved in what would be a massive coverup, do you think BOTH would blow it by saying "pull it" - and no other strong evidence can be found to back up controlled demolition? Why would two of the most important people involved in the supposed coverup screw up on such a huge point? Why aren't fire fighters and other personnel who were in WTC 7 coming forward with any evidence? Why aren't we hearing ANYONE else come forward?    All the evidence I've seen supporting a coverup shows photographs or video footage that requires a leap of faith to support, a newsreporter who could easily have made a mistake (among the hundreds of errors that were reported that day), and two individuals saying the words "pull it" which can be open to a variety of interpretation.

Contrary to some of the reports, there is strong evidence that WTC 7 was making money.   Why "pull it"????

Given the difficulty in providing credible evidence and all the unanswered questions, does anyone understand why I find a conspiracy to demolish this building hard to accept?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:34 PM

WTC 7 had just undergone a 20 million dollar fix-up to reinforce it as a "command center." If the day was a government-op, chances are the on-site monitoring was done from the newly-fortified floor in WTC 7 that overlooked the complex.

Also, records had been pouring into WTC 7 for months. Most notably SEC records regarding hundreds of ongoing fraud cases (things like Enron). Lots of old treaties and land records had been placed in WTC 7 too. Lots of paperwork concerning court cases, ownership of real estate, etc. The BATF, FBI, CIA, etc. regional offices were in the bldg., and records concerning their murderous "screw ups" were located there. The reason for the takedown of the building could have been simply to do the biggest expungement of records in history.   

There were lots of reasons to bring down WTC 7.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 04:18 AM

"Pull it" is not a term used in demolition.
Who started that rumour?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 08:42 AM

I suppose some find it amusing 'debating' with lunatics.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Alice
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 10:02 AM

Guest Scary, I truly encourage you to get a mental health check up. Belief in conspiracy theories is a sign of paranoia that you should take
seriously. Psychology Today, Conspiracy Theories


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 10:14 AM

The term 'pull it' was not in use before 9/11 by explosives people. It is now. The rumour was started when the buildings 'fell' and both Silverstein and Guilani used the term on camera.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 01:31 PM

So, what if I believed the "19 men with boxcutters" story? 4-5 men on each plane, each man with a one-inch razor. They got planeloads of Type-A American salesmen to cower in their seats, then (with the flight skills that got them kicked out of flight schools), the hijackers took the planes through maneuvers a jet pilot couldn't perform without a pressure suit. They also got NORAD to stand down over the buisiest airspace in North America for an hour and a half. If I believed THAT story, would I pass the mental health test?

The government version of 9/11 is a lie. We all know it. And the coverup in itself is a crime. If your house blew up and then you told the cops that you were in charge of investigating the event and they'd just have to accept your explanation, you'd be arrested. The people are starting to hold the criminals of 9/11 accountable. Bit by bit.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Big Mick
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 01:40 PM

Alice, I have been suggesting the same thing about this "Guest" for years.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 02:08 PM

"If I believed THAT story, would I pass the mental health test?"

Probably.   

Your statements have a lot of question marks in them. First, we do not know what the passengers did on all the planes, except for one which they forced to crash. You say that the pilots flunked out of flight school, but they were not going for their license. You say they took the planes through manuevers that would require pressure suits - no evidence there. You say that NORAD was in "stand down", and that is simply not true.   You are making statements as if they are fact, when the REAL TRUTH is that you are only stating your opinions. You are doing EXACTLY the same thing you accuse the goverment of doing - creating a coverup and twisting the facts to fit your story.

You really are scary, Kerry.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 03:59 PM

"There is also the fact that NORAD-Northeast was conducting war game exercises that morning, a fact that has been very little talked about and certainly not reported to the general public. What's also not been reported, according to the information that I have, at least one of the scenarios they were considering in their war game exercises concerned hijacked aircraft being crashed into buildings. Now, this could explain the lack of response when the air traffic controllers began to report that four planes were off course..." - Jim Marrs, Author, Inside Job


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 04:32 PM

In my opinion, those who ridicule the "nineteen men with boxcutters" scenario are guilty of applying today's mindset to events that happened under a totally different set of rules. Yes, it's absurd to think that nineteen men with boxcutters could hijack four airliners and use them as flying bombs today, but it was far from absurd on September 11, 2001.

On that date, the accepted way to respond in a hijack situation was to go along with the hijacker(s). In all previous hijackings, the perpetrators' goals had simply been to make the plane go someplace other than it's original destination. Acceding to their demands was the safest thing to do. A hijacking was most likely going to be an inconvenience, not a deadly event, and actions which might turn one into a deadly event were simply not taken. Fighting back against a highjacker was considered foolhardy in the extreme. Those "type A businessmen" probably did not suspect for an instant that the outcome of what was going on in those planes would be anything more than an unscheduled detour to someplace like Tehran. The idea that people would actually take control of a plane and use it as a flying bomb was as foreign to the psyches of the people on board as the idea of an alien spaceship using a tractor beam to tow it to the moon.

Saying that the idea of a planeload of people not fighting back is absurd is like saying that a child being bitten by a poisonous snake because he didn't know how dangerous it was is absurd. People's reactions to threatening situations are in line with the perceived threat level, and the difference between the perceived threat level during a highjacking, should one occur today, and the ones that occurreed on 09/11/01 is astronomical. A hijacker with a boxcutter today would get the shit beat out of him by thirty people, even if it meant one or two people got their throats slit in the process. Better a couple of dead people than a planeload. That's simply not the way people thought before 9/11.

And those who think a boxcutter is not a deadly weapon are guilty of playing semantic games. The word "boxcutter" sounds harmless, and the exposed blade of a boxcutter may only be an inch long, but that blade is razor sharp and can cut through a person's trachea as easily as a surgeon's scalpel. If you don't think they're dangerous, call up your local hospital emergency room and ask how many store clerks' arms and legs they've stitched up this week due to accidental, self-inflicted boxcutter wounds. If people's jugular veins and trachea were in their forearms instead of their necks, stocking shelves would be the world's most dangerous job. If you'd like to see the six-inch scar in my own left forearm from when I was a nineteen-year-old grocery clerk, come visit.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 04:45 PM

They killed at least one flight attendant and 'probably' a couple of pilots with those box cutters...(This is confirmed...not speculation)...calls were made, screams were heard..)...and they TOLD passengers they had bombs..what would you do? Those on the LAST plane did, after they understood.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Wesley S
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 05:07 PM

And it's only because they were on the last plane that they had any idea what was going to happen.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 05:11 PM

I don't mind starting at square one again.

First, who was in control of NORAD on September 11, 2001?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Wesley S
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 05:12 PM

It's only square one because that's where you're starting to prove your point.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 05:26 PM

We know Dick Cheney was in charge of NORAD because of the war games. Tell us where the "stand down" has been proven.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 09:13 PM

Cheney's control of NORAD on September 11, 2001 had nothing to do with wargames. All wargames before had been conducted without transferring control of NORAD from military to civilian control. NORAD had been in existence for half a century, always under military control, then on June 1, 2001 it was transferred to the Department of Defense with this order:

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/norad/docs/intercept_proc.pdf

And this order transferred control of NORAD to the Department of Defense (Secretary Donald Rumsfeld), not to the White House.

Yet we know Dick Cheney was in control of the airspace because the Secretary of Transportation, Norman Mineta, testified to this before congress:

"During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, 'The plane is 50 miles out.' 'The plane is 30 miles out.' And when it got down to 'the plane is 10 miles out,' the young man also said to the Vice President, 'Do the orders still stand?' And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, 'Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?'"

This was the Pentagon plane Cheney ordered not to be shot down.

The video of this is on youtube, etc. It was broadcast live on C-SPAN.

So the above contradicts Olesko's statement, We know Dick Cheney was in charge of NORAD because of the war games. Tell us where the "stand down" has been proven.

Please cite sources in the future, and if you have a source proving that we know Cheney was in charge of NORAD because of the wargames, please add a link to it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 09:54 PM

Thanks Froth, you are correct - Cheney was not in charge and there was no stand down. Thanks for the link.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 10:17 PM

By the way Froth, if you read the whole testimony, it does appear that Mineta mentioned that flights were scrambled from Langley and had not reached DC. No mention of an order to "not" shoot the plane down:

MR. HAMILTON: We thank you for that. I wanted to focus just a moment on the Presidential Emergency Operating Center. You were there for a good part of the day. I think you were there with the vice president. And when you had that order given, I think it was by the president, that authorized the shooting down of commercial aircraft that were suspected to be controlled by terrorists, were you there when that order was given?

MR. MINETA: No, I was not. I was made aware of it during the time that the airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Well, at the time I didn't know what all that meant. And --
MR. HAMILTON: The flight you're referring to is the --

MR. MINETA: The flight that came into the Pentagon.

MR. HAMILTON: The Pentagon, yeah.

MR. MINETA: And so I was not aware that that discussion had already taken place. But in listening to the conversation between the young man and the vice president, then at the time I didn't really recognize the significance of that.

And then later I heard of the fact that the airplanes had been scrambled from Langley to come up to DC, but those planes were still about 10 minutes away. And so then, at the time we heard about the airplane that went into Pennsylvania, then I thought, "Oh, my God, did we shoot it down?" And then we had to, with the vice president, go through the Pentagon to check that out.

MR. HAMILTON: Let me see if I understand. The plane that was headed toward the Pentagon and was some miles away, there was an order to shoot that plane down.

MR. MINETA: Well, I don't know that specifically, but I do know that the airplanes were scrambled from Langley or from Norfolk, the Norfolk area. But I did not know about the orders specifically other than listening to that other conversation.

MR. HAMILTON: But there very clearly was an order to shoot commercial aircraft down.

MR. MINETA: Subsequently I found that out.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 11:38 PM

But Cheney WAS in charge. The U.S. Secretary of Transportation testified before congress that Cheney was making the command decisions.

So how did the transfer of power from the Department of Defense to the Vice President occur? Where is that in the 911 Commission report? Or any report? Please link to a source explaining how the order transferring control of NORAD to the Dept of Defense resulted in Dick Cheney giving the orders on 9/11. And that's what they were called as events unfolded..."orders." Norman Mineta testified to that.

But Mineta failed to give PROPER testimony, as the last two quotes from your portion of the transcript show. Mineta failed to add it "very clearly was an order to shoot commercial aircraft down," so Lee Hamilton put the words in his mouth. Hamilton was coaching Mineta. Such testimony would be stricken in a court case.

You don't provide any support of your interpretation of the events. Everyone has an opinion, and I'm not asking for yours. If you can supply the opinion of someone who's studied the issue thoroughly, that would be welcomed, but personal interpretation is worthless.

"Had Cheney given the expected order - the order to have an aircraft approaching the Pentagon shot down - we could not explain why the young man asked if the order still stood. It would have been abundantly obvious to him that it would continue to stand until the aircraft was actually shot down. His question would make sense, however, if "the orders" were ones that seemed unusual.

Some critics of the official account have suggested, therefore, that "the orders" in question were orders not to have the aircraft shot down. But of course this interpretation, while arguably being the more natural one, would also be very threatening to the Bush administration and the Pentagon.

It is not surprising, therefore, that although Mineta's account was released in the 9/11 Commission's staff report in May 2003, this account is not included, or even mentioned, in the Commission's final report. This omission provides rather clear evidence that the Commission's real mission was not to provide the fullest possible account of 9/11 but to defend the account provided by the Bush administration and the Pentagon.

Griffin's analysis of this event proposes that "the orders" that the "young man" referred too, were in fact to stand down, rather than shoot down...."

http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/250906_norman_mineta.html

(The Griffin referred to is David Ray Griffin, 9/11 investigative author. His analysis shows that the order could only have been a stand down order).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 07:34 AM

" the hijackers took the planes through maneuvers a jet pilot couldn't perform without a pressure suit."

BOLLOCKS!

There is not a civil airliner in existance which would survive any maneouvre pulling enough G to require a pressure suit. A Russian Tupolev actually fell apart at an air show under a loading of one negative G.

The only thing scary about you, Kerry is the monumental ignorance you display when you stae such nonsense as fact.

Go play with your marbles..... Oh no! Sorry you've lost them....

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 09:19 AM

One thing at a time.

Waiting for an explanation as to why Dick Cheney gave the stand down order.

You got any input on that?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 09:20 AM

"The U.S. Secretary of Transportation testified before congress that Cheney was making the command decisions. "

Do you have a source for that? I don't see Mineta confirming that in the source you gave us - it seems to be your interpretation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 09:58 AM

" If you can supply the opinion of someone who's studied the issue thoroughly, that would be welcomed, but personal interpretation is worthless."

Nice try. You present your opinions as fact when the reality is they are nothing substantial and based on someone elses opinion - not fact. Think for yourself for a change.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 12:40 PM

Fact: It is on the record (see Mineta's testimony above) that Cheney was making the command decisions on 9/11. He was issuing orders regarding the handling of the "hijacked" planes.

Cheney was asked if the order still stands, and he said it did. He was asked more than once. If it had been a shoot-down order, he would not have been asked more than once. The aide asked more than once because the order was unusual. Of course it was. An order to let a hijacked plane reach its target violated half a century of NORAD protocol. That's the opinion of the foremost authority on this subject, David Ray Griffin (link above). Show me an analysis of Cheney's actions that credibly contradicts Griffin's.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 12:51 PM

An order to shoot down a hijacked plane violated half a century of NORAD protocol AND all previous US policy. If the aide had NOT rechecked it, he SHOULD have been fired!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 01:09 PM

Link to Mineta's testimony. Cheney fuckin' well knew.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 01:09 PM

"Cheney was asked if the order still stands, and he said it did. He was asked more than once. If it had been a shoot-down order, he would not have been asked more than once."

What???????????????? Are you an expert on protocol? Were you in the room? Was that said in the testimony?   I bet the answer to the last three questions is "no".

" The aide asked more than once because the order was unusual. Of course it was. An order to let a hijacked plane reach its target violated half a century of NORAD protocol. That's the opinion..."

Bingo!!!   That's the OPINION. Whether it is your opinion, an opinion of a a so-called "expert", or Mineta - it is simply AN OPINION.

Again, you are using screwed up logic to try to turn opinion into fact.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 01:17 PM

I think maybe both sides ought to read the link here. CHENEY KNEW!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 01:22 PM

Thanks Peace. Again, it does not show that there was a "stand down".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 01:37 PM

I'm reading thru the tesimony of Mineta and others....(there's a LOT of it)...and trying to sort out the details of 1) who knew what about Flight 77, and when - 2)When various orders to a) scramble b)shoot or NOT shoot were given - 3)what fighters, F-15 & F16, were a)in the air, b) armed c where located -4) Flying time for any fighters available TO the Pentagon - 5)Who was a)in charge b) authorized to issue a 'shoot down' order [Gen. McKinley states there were several)

and finally, the precise sequence of all these things in relation to the actual impact.

It ain't easy, folks.....I do NOT like Cheney, but I gotta read more before I'd accuse him of intentionally allowing an attack that 'could have been' avoided.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 01:41 PM

True, Ron. The problem all of us have had with trying to determine what happened on 9/11 is caused by half-truths from Washington and the 'conspiracy' people. I am of the opinion that there was conspiracy on the part of government (or members in it) to allow an event to happen. The resulting chaos created a vacuum into which stepped Neocons. And they have made trillions of dollars. And taxpayers have funded their wealth.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 01:41 PM

Peace,

Perhaps I am missing something, but having just reread the testimony you linked to, I fail to see that Cheney knew beforehand about 9/11. Can you point out what makes you think this?

8-{E

"There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" " seems obviously refering to the orders to SHOOT DOWN a commercial aircraft.

"MR. ROEMER: So about 9:25 or 9:26. And your inference was that the vice president snapped his head around and said, "Yes, the order still stands." Why did you infer that that was a shoot-down?

MR. MINETA: Just by the nature of all the events going on that day, the scrambling of the aircraft and, I don't know; I guess, just being in the military, you do start thinking about it, an intuitive reaction to certain statements being made. "

As for the aircraft disappearing from the radar,

"The first time that anything untoward, and this was gleaned from FAA response, that anything out of the ordinary happened was at 8:20, when the electronic transponder in American Airlines 11 blinked off if you will, just disappeared from the screen. Obviously the terrorists turned that transponder off, and that airplane, although it did not disappear from the radarscope, it became a much, much more difficult target to discern for the controllers who now only could look at the primary radar return off the airplane. That was at 8:20. "

" At 8:46, our next log event, we get the last, and, by the way, much of this radar data for these primary targets was not seen that day. It was reconstructed days later by the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron, and other agencies like it who are professionals at going back and looking at radar tapes and then given that they are loaded with knowledge after the fact, they can go and find things that perhaps were not visible during the event itself. "

"At 9:05, FAA reports a possible hijack of United 175. Again, that's three minutes after the impact in the tower. That's how long it is taking now the information to flow through the system to the command and control agencies and through the command and control agencies to the pilots in the cockpit. At 9:09, Langley F-16s are directed to battle stations, just based on the general situation and the breaking news, and the general developing feeling about what's going on. And at about that same time, kind of way out in the West, is when America 77, which in the meantime has turned off its transponder and turned left back toward Washington, appears back in radar coverage. And my understanding is the FAA controllers now are beginning to pick up primary skin paints on an airplane, and they don't know exactly whether that is 77, and they are asking a lot of people whether it is, including an a C-130 that is westbound toward Ohio. At 9:11 FAA reports a crash into the South Tower. You can see now that lag time has increased from seven minutes from impact to report; now it's nine minutes from impact to report. You can only imagine what's going on on the floors of the control centers around the country. At 9:11 -- I just mentioned that -- 9:16, now FAA reports a possible hijack of United Flight 93, which is out in the Ohio area. But that's the last flight that is going to impact the ground.

At 9:24 the FAA reports a possible hijack of 77. That's sometime after they had been tracking this primary target. And at that moment as well is when the Langley F-16s were scrambled out of Langley.

At 9:25, America 77 is reported headed towards Washington, D.C., not exactly precise information, just general information across the chat logs; 9:27, Boston FAA reports a fifth aircraft missing, Delta Flight 89 -- and many people have never heard of Delta Flight 89. We call that the first red herring of the day, because there were a number of reported possible hijackings that unfolded over the hours immediately following the actual attacks. Delta 89 was not hijacked, enters the system, increases the fog and friction if you will, as we begin to look for that. But he lands about seven of eight minutes later and clears out of the system.

At 9:30 the Langley F-16s are airborne. They are 105 miles away from the Washington area; 9:34, through chat, FAA is unable to precisely locate American Airlines Flight 77; 9:35, F-16s are reported airborne. And many times, reported airborne is not exactly when they took off. It's just when the report came down that they were airborne. At 9:37 we have the last radar data near the Pentagon. And 9:40, immediately following that, is when 93 up north turns its transponders off out in the West toward Ohio, and begins a left turn back toward the East.

At 9:49, FAA reports that Delta 89, which had been reported as missing, is now reported as a possible hijacking. So again he is --

MR.: That's 9:41, sir.

MR. SCOTT: I'm sorry, 9:41. Again, he is in the system. He is kind of a red herring for us.

Now, the only thing that I would point out on this chart is this says 9:43, American Airlines 77 impacts the Pentagon. The timeline on the impact of the Pentagon was changed to 9:37 -- 9:43 is the time that was reported that day, it was the time we used. And it took about two weeks to discover in the parking lot of the Pentagon this entry camera for the parking lot, which happened to be oriented towards the Pentagon at the time of impact, and the recorded time is 9:37. And that's why the timeline went from 9:43 to 9:37, because it is the best documented evidence for the impact time that we have. Getting toward the end now, 9:47 is when Delta 89 clears the system by landing in Cleveland. So he is not a hijack. Lots of things are going on now in the system as the sectors begin to call both units that are part of 1st Air Force and NORAD, as well as units that have nothing to do with us. We are beginning to call everyone now and the 103rd Air Control Squadron, for instance, stationed in Connecticut, is an air control squadron, a radar squadron, and they got their radar online, operational, and begin to link their radar picture into the Northeast system. They are not normally part of NORAD. This is really the initial part of a huge push the rest of that day to link as many radars in on the interior as we can, and to get as many fighters on alert as we can. "


So, where is the mystery???


"GEN. MCKINLEY: On the day of September 11th, 2001, our mission was to defend North America, to surveil, to intercept, to identify, and if necessary to destroy, those targets which we were posturing were going to come from outside our country. In fact, that tracks originating over the landmass of the United States were identified friendly by origin. Therefore those alert sites that were positioned on the morning of September 11th were looking out primarily on our coasts at the air defense identification zone, which extends outward of 100 to 200 miles off our shore. So that was the main focus of NORAD at the time.

MR. BEN-VENISTE: I asked you about your responsibilities, sir, and I ask you again, whether it was not your responsibility as NORAD to protect the United States and its citizens against air attack.

GEN. MCKINLEY: It is, and it was, and I would just caveat your comment by saying that our mission was at that time not designed to take internal FAA radar data to track or to identify tracks originating within our borders. It was to look outward, as a Cold War vestige, primarily developed during the Cold War, to protect against Soviet long-range bomber penetration of our intercept zone.

MR. BEN-VENISTE: Well, I think, sir, that you have used a good term, not good for the United States, but accurate, in terms of the vestigial mandate operationally to look outward toward the borders rather than inward. And as vestigial you mean, I am sure, as a result of our decades of confrontation with the former Soviet Union.

GEN. MCKINLEY: Correct, sir.

MR. BEN-VENISTE: And so on the day of September 11th, as you can see these dots -- I know it may be difficult to see -- NORAD was positioned in a perimeter around the United States, but nothing in the central region, nothing on the border with Canada?

GEN. MCKINLEY: That's correct, sir. "

"And I also remembered as I went downstairs, before I even talked to him, that it had been a long time since we had had a hijacking, but the fact that we had reviewed the procedures of what it is we do for a hijacking, because we were in the middle of an exercise. So we were pretty well familiar with those procedures, and of course we have our own checklist that we follow.

As I picked up the phone, Bob told me that Boston Center had called possible hijacking within the system. He had put the aircraft at Otis on battle stations, wanted permission to scramble them. I told them to go ahead and scramble the airplanes and we'd get permission later. And the reason for that is that the procedure -- hijacking is a law enforcement issue, as is everything that takes off from within the United States. And only law enforcement can request assistance from the military, which they did in this particular case. The route, if you follow the book, is they go to the duty officer of the national military center, who in turn makes an inquiry to NORAD for the availability of fighters, who then gets permission from someone representing the secretary of Defense. Once that is approved then we scramble aircraft. We didn't wait for that. We scrambled the aircraft, told them get airborne, and we would seek clearances later. I picked up the phone, called NORAD, whose battle staff was in place because of the exercise, talked to the deputy commander for operations. He said, you know, "I understand, and we'll call the Pentagon for those particular clearances." It was simultaneous almost for that decision that we made that I am looking at the TV monitor of the news network and see a smoking hole in what turned out to be the North Tower of the World Trade Center, wondering, What is this? And like many of us involved in that, Does it have anything to do with this particular incident? Which we didn't think it did, because we were talking Boston Center, and we were not thinking of the immediate New York metropolitan area. Shortly after that, of course our airplanes became airborne. It just so happens that Colonel Duffy, who was a pilot of that first F-15, had been involved in some conversation because, as telephone calls were made, he was aware that there was a hijacking in the system. It's kind of interesting because he concluded that that indeed might have been that airplane himself, and [he]elected to hit the afterburner and to speed up his way towards New York. "


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 01:44 PM

"MR. LEHMAN: To follow up on that, General Arnold, did you have authority to shoot down 93 when it was heading towards Washington? And where did you get it?

GEN. ARNOLD: A lot of discussion on that. Our intent on United 93 -- the simple answer is, to my knowledge, I did not have authority to shoot that aircraft down. We were informed after the airplane had already hit the ground. That's the simple answer.

MS. GORELICK: I'm sorry, could you say that again? You were informed of what after it hit the ground?

GEN. ARNOLD: We were informed of presidential authority some five minutes after that aircraft had hit the ground, according to our records.

MR. LEHMAN: So you were given it after the fact, presidential authority to shoot it down?

GEN. ARNOLD: To my knowledge. Now, I can tell you that in our discussion with the NORAD staff at that particular time that we -- you know, we intended to intercept that aircraft at some point in time, attempted to deviate that aircraft away from the Washington, D.C. area. There was discussion at that particular time whether or not that aircraft would be shot down. But we, I did not know of presidential shoot down authority until after that aircraft had crashed. "

"MR. BEN-VENISTE: You say it was received subsequent to the crash of 93?

GEN. ARNOLD: Yes, that's correct.

MR. BEN-VENISTE: From what source was that received?

GEN. ARNOLD: It was passed down to us from the NORAD, from Cheyenne Mountain, that they had received shootdown authority. And then, you know, the timeframe escapes me at the moment, but you know for example over the Washington, D.C. area it was declared a no-fly zone by clear -- just by the fact that any aircraft was present, if we could not determine if that aircraft was friendly, then we were cleared to shoot that aircraft down.

MR. BEN-VENISTE: When was the declaration of no-fly zone authorized?

GEN. ARNOLD: I don't know. It was shortly during that timeframe.

MR. BEN-VENISTE: So are you saying that that declaration gave you shootdown authority?

GEN. ARNOLD: It gave us -- that particular declaration that I am referring to is a class bravo airspace within the Washington, D.C. area that was shut down to aviation, except for military or for law enforcement emergency response aircraft at that particular time.

MR. BEN-VENISTE: To help me understand, does it mean once that condition exists, that unless you were able to determine that this was a friendly aircraft, which under the circumstances I suppose means under the control of the terrorists at that time making it an unfriendly aircraft, that you had authority --

GEN. ARNOLD: That's correct. "


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 01:45 PM

First, I have never SAID he knew before hand. He knew WHEN the attacks were taking place. He KNEW a half hour ahead. I have not suggested that he knew days ahead. I think he is one of the more repugnant people in a position of power. I hope the fucker drops dead by breaking his neck falling down stairs. I'd spit on his grave just because. And I hope there is a hell so the miserable bastard can rot there for eternity. That said, please don't put words in my mouth. Thank you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 01:50 PM

Peace,

I did not intend to put words in your mouth.

I believe you just said "He KNEW a half hour ahead."


Perhaps I am missing something, but having just reread the testimony you linked to, I fail to see that Cheney knew before THE FACT about 9/11. Can you point out what makes you think this?

I am looking for the information, not quesytioning your OPINION.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 01:54 PM

My OPINION is that they were aware something was being planned but chose to ignore the warnings. On 9/11 I do BELIEVE that we were caught off-guard and the flaws in our defense became evident. I THINK that the attention spent on conspiracies diverts attention from the serious failures and inadequate preparations that our government had.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 03:19 PM

Ron O,

"My OPINION is that they were aware something was being planned but chose to ignore the warnings."

Something, perhaps, but I do not think they had definite enough indications to be able to know what. IMO, of course. Looking back, perhaps it is obvious, but with the information THEY HAD AT THE TIME, could they REASONABLY have put the information together and come up with what actually happened? If 10 people each know one part, can they know what ( of all that they know) NEEDS to be told to the other 9 people to fill out the picture?

And then, COULD they have taken action (under the situation at the time)?


"On 9/11 I do BELIEVE that we were caught off-guard and the flaws in our defense became evident."

Absolute agreement on this one.

"I THINK that the attention spent on conspiracies diverts attention from the serious failures and inadequate preparations that our government had."

Absolute agreement on this one, as well.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 03:25 PM

BB - I think we agree on some of my first point as well. I may not have worded it properly. When I said they knew something was up, I did not mean to infer that they had particulars.

As you say, 10 people knowing one part does not give a full picture.   Still, I think there was reasonable "chatter" reported to indicate that we needed to be prepared. No one knew exactly how or exactly when, but I do think if we were cautious we might have been prepared when the acts started.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 03:30 PM

And if PAST actions were any indication, the increased chatter indicated a planned attack on US assets ( embassies, ships, or companies ) OUTSIDE the US ( look at what had happened previously).
Without some definite information that the target was IN the US, HOW would it have been handled any differently? Had there been increased alerts to embassies, and to ships in foreign waters? Did anyone presently judging the administration's actions, or lack thereof EVER ask that?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 03:49 PM

"Without some definite information that the target was IN the US, HOW would it have been handled any differently? Had there been increased alerts to embassies, and to ships in foreign waters? Did anyone presently judging the administration's actions, or lack thereof EVER ask that? "

There have been plots that were detected and stopped in the past. There have been alerts to embassies and ships. There had been indications that they might hijack and blow up plans, so YES, there should have been more action on the part of the administration.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 04:22 PM

And what would have been done that would have

a)been of use
b)been acceptable at the time to the impacted individuals?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 04:52 PM

a) possibly
b) possibly


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 05:14 PM

Such as?

Everything ** I ** can think of ( post 9/11) would have been considered as too unlikely to guard against or have been too retricvtive to others rights to have been considered.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 07:18 PM

If they were gathering intelligence properly, they might have been able to prevent the entire plan. The warning signs were there, but ignored.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 07:43 PM

So the, the aide kept returning to the room asking Cheney if the order to shoot down the plane was still in effect? Is that what's being said here?

I need to see some links to reasonable argument that Cheney's aide kept coming back to ask if the shootdown order still stood. I haven't seen the argument here, so please link to it if it is out there somewhere.

The #1 man at the Dept of Transportation was in the room with Cheney at the time, and that man quoted Cheney verbatim. The evidence is all on the table, and the best analysts have concluded that Cheney could only have been talking about an order to override protocol.

Show me something to the contrary. Still waiting.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 07:46 PM

"Show me something to the contrary. Still waiting. "

I catually read a link that showed that. However, I don't like it when people get snotty about it. With that attitude you're gonna wait one long fuckin' time.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 09:00 PM

Cheney's actions on 9/11 (witnessed by Secretary of Transportation Mineta) are the biggest public display of guilt out there. His actions can't be denied, they can't be explained in a way that makes him look like a good guy.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 09:04 PM

I agree. Cheney is NOT a good guy. He is a money-grubbing piece of shit who helped his old company procure billions in contracts in Iraq. He is garbage. He is also dangerous. Ask thousands of dead American kids in Iraq. Tens of thousands of wounded and maimed. You won't see anyone here whitewwashing that that no-good sonuvabitch.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 10:57 PM

Peace....if you have an opinion on Cheney, spit it out! Don't be tiptoeing around the issue.















*chuckle*


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Apr 07 - 10:56 AM

"So the, the aide kept returning to the room asking Cheney if the order to shoot down the plane was still in effect? Is that what's being said here?"

It is one possibility. We don't really know for sure.


Cheney is scum. He is also as inept as the rest of the fools in this regime. There is so much blood on their hands.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Apr 07 - 11:06 AM

Again, from the transcript:

""There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" "

He asked this once. So,

"I need to see some links to reasonable argument that Cheney's aide kept coming back to ask if the shootdown order still stood. I haven't seen the argument here, so please link to it if it is out there somewhere."

is meaningless- as the aide did not do so. He asked ONCE- as anyone else in the circumstances might have.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 27 Apr 07 - 11:10 AM

I saw an interview somewhere with the 2 fighter pilots who tried to GET to the Pentagon, but simply did not have enough information early enough. They were very upset, but as I remember, they had no way to manage an intercept in the time frame.

I'll see if I can find something...(It would make moot the question of 'whether' any shoot-down OR stand-down order was given, cancelled, not given.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Apr 07 - 12:43 PM

"There is also the fact that NORAD-Northeast was conducting war game exercises that morning, a fact that has been very little talked about and certainly not reported to the general public. What's also not been reported, according to the information that I have, at least one of the scenarios they were considering in their war game exercises concerned hijacked aircraft being crashed into buildings. Now, this could explain the lack of response when the air traffic controllers began to report that four planes were off course..." - Jim Marrs, Author, Inside Job


This is well known enough to be in the 9 11 commission report, the made for tv 911 movie and tabloids.

What are we supposed to say?
Gee what an unfortunate coincedence. It made for incredible confusion and dely in getting a real response in the air. This must be the reason for the stand down orders we heard about.

Oh dear, of all days for the terrorists to choose, it had to be the one when we were pretending to be under attack by hijacked planes that were guided into buildings.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 30 Apr 07 - 11:45 PM

http://patriotsquestion911.com/#Baer

Secretary Mineta's testimony is entirely omitted from the 9/11 Commission Report. His testimony directly contradicts the 9/11 Commission Report in two key points.

1. Mr. Mineta testified he arrived at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) in the White House at 9:20 a.m. and observed Vice President Dick Cheney discussing with an aide that the incoming Flight 77 was 50 miles out at 9:25 or 9:26. The 9/11 Commission Report maintains Vice President Cheney did not arrive at the PEOC until 9:58, over one-half hour later. Mr. Mineta's testimony is further supported by the fact that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon at 9:37, which is the correct time it would have taken Flight 77 to arrive at the Pentagon, if it had been about 50 miles out at 9:26.

2. The Commission Report maintains the government did not know the whereabouts of Flight 77 prior 9:32, when Dulles Tower air controllers "observed a primary radar target tracking eastbound at a high rate of speed". Mr. Mineta's testimony reveals Vice President Cheney was being informed of the plane's position for several minutes before that, and perhaps considerably longer.

"....I state unequivocally; There is absolutely no way that four large commercial airliners could have flown around off course for 30 to 60 minutes on 9/11 without being intercepted and shot completely out of the sky by our jet fighters unless very highly placed people in our government and our military wanted it to happen...."

-- Robert Baer, former CIA Case Officer and Specialist in the Middle East

Also, this, from a list of 9/11 Commission Omissions and Distortions by David Ray Griffin:

100. The claim that Cheney did not reach the underground shelter (the PEOC [Presidential Emergency Operations Center]) until 9:58 (241-44).

101. The omission of multiple testimony, including that of Norman Mineta to the Commission itself, that Cheney was in the PEOC before 9:20 (241-44).

102. The claim that shoot-down authorization must be given by the president (245).

104. The omission of reports that there were two fighter jets in the air a few miles from NYC and three of them only 200 miles from Washington (251).

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/571-page-lie.htm

There have been 3 "versions" of what happened with Flight 77, but the one that Mineta outlines is the only one that makes historical, chronological sense. Cheney issued an "order," and he said it still stood. Flight 77 was allowed to proceed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 30 Apr 07 - 11:49 PM

And here's something new. It just keeps piling up:

An eyewitness who evacuated WTC 7 before its collapse reported an explosion inside the building, before exiting via the lobby which had been almost completely destroyed - before either of the twin towers had collapsed nearly 400 yards away in the WTC complex.

This testimony severely undermines the flawed explanation that Building 7 collapsed as a result of the damage it sustained following the collapse of the towers....

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/wtc_7_eyewitness_reported_explosions_before_collapse.htm


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Podkayne
Date: 01 May 07 - 02:29 AM

This thread was better when the Martians were involved.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Sorcha
Date: 01 May 07 - 02:38 AM

Martians??? Look Man, that insults us Venusians! Not to mention the Jupitarians! And, keep your ham sammitches to yourself, please. We venerate pigs.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 01 May 07 - 01:28 PM

So, let's recap:

*Explosions inside WTC 7 before the twin towers came down

*Cops telling people to get back because they're going to bring down the building

*The BBC reporting 23 minutes before it came down that the building had fallen (past tense)

*After a perfectly-controlled demolition at free-fall speed, where the building falls into its own footprint, the lease-holder says he made the decision to "pull" the building. "Pull" is a demolition industry term meaning "demolish"

*It would have taken days or weeks to plant the charges needed for a perfect demolition, but only 8 hours elapsed between the attacks and the collapse of WTC 7

*Photographic evidence shows minimal fires coming from the windows of WTC 7, but WTC 5 & 6 are consumed in flames and never fall (plus, WTC 7 is much more reinforced than 5 & 6 -- WTC 7 is the mayor's "command bunker" and may have been the most reinforced civilian building in the world)

*The government's Safety organization NIST has as of this date changed its "reason" for the collapse of WTC 7 six different times.

*The 9/11 Commission did not even mention the collapse of WTC 7 in its "final" report

*John Kerry says WTC 7 was intentionally brought down for safety reasons

*If you question the story outlined above, you are arrested by the government that benefitted from the terrorist attacks. See video below:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2007/160407Jam.htm


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Wesley S
Date: 01 May 07 - 01:36 PM

Scary Kerry - So how many people were involved in all of this? Counting the planners, explosives experts, cops, reporters, ect. Do you think it took over 100 people to pull it off? 200 ? 500 ?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Bill D
Date: 01 May 07 - 01:39 PM

You keep USING already discredited stories, plus your own claims, plus 'reports' which are anecdotal at best, to bolster your argument.


The BBC has admitted they were wrong to report the collapse early.
One man 'says' he heard an explosion...(in a burning building, there likely to be LOTS of things making explosive noises.)

It all boils down to "here is the evidence *I* like".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Ebbie
Date: 01 May 07 - 01:49 PM

I watched the video. As given (edited?) in it, during the confrontation the protesters come off much better than the authorities. The Port Authority came across as thoroughly confused and uncertain.

Don't pretend that they are part of the "conspiracy". These people are confused and without instruction.

It strikes me that if the evidence is so compelling for '911 was an Inside Job' then some respected and influential US figures need to become convinced of it. And don't tell me that 'they' are all fearful sheep. There is no way anyone will convince anyobody as long as they speak as though they were the only ones smart enough and free enough and in-the-know enough.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 01 May 07 - 09:44 PM

Well bless you, Ebbie. You said "if" when talking about 9/11. My work here has not been in vain.

That video is really just an example of what America's going to become BECAUSE of 9/11. Those cops are doing what they do best...behave like thugs. And if it's not stopped, they'll be looking over your shoulder 24/7 before long making sure YOU toe the line. The entire American economy is shifting to the phony "war on terrorism" because of 9/11. Look at the disgusting link below:

http://view.fdu.edu/default.aspx?id=2787

I mean, today we have admitted "illegals" parading around America flaunting their illegality (today, May 1), but why are they even HERE if there's a real threat of terrorism? Why are the Mexican and Canadian borders so totally open if our govt wants to "protect" us from terrorists?

As far as prominent people saying 9/11 was an inside job, here's a link to a bunch who say it was:

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

More and more people come out with evidence every week. Professors publish papers, the research goes on, but the mainstream media doesn't report it because they're owned by the government that benefits from the terrorism. Rosie O'Donnell talks about WTC 7 not being struck by a plane, and she's out of a job a month later. Eventually the truth will out, but it's a slow process. Meanwhile, the federal govt (Democrats and Republicans) are going to continue selling the myth of 9/11 so that they can retain their stranglehold on power.

Wesley S. -- The neo-cons in charge of the federal govt nowadays are Trotskyite communists. They began taking over the Republican party in the 1960's and now control it. For an explanation of what neo-cons are, you can go to this link:

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm

The communists in America learned during the "Red Scares" that they could best operate in small groups unaware of each other. Applied to the 9/11 scenario, that would mean maybe 5-6 people knew the overall details of the operation. All they had to do to pull it off was make sure everyone else followed Standard Operating Procedure on the day of the attacks. There would be a larger number than the 5-6 needed to plant explosives, and probably MI-6 and the Mossad were used there. The CIA has historically done dirty work for them, and they've reciprocated. Been that way for decades. So some "foreign assets" were probably used to plant the bombs that would kill Americans, then the ringleaders just gave a green light.

As far as WTC 7, I expect if the truth is ever made known about it, the building was always wired for demolition. It was the regional headquarters of the CIA, FBI, BATF, SEC, etc., and the govt can claim it HAD to be wired in case it was ever "compromised." But there are thousands of government-issued gag orders in place now, so the truth about WTC 7 will probably never come out. It's a hell of a smoking gun when it comes to coverup, though. The govt has changed its story repeatedly concerning what happened at WTC 7, and none of those changes were made because of new "findings"--they were made because of new accusations.

And Bill D. -- Of course the BBC said they were wrong to report the collapse early. It was a major screwup. Major. Of COURSE they were wrong. lol

The latest WTC 7 development (the report by Housing Authority worker Barry Jennings) is just the latest in a continuing stream of evidence that continues to come out. The 9/11 Commission Report doesn't even mention WT7, but it's become anecdotal that it was "damaged by debris from the collapse of the towers." Wrong. An employee in the building just destroyed that timeline.

So refer me again to the Popular Mechanics bits about WTC 7. Popular Mechanics is a Hearst Publication (link to Wikipedia "Yellow Journalism" entry below):

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

Refer me to the debunked Popular Mechics "debunking" piece and tell me again how WTC 7 fell. NONE of the points I've made have been "discredited" by your "expert" Benjamin Chertoff (cousin of Homeland Security "Czar" Michael Chertoff). No serious-thinking person takes that nonsense literally. The Chertoff piece is just a bunch of footnotes for the Myth. The Chertoffs, Bushes, Clintons, Kennedys, etc. benefit from bigger big govt. Don't let them make a chump out of you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: CarolC
Date: 02 May 07 - 06:52 AM

September 11 Revisited...

http://911revisited.com/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Wesley S
Date: 02 May 07 - 09:12 AM

Scary Kerry - I didn't ask about Neocons. Let me repeat the question:

Scary Kerry - So how many people were involved in all of this? Counting the planners, explosives experts, cops, reporters, ect. Do you think it took over 100 people to pull it off? 200 ? 500 ?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scarry Kerry
Date: 02 May 07 - 01:53 PM

5-6 plotters. Hundreds of unwitting operatives. Probably 10-20 MI-6 wiring the Pentagon for maxamum damage, and 40-50 Mossad wiring the twin towers over weeks or months. One of the companies that was working on the pentagon (area that was hit by the plane) was British and was still in town when the attacks happened. And Mossad could have been used easily to come and go in Manhattan and plant the charges needed in the towers. The clandestine services keep their mouths shut, too, if that's what you're getting at. The spooks wouldn't talk, neither would the half-dozen plotters. The rest...they were just following orders. A lot of people have a PIECE of the puzzle, but the number of plotters would be minimal.

As to who the plotters were, Cheney controlled the airspace on that day and Rumsfeld was in the pentagon. SOMEONE had to turn off the phalanx gatling guns and surface to air missiles that were protecting the pentagon at the time, and the boss was in the building. So Cheney and Rumsfeld definitely.

Beyond that, who knows? I'd say Bush #1, since he's been in on every major step in the destruction of America in the past 30+ years, and Cheney and Rumsfeld are his men.

I used to think that Eberhart and Myers of the Joint Chiefs had to be involved, but maybe they weren't. They certainly aided in the coverup, but on the day of 9/11 they may have been as confused as their NORAD pilots.

No one not involved in the actual carrying out of the plot would have known all the details, unless they stumbled across them by accident, but I suspect Jeb Bush knew the whole plan. His father once called him the "smart one," and the PNAC document was copied to him a year before 9/11, so he may have been taken in to his father's confidence, since George W. would be in Jeb's state of Florida that day.

So Cheney and Rumsfeld definitely, Bush #1 probably, and possibly Eberhart, Myers, Jeb Bush and Henry Kissinger (Kissinger just because he makes daily trips to the White House and always seems to be around when trouble pops up).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 May 07 - 01:58 PM

"SOMEONE had to turn off the phalanx gatling guns and surface to air missiles that were protecting the pentagon at the time,"

And what makes you think there WERE any, prior to 9/11?

If so, they wasted a LOT of money bringing in things AFTER 9/11, that YOU claim were already in place.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Wesley S
Date: 02 May 07 - 02:00 PM

Other posts you've made make it sound like you think some of the police and some reporters were in on it too. Correct or have I misunderstood?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 03 May 07 - 01:20 AM

beardedbruce --

92. Thierry Meyssan, who has referred to these anti-missile batteries (Pentagate [London: Carnot, 2002], 112, 116), has said with regard to his source of information: "The presence of these anti-missile batteries was testified to me by French officers to whom they were shown during an official visit to the Pentagon. This was later confirmed to me by a Saudi officer."

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060405112622982

There are other mentions of the surface-to-air system in various articles. Can't find anything about the phalanx system right now, but I remember they announced they were going to put arms on the roof of the pentagon AFTER 9/11 and lots of articles at the time pointed out that there already WERE arms, and the phalanx was mentioned. I also remember thinking the phalanx was pretty outdated. That may have been about the time the new rolling airframe missiles was being deployed. GWBush had a surface-to-air battery set up on the roof where he was staying in Sarasota on 9/10/01. The things are portable and hard to argue with, so why would the pentagon be without a few? I'd look more, but some of those other forums get even me down. It's incredible how many people support the murder in Iraq. Just poke around with some word combinations in search engines and something will turn up.

Point is, the pentagon wasn't defenseless. And the boss was in the building (and reportedly patched in to a videoconference call discussing the unfolding events, so he knew a plane was coming his way). So he should have had MPs with rifles on the lawn shooting at the thing, if nothing else. But he just sat safely on the other side of the building while not a single round of anything was fired in defense.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 May 07 - 11:10 PM

Let me get this straight: The US government got hold of some wannabe-"suiciders" and said, Have we got a deal for you."

Right?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 04 May 07 - 12:45 AM

The guys on the planes didn't know they were going to die. They were U.S. government operatives. They'd been trained by the U.S. and regularly participated in "drills." On the morning of 9/11 they thought they were just going through another drill like the one a few weeks before, when actor James Woods saw a couple of the "9/11 hijackers" on a flight.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/002187.htm

The planes were taken over by remote guidance systems, which would account for the trick maneuvering some of them engaged in. The "hijackers" were unsafe in Cessnas, so they weren't at the controls of those planes.

And here's an interesting piece about Loose Change 2, the movie that put the 9/11 Truth movement into gear. The movie is being shown on in-flight movies. lol. The U.S. govt is in big, big trouble:

UK producer and distributor MercuryMedia International has licensed the 9/11 conspiracy internet movie Loose Change 2 – which features footage of exploding passenger jets – to Virgin Atlantic Airways.

The controversial film, made for just US$10,000, has attracted over 50 million downloads since its release in 2005, and will now be available for broadcast on Virgin Atlantic flights....

http://www.c21media.net/resources/detail.asp?area=100&article=35648

And here's a good bit of news. David Ray Griffin has finally come out with his "Debunking the debunkers" book. I think he's also released a film to go along with it. A review of the book (by a former Asst Director of the U.S. Treasury and current 9/11 Truth activist) can be found here:

http://mujca.com/debunking.htm

Some excerpts from the review:

Perhaps it is merely a coincidence that just prior to 9/11 Cathleen P. Black, who has family connections to the CIA and Pentagon and is president of Hearst Magazines, the owner of Popular Mechanics, fired the magazine's editor-in-chief and several senior veteran staff members and installed James B. Meigs and Benjamin Chertoff, a cousin of Bush administration factotum Michael Chertoff. It was Meigs and Benjamin Chertoff who produced the Popular Mechanics report that Griffin has eviscerated....

Griffin shows that the Popular Mechanics report consists of special pleading, circular reasoning, appeals to the authority of the NIST report, straw men, and internal contradictions in the report itself....

The two WTC towers did not collapse. They blew up and disintegrated, as did WTC 7. There is an enormous energy deficit in every account that rules out the use of explosives. Gravitational energy is insufficient to explain the pulverization of the buildings and contents and the severing of the 47 massive center core steel columns in each of the towers into convenient lengths to be picked up and loaded onto trucks; much less can gravitational energy account for the pulverization of the top floors of the towers and ejection of steel beams hundreds of feet horizontally just prior to the disintegration of the floors below....

NIST's final report stated that of the steel available to it for examination, "only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250 degrees Celsius" (482 degrees Fahrenheit). The self-cleaning ovens in our home kitchens reach temperatures higher than this, and the ovens do not melt or deform....

(This one is really good, about Flight 77, at the Pentagon) ...the absence of passenger luggage, fuselage, wing and tail sections--indeed the absence of a 200,000 pound airliner--is attributed to the vaporization of the airplane due to the high speed crash and intense fire. The incompatibility of vaporized metal but recovered flesh and blood stood unnoticed until Griffin pointed it out....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Wolfgang
Date: 04 May 07 - 06:28 AM

Dreaded GUEST, Froth, or however you like to be called. Now that the "Hindenburg" catastrophe at Lakehurst is exactly 70 years away, I'd love to read your theory about the catastrophe. I'm sure you're not buying the official static electricity from using the wrong paint on the ship in combination with a leak explanation.

Was it Jan Gaspard's theory that the airship has been shot down with the help of a beam canon by the USA as part of an economic war with Germany about who dominates air travel? Or have you even better information? Surely it cannot have been just a coincidence that Nikola Tesla was in Lakehurst that day?!

The USA reports and the German about the event differ. That is a sure sign that there is something hidden. Reports!!! I just say Warren report. Huh!

Come on, tell us the truth in a new thread and under a new name. I can tell you that you'll gather a following of three whatever your theory is.

Wolfgang


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 May 07 - 02:58 PM

Gawd, this just gets weirder and weirder!

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 04 May 07 - 04:51 PM

So...there really were no hijackers, no cell phone calls, no airliners involved. Bombs were planted throughout the World Trade Center. Flight 93 either never existed, or was shot down by US jets. Many people were aware that the attack was about to happen, because people were warned (some by Condi Rice, no less), not to fly, go to work in the Trade Center, etc. Thousands of shares of put shares were traded on the Dow by people anticipating a sudden drop in price for Boeing, American, and United Airlines, all of them aware that a disaster was imminent. Several days before the staged attack, a business man purchased the World Trade Center with a 35 billion dollar insurance policy, so apparently he was "in the know" about the plan as well. Bin Laden, having been recently treated at the American Hospital with US knowledge, suddenly became the designated scapegoat. The scope of the plan is just incredible. It meant hundreds, if not thousands, of people involved. And each one of them willing to take the secret of their involvement to his deathbed, even though they were complicit in murdering 3000 innocent people! And why....loyalty to Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld!
Not one..NOT ONE of these people has spilled the beans, either!

Are you people complete idiots?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 May 07 - 05:12 PM

Lonesome EJ, if all of this is true, then I'd say there's a book in it for some whistle-blower.

When one considers the size of the advance that a lot of publishers would be willing to offer for a tell-all book about the government's 9/11 conspiracy, or the size of the residuals on a maga-blockbuster best-seller, not to mention fees for lectures, television appearances, and all that, it must certainly be a temptation.   But then, of course George W. Bush is such as charismatic leader that none of these thousands of people who are in on the real scoop would even think of betraying to him.

Heaven forefend that anyone might succumb to a temptation such as that! Such loyalty is an admirable thing! My amazement knows no bounds!!

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 04 May 07 - 08:32 PM

When I start threads now, the ones on mudcat are stricken. So I usually just insert the information into the most closely related ongoing discussion.

The "hijackers" were FBI operatives. There are even rental receipts showing an FBI agent roomed with some of them. The "hijackers" were run through some flight schools to give their flying "skills" some believability, lots of schools and military bases taught them various things...all public record.

So, there they are on 9/11, rushing to get on their planes for another drill, but then the planes are taken over by remote guidance systems. If you think this can't be done, then give me the name of just ONE of those little pilots who fly cruise missiles.

The U.S. govt is not duly elected. Our voting system has been compromised to the point that gangsters are now being inserted into the White House and into other positions of power. So how do you think they'll behave, like saints? They're freakin' gangsters. They do what comes natural. They kill for power. Only, THIS group is under orders from the World Bank to destroy America. They're doing it by debasing the currency, destroying our military in wars intended to make us unpopular internationally, and...etc. I've sung this tune before. Their brass ring, though, is going to be the nuking of Iran. That country just announced that its nuclear plants are now all online, so that means that if the U.S. bombs them, they'll melt down. 17 plants in Iran, 17 Chernobyls resulting from the U.S. nuking a country in an act of sheer aggression. The world can't stand by and let that happen. The U.S. will have to be put down like a mad dog. We'll get the Nazi Germany treatment, and it'll all be on account of the American public didn't have the gumption to deal with a rogue government.

Things are bad, folks, and it didn't get this way because 19 buffoons with box cutters dashed from the titty bars to the passenger jets praising Allah. Wake up.

Hindenburg, no opinion.

Validity of Griffin's book--the guy's a theologian, among other things. He may be making a buck, but then it's in a good cause. And this book he wrote as a RESPONSE to a yellow journalism piece (see above). The Popular Mechanics article all the goosesteppers point to as Gospel is pure junk science. Written by the COUSIN of the fascist Homeland Security "Czar." Griffin just refutes the tripe point by point.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 04 May 07 - 08:39 PM

" If you think this can't be done,"

Of course it can be done... We - THE Martians are doing it all the time. As a matter of fact, they made you post all that stuff just soi you would look stupid.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 04 May 07 - 11:45 PM

If a theologian telling you 9/11 was an inside job isn't for you, maybe this is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvfmZvppKKU

About 2 minutes long.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 04 May 07 - 11:54 PM

March, 1962. And the Generals were looking for a way to run the show. They wanted a hunting license, and 'faked' attacks inside America seemed a sure-fire way to get control. The idea has been around for a long time. In Europe, it was the Nazi justification for the invasion of Poland. Couldn't happen today, huh? Yeah, right. Operation Northwoods. Worth a look.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 05 May 07 - 12:42 AM

Could a fake attack happen? Yes. Could it happen on this scale with no one involved coming forward? That's ridiculous. Is it worth a look?I gave the Loose Change movie a look. It does a good job of presenting the case, but the case is founded on supposition, guesswork, and wild speculations. Those who want to think the Bush Administration is truly evil and capable of anything may believe it, but it requires a suspension of logical thought.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 05 May 07 - 01:12 AM

Scary

That video on the beach is interesting. I don't know how much credibility you can give the speakers, since they probably believe George Washington freed the slaves. But interesting, nonetheless.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 May 07 - 05:25 PM

ye gods. That video clip may be only two minutes long but it was TOO long. Talk about trained monkeys...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Peace
Date: 05 May 07 - 05:26 PM

They may be trained but they ain't house-broke yet . . . .


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 May 07 - 06:13 PM

Well, WOW, Scary! That sure convinces me!

Nothing like hearing it spoken by voices of authority.

Nope. Nothing like it!

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 06 May 07 - 11:21 PM

This about the bogus Jose Padilla "terrorism" case in the U.S. They can't even seat a jury. Potential jurors know they've been lied to about 9/11. This is excellent:

"I've been surprised at the number of our jurors who don't have an opinion about 9/11," U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke, who is presiding over the case and asks most of the juror questions, said Wednesday.

A cottage industry of conspiracy theorists has sprung up among academics and others who claim such things as that the U.S. was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, or that explosives planted inside the World Trade Center towers brought the buildings down rather than the jetliners that crashed into them.

To be sure, most jurors without a Sept. 11 opinion are aware that the attacks have been blamed on terrorists of some sort. But many seem unwilling to blame al-Qaida and its leader, Osama bin Laden — the conclusion reached by the national Sept. 11 Commission and the Bush administration and widely reported by news media.

http://www.onelocalnews.com/whiterockreviewer/stories/index.php?action=fullnews&id=105236


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition
From: GUEST,Scary Kerry
Date: 12 May 07 - 07:33 PM

(The official story of 9/11 gives 9:37 a.m. as the time the "plane hit the pentagon," but many clocks stopped at 9:31 and 9:32, and witnesses inside the building say there was an explosion at that time):

Converging Lines of Proof of a 9:32 Violent Event at the Pentagon on September 11, well before the Official Story says anything hit the building:

Multiple standard-issue, battery-operated wall clocks on the walls of the area of the Pentagon attacked on 9/11 -including one in the heliport just outside the west face- were stopped between 9:31 and 9:32h2;1/2 by a violent event, almost certainly a bomb or bombs inside the building and/or in a truck or construction trailer parked right outside the west face. The first Associated Press report, in fact, stated that the Pentagon had been damaged by a "booby trapped truck." The Navy posted the stopped heliport clock on an official website and another of the stopped clocks is in the 9/11 display at the Smithsonian Institution.[2] These are just some of the west section Pentagon clocks that stopped between 9:31 and 9:32h2;1/2 on September 11.

http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=33832&Disp=18

The writer of the article is Barbara Honegger, MS – Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, the U.S. Navy's advanced science, technology and national security affairs university (1995 - present). White House Policy Analyst and Special Assistant to the Assistant to President Ronald Reagan (1981 - 1983).

http://patriotsquestion911.com/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate


 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 20 June 8:09 AM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 2022 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.