Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

any on here not yet understand 9/11 was inside job?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
mrhopeforwes Donating Member (230 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:21 PM
Original message
any on here not yet understand 9/11 was inside job?
for such people, let's start you off with the simple FACT that, a) Bush and co. reacted to the news of the first crash as if it was an accident; and, b) how could the pentagon be hit with that much warning?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
hart Donating Member (24 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
1. We are all entitled to our opinions........I guess.
I am just tired of reminding myself I SAW the jets fly into the towers and I READ Bin Laden's statements of joy over it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. This weekend, I SAW a giant ape wrestle three t-rexes.
I also READ a book not long ago about a guy who said he was the son of God, and his mom was a virgin, and he could walk on water and stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Dora Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. In no way does your response refute the OP.
Yes, we all saw the towers get hit and collapse. We all "read" bin Laden's response.

The OP does not say that 9/11 did not happen. We all know it happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
15. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
LunaC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
24. For the Doubters
PNAC 101 - RISE OF THE NEOCONS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5648350#5648810

If you're not outraged at then end, then you weren't paying attention!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thorandmjolnir Donating Member (390 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
26. Please provide link to that statement
I believe Bin Laden stated he had nothing to do with 9-11:

The first public response from Osama bin Laden was read on September 16, 2001. He stated, "I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation," which was broadcast by Qatar's Al-Jazeera satellite channel. (<5>, <6>, <7>). This denial was broadcast on U.S. news networks and worldwide. The second public response was read on September 28 by Daily Ummat a Pakistani newspaper. He stated "I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. " <8>.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrhopeforwes Donating Member (230 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
50. that's what you call logic?
if you go to reopen911.org and/or 911inplanesite.com you can watch video of the first crash in slow motion and you'll see a flash of yellow light come out of the nose of the plane a split second before it hits.

...in the meantime, care to address my points about them acting like it was an accident and the pentagon being hit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
2. Grossly neglegent and incompetent? Sure.
To the point that they knew it could happen, but stood by and let it happen anyway? Possibly.

Actually made it happen with controlled demolitions and whatnot? Pure fiction.

But that's just my opinion. of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadisonProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. You should base you opinion on something tangible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:35 PM
Original message
Thanks. I'll try to do that.
Sound idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LunaC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #2
25. Have you read THIS yet?
I suspect it may sway your opinion...

PNAC 101 - RISE OF THE NEOCONS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5648350#5648810
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrhopeforwes Donating Member (230 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
51. if you have any interest in the truth, then you'll think deeper...
and go to reopen911.org and 911inplanesite.com

the scientific evidence that the towers came down by controlled demolition is irrefutable.

as I said to the other guy, how about addressing my first two points?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. Don't even bother. Some people will not even admit that they Wanted It To
Edited on Tue Dec-20-05 03:28 PM by Vincardog
Happen. Some people find it too hard to comprehend that such a malevolent crew could have hijacked our government. I for one do not like it but can see the truth writ large.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
5. anyone who has looked at the evidence knows . . .
that the "official" story of 9/11 is pure fiction . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
7. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. The attack on the Pentagon
was probably quite important as a symbolic "casus belli" as it's a military/govt installation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkofos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Indeed
But where did they crash the plane or where did they put the people
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SkiGuy Donating Member (451 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #17
31. They were buried by their families
You're gonna tell me that they landed in Cleveland. Tell that to my neighbor whose wife was ON THE PLANE THAT HIT THE PENTAGON.
They were real PASSENGER planes with real people on them who ALL died.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkofos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #31
35. I don't buy it
Your neighbor should have the remains exhumed and perform a DNA analysis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 12:16 AM
Response to Reply #31
49. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
mrhopeforwes Donating Member (230 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #31
52. you didn't actually address the points here....
here's the theory: the pentagon was hit by a small military plane that had a holographic device that made it look like the passenger plane and the actual plane was hijacked and/or controlled remotely and/or the pilots were told by fake air control there was an emergency and to land at a military base then they were killed. Farfetched on the surface, no doubt. But look at the evidence: 1) Pentagon had all the time in the world; 2) the trajectory the plane hit would require a serious top gun pilot to maneuver the way it did; 3) what a coincidence that it struck the part of the Pentagon that was undergoing renovation so that hardly any people (other than maintenance workers) to be there...in conjunction with the fact that with all that fancy flying why not just make a direct hit to that monumentally large target?; 4) the pentagon has anti-aircraft missiles in place to shoot down anything w/o the right transponder code; 5) the FBI immediately confiscated the video surveilance tapes of the private convenience stores that filmed it from across the street; 6) in no way does the damage to the pentagon correlate to the size of the alleged plane; 7) the lawn was still green and intact yet we're told the plane skidded right across it.

...your refutation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
piobair Donating Member (416 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #52
54. point 4
The pentagon did not have an AA battery in place due to its proximity to Reagen National. The only missle defense were shoulder fired stingers that would have had minimal effect on a large plane moving at high speed. I applaud your effort to point out problems with the the official story but padding your list with easily disprovable items doesn't do you much good. It diminishes the effectiveness of the rest of your theory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrhopeforwes Donating Member (230 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #54
57. if you can only refute ONE point then you actually BOLSTERED
my argument.

...still waiting for someone to rationalize them reacting to the first crash as if it were an an accident. ...or how come the pentagon's non-robotic defenses couldn't thwart an attack with over an hour's warning--ON THE SAME DAY THEY WERE ALREADY ENGAGED IN WAR GAME PRACTICE!!!! ....and every other piece of EVIDENCE we've already brought up here.

Listen, I'm not trying to be snide because, believe me, I understand how monumentally hard it is to emotionally and psychologically absorb this ne reality. I was ready to vomit 2 years ago after I spent a week on the web researching all of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
piobair Donating Member (416 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #57
58. point was wrong
If you can't admit that one of your points was wrong, why should I take anything else you report seriously?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrhopeforwes Donating Member (230 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #58
59. I thought my last post WAS conceding pt. 4 was wrong?
...and what does my arguing etiquette have to do with the veracity of the actual FACTS and EVIDENCE?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
piobair Donating Member (416 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #59
61. sorry
I didn't read your post as conceding the point. The problem I have with some researchers is that they just throw a lot of stuff against the wall to see what sticks and then they just go with that. Not saying you do this. Lots of questions and very few answers from either side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
8. WTC 7, the Pentagon and Somerset County, Pennsylvania all point to
MIHOP.

Far too many "coincidences" to occur on one day.

WTC 7 - The first steel framed building in history to collapse due to fire (it wasn't hit by a plane).

Pentagon - The building swallows a 757, leaving very few parts and a pristine lawn. Plus the FBI immediately confiscates film from security cameras around the area, never to release it again. And please explain what was in the blue-tarped box carted away.

Somerset County, Pennsylvania - Crater with too little debris. Debris found miles away from "crash" site. Eyewitness accounts of another plane ignored.

The only people that still believe that it was 19 terrorists with box cutters that pulled it all off have not looked at the data critically or are simply apologists for the official conspiracy theory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. I'm not that cynical
And believe me, I'm VERY cynical. I don't think non-believers can necessarily be labeled "apologists," but I agree that it really does take a willingness to seriously look at the data. Many aren't willing. It is just too darned big for many patriotic American minds to even begin to comprehend. Our government wouldn't DO that?!

But remember...BushCo isn't really our government. They're a regime installed via a bloodless coup to represent the corporations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #12
21. I wasn't either. I was a real believer in our gov't. I'm a veteran. But
after the emotion wore off and I began to look at things in the clear, hard light of day, it just didn't pass the smell test.

In the military we drilled all the time, we didn't want to get caught off guard. Yet on 9/11 it didn't just happen once, it happened four times.

But one of the big things is the PNAC. When an organization cries out for a "New Pearl Harbor" so that it can justify going to war with Iraq and that just happens to occur on their watch, it's hard to see it as merely coincidental.

Then you start looking at the fact that FEMA was in NYC the night before, that every truck of steel carted away from the site was GPS tracked (one trucker was fired for taking an unauthorized "stop") and that nearly all the debris was quickly shipped over to China for recycling, you begin to wonder.

When the President resists an independent commission for months, then acquiesces, but refuses to testify under oath or alone (he had Dick with him), you get a little more cynical. When people who claim to have knowledge of numerous intelligence failures are gagged, your cynicism grows.

Then you watch Bush sitting in that damned classroom acting like the biggest emergency in America's history hasn't just happened on his watch and your cynicism finally peaks.

I trust none of these bastards. I truly believe they could allow thousands of Americans to die so that they could carry out their foreign intrigues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #21
38. As a veteran, you might be interested in the opinions of
Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret.

http://www.rmbowman.com/ssn/rally031025.htm

He flew 100 combat missions in Vietnam.

He headed the Star Wars program for Ford and Carter
before it was the Star Wars program.

Here's a link to a 28-minute speech he gave:

http://www.vermontindymedia.org/usermedia/video/3/rbowman911InquiryMay0456k.wmv

Or you can find it here if you'd rather: http://www.snowshoefilms.com/911coverup.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
41. Why WTC 7 Fell
For starters they thought it was dangerous and would collapse:

but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.



http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayd...

So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see.



http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyl...


Also there was this:

• The building had sustained damage from debris falling into the building, and they were not sure about the structural stability of the building.

• The building had large fires burning on at least six floors. Any one of these six fires would have been considered a large incident during normal FDNY operations.

• There was no water immediately available for fighting the fires.

• They didn’t have equipment, hose, standpipe kits, tools, and enough handie talkies for conducting operations inside the building.


http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-81.pdf

page 165

One Battalion Chief coming from the building indicated that they had searched floors 1 through 9 and found that the building was clear.390 In the process of the search, the Battalion Chief met the building’s Fire Safety Director and Deputy Fire Safety Director on the ninth floor. The Fire Safety Director reported
that the building’s floors had been cleared from the top down. By this time, the Chief Officer responsible for WTC 7 reassessed the building again and determined that fires were burning on the following floors:
6, 7, 8, 17, 21, and 30.391 No accurate time is available for these actions during the WTC 7 operations; however, the sequence of event indicates that it occurred during a time period from 12:30 p.m. to
approximately 2:00 p.m.

The Chief Officer then met with his command officer to discuss the building’s condition and FDNY’s capabilities for controlling the building fires. A Deputy Chief who had just returned from inside the
building reported that he had conducted an inspection up to the 7th or 8th floor.392 He indicated that the stairway was filling with smoke and that there was a lot of fire inside the building. The chiefs discussed the situation and the following conditions were identified:

• The building had sustained damage from debris falling into the building, and they were not sure about the structural stability of the building.

• The building had large fires burning on at least six floors. Any one of these six fires would have been considered a large incident during normal FDNY operations.

• There was no water immediately available for fighting the fires.

• They didn’t have equipment, hose, standpipe kits, tools, and enough handie talkies for conducting operations inside the building.

At approximately, 2:30 p.m., FDNY officers decided to completely abandon WTC 7, and the final order was given to evacuate the site around the building. 395, 396 The order terminated the ongoing rescue
operations at WTC 6 and on the rubble pile of WTC 1. Firefighters and other emergency responders were withdrawn from the WTC 7 area, and the building continued to burn. At approximately 5:20 p.m., some three hours after WTC 7 was abandoned the building experienced a catastrophic failure and collapsed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pauldp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #41
60. Question for you Hack.
What about the collapse video footage of 7 is clearly inconsistent with a controlled demolition?
There should be something if it was so obviously not a controlled demo right? Could you point
out something in any of the video angles that clearly shows the collapse to be different from a CD?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AgadorSparticus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
10. I hear your pain. This should be obvious by now. But all you will
get is a bunch of descrediting labels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
13. Well yeah, I'd understand
If I was a freakzoid conspiracy theorist with water on the brain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
LunaC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #13
28. I'd appreciate your opinion.....
PNAC 101 - RISE OF THE NEOCONS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5648350#5648810

...you may feel foolish after reading it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meganmonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #13
33. You want to hear a conspiracy? I know an unbelievable one...goes like this
There were less than 20 foreign men, mostly Saudis, who were able to enter the US (many of whom were on watch lists, btw) and study here. Some of them were taught to fly planes at US flight schools. Somehow, wielding nothing but box cutters, they were able to hijack 4 planes almost simultaneously and crash 3 of them into major US landmarks! And US intelligence knew virtually nothing about it ahead of time!

Pretty hard to believe AFAIC :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #33
65. Don't forget that they did this over a 90 minute period without
a single fighter jet intercepting any of the four planes.

Note that the passengers of Flight 93 supposedly had enough time to:

1) figure out they were being hijacked,
2) call dozens of loved ones to tell them about this, many several times,
3) get and process the meaning of the news about the WTC and Pentagon crashes,
4) join in a prolonged prayer session with a Verizon operator,
5) meet with each other to plan an attack on the hijackers and reach a consensus on this plan,
6) execute a prolonged attack the hijackers, and
7) force the plane down over an unpopulated area.

Meanwhile, although all of these events took place more than 30 minutes after the SECOND plane hit the WTC, our ENTIRE $500 billion a year military structure was supposedly unable to get a SINGLE fighter jet in Flight 93's vicinity before it crashed a full 58 minutes after the SECOND hijacked plane hit the WTC. Well over 90 minutes after the authorities knew that two planes were hijacked, the entire military response of the last remaining superpower against the "awesome aviation might" of a single well-worn passenger plane depended completely on the actions of random group of unarmed civilian passengers operating in the midst of a direct terrorist threat aboard Flight 93!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lpbk2713 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
18. One thing is for sure ..... Shit-for-Brains wouldn't have been re-elected



without it, even if the election was a close one. He's the luckiest SOB that ever stepped foot in the White House.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. no Patriot Act, Tax cuts, Spying, Torture, and no Iraq War...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
we can do it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #18
42. BTW - He STOLE the Election, Too
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
19. * and Rumsfeld
seem to be the only people in the world who weren't interested in watching it live on TV as soon as they heard about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
20. I assumed as much the second I saw the towers smoking
But I'm not as informed on the details as I ought to be.

Has anyone made a good graphic (like the Abramoff corruption flowcharts) of the evidence for MIHOP?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
WoodrowFan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #20
36. here.
here is the chart with all the MIHOP evidence...






















opps, that's right, there is NONE except in the PCT's fevered brains..

bye bye
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
we can do it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #36
43. Wait - Isn't That the Official Governments "Evidence"
Edited on Tue Dec-20-05 08:01 PM by we can do it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janedoe Donating Member (540 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. That's what I assumed WoodrowFan meant. (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WoodrowFan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. no
Edited on Tue Dec-20-05 08:27 PM by WoodrowFan
it's a group photos of all the PCTers who don't rely on the hard RW for their info.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
27. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
LunaC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. Background info that may be of interest
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patcox2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
30. If it was an inside job, why are we so in danger we must break a union?
Elsewhere you argue that national security requires jailing the striking transit workers. Yet here you argue that 9/11 was faked, MIHOP.

These are profoundly inconsistent positions. If you beleive Bush manufactured the terror threat to justify a war to seize power and to seize the oil fields, then you would not believe we are in such danger from terrorists, would you? The only danger is that Bush may attack us again, one would think.

So inconsistent, what could be the purpose of someone apparently making disingenuous arguments about hot-button issues?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrhopeforwes Donating Member (230 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #30
53. nice try....
but first of all, after watching the strike unfold yesterday, part of my thinks I was proven wrong that it's a security issue...although Bloomberg did mention a cop was hit by a car as a result of dealing with a strike issue. However, I still don't think it's that farfetched to think that creating unprecedented gridlock could become a security issue even without an attack or natural disaster happening a the same time. ...not to mention the economic setback this is causing.
second, just because 9/11 was done by our government, doesn't mean that there aren't real terrorists out to get us, right? ...especially now that Bush has given those types so much more motivation to do so.

and, as I said on the original thread about the strikes, believe me, I've often been one to harp about the power of unions and how much more assertive they should be. and if I were the President then they wouldn't have to make it come to this.

incidentally, if you really wanna see how I feel, and you really wanna see a solution to getting Bush out of the WH, leave me your email address and I'll forward you my short story that's soon to be published. (Amy Carter recently read it (after I delivered pizza to her house) and she loved it and is going to pass it to Jimmy).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marie26 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
32. Incompetance. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johonny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
34. Wow
A) cause Bush is stupid and probably didn't think at all. Heck he didnt think after the second crash either. He sat in a class room with the most unintelligent look on his face I've ever seen in a president.

B) Plane flys into building... crash. That's how it got hit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WoodrowFan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
37. go away
Edited on Tue Dec-20-05 06:06 PM by WoodrowFan
the DU already has enough PCT loons trying to turn this into Rense.... I guess ALL of the major Democratic leaders must be in on it, Bill Cliton, John Kerry, Jimmy Carter, Howard Dean, John Edwards, Harry Reid, Wes Clark, Dennis Kucinich, etc, etc, etc, because NOT A SINGLE DEMOCRATIC LEADER SEEMS TO AGREE WITH THE PCTS! Amazing how they seem reality based..

bye bye
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. NOT A SINGLE DEMOCRATIC LEADER
Rep. Cynthia McKinney's not a leader?

Did you know that the 9/11 truth statement was signed by David Cobb, Michael Badnarik, and
Ralph Nader?

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlienSpaceBat Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #37
40. Why do democratic leaders have to be in on it ?
Talk about a straw man argument ...

Given the flag waving tendency of so many americans, and the tendency of so many to be so hostile to even the idea of official involvement in 9/11, it would be a massive political risk for a major figure to get too far out on this. After all, if even left of centre supporters like a DU member with 1000+ posts are so quick to start calling people fevered conspiracy theorists, what chance would a candidate have in main street red america ?

There isn't a flow chart of MIHOP like there can be for a bribery, or even a CIA leak case. The facts of 9/11 are too many, too interlinked, too complex to depict in a bite sized diagram (unfortunately).

See http://www.complete911timeline.org/project.jsp?project=911_project for the dry facts from official media sources that would go into such a flowchart.

Whatever you currently believe, the fact remains that the official theory is by definition a conspiracy theory. It has had so many revisions, evasions and deliberately unexplained or covered up evidence. Even if you don't want to believe LIHOP or MIHOP the fact is that the official story doesn't stand up to even a little scrutiny, so something else *must* be true.

Aren't you even a little interested in what that truth might be ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WoodrowFan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #40
46. I am, MIHOPers are not
Edited on Tue Dec-20-05 08:15 PM by WoodrowFan
I've yet to meet a PCTer who isn't lying to my face. (NO PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON! WTC COULDN'T FALL LIKE THAT!!, etc, etc.) What's worse, they lie to our faces just so they can get off on their mental masturbation at the expense of the victims. And since they rely on far RW sites like Rense, Prisonplanet, whatreallyhappened, etc, I don't think MIHOPers are progressives either. Sorry, but I have zero respect for the tinfoil crowd just like I have no respect to the holocaust deniers or creationists. Deal with it


and oh yes, since no Democratic leaders agree with MIHOPers you're saying they are a) in on it, b) stupid or c) cowards. Sorry, I trust the leaders I named more than I trust the wackjobs RWers at Rense. Maybe you should try the PI. They love faux progressives who bash Democrats and indulge in RTW nut sites...

and finally

bye bye....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrhopeforwes Donating Member (230 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #46
55. so I guess then that you don't find it suspicious that they reacted to the
news of the first crash as if it were an accident, correct? and it doesn't bother you that despite the warnings the government had, the people in the second tower were not immediately told to evacuate.
I'm glad you're okay with that and are capable of addressing this point on here the way mature debaters would.

....not to mention all the other EVIDENCE folks on this thread have spoon fed you.

...did you know Bush said that he SAW the first crash on TV?????????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pauldp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #46
62. Howard Dean said he would not be suprised if Bush knew.
Have you Googled the following names?
Sibel Edmonds
Indira Singh
Anthony Shaffer

You don't have to go to Rense or Prison Planet to know there is a 911 coverup going on. Your generalizations about people who
question the official conspiracy theory are really over simplified.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlienSpaceBat Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #46
63. More straw men ....
I didn't mention, or suggest you view, rense or prison planet etc. Neither did I say that democratic leaders are any of your 3 alternatives. What they are is mainstream politicians, and unfortunately the 9/11 issue is out of the mainstream right now, so I wouldn't expect them to commit political suicide over it at present. I don't really know what they think either - absence of evidence of their agreement doesn't equal evidence of their disagreement, FWIW.

And oh yes, on what basis would you judge me to be a 'faux progressive' ? Ad hominem is pretty poor form at any time, but without anything to base it on in the first place ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. Yes.
If all you have to on is Rense or PP and you're turned off by their tone and/or documentation styles, and you don't have a technical background, that pretty much leaves GE, Time Warner, the NYT, etc., and they aren't exactly disinterested parties.

I'd recommend starting here instead: http://911research.wtc7.net/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 07:14 AM
Response to Reply #37
66. Nor do most seem to agree with anti-voting machine activists.
Nor do most feel free to state in public that BushCo is more akin to a syndicate than an administration.

Nor do any question the necessity of a never ending war on a noun.

Nor do they seem to think that lying our country into a war of aggression is an impeachable offense.

Would you have us refrain from questioning anything about any of these subjects until our "leaders" first fully embrace these controversial and politically charged claims?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rich Hunt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
47. depends on what is meant...


....by 'inside job'. Inside job doesn't have to mean 'government', and if it does, which entities in government, and how?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrhopeforwes Donating Member (230 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #47
56. yeah, but if inside, but not Bush and co....
why doesn't bush and co. tell us it was inside job by others?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeedBug Donating Member (13 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
48. My Story
2 Days before the September 11 attacks I rang a nationwide talkback show in New Zealand. I forget how the conversation started but after only a couple of sentences I started saying "they dont think". I said this three times. Ill let you imagine who i was talking about. The next thing I did was yell at full volume "WAR" meaning there was going to be one. After this I gave a cry to tell about suffering (er youd have to hear it and what the host was saying) and then showed that I was giving the call everything I had and started saying "the thing, the thing" as a clue to why i was saying there was going to be a war. I finished the call by voicing a gleam in my eye, referring to there going to be a war and what i was saying about it. Err i guess you know what a gleam in ones eye means. So 2 days after yelling theres going to be war the planes hit the buildings. Theres more to the call than this like the host speaking and stuff but its obviously hard to type about a phone call and deliver the exactness of it. I made a point of showing I was giving it everything I had to express how there was going to be a war and everything in the call was to do with war. Umm, the translation of the call into text is a very poor example but i just wanted to post that and see if people have any comments. Like I said its not nearly as powerful as it would be to hear the actual call.

Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lithos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-26-05 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
67. This has gone a bit too personal
Lithos
9/11 Forum Moderator
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 13th 2024, 02:10 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC