Does Anyone Have Any Questions?

[Partridge]

Jesus Over Israel?

Sounds eeirly familiar (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0233875/).

[YouCrazyDiamond]

Um, yeah. I was just wondering which way to the bathroom?

And should I just help myself to whatever is in the kitchen?

[amman254]

I assume you are talking about Gerhard Schroeder former chancellor of Germany. I am German, though not born there lived there for some time and go at least twice a year. I have never heard this. Not that I am doubting you but could you please post an article or relevant link, I am highly interested.
thanks

well, it is not a chancellor, and it certainly wasn't gerhard schroeder...after leaving office he didn't loose any time at all getting a new CEO job in one of putin's big russian pipeline company's. he really took some shit over here for that.

back to topic, the guy you are referring to, is andreas von buehlow. he was a high up secretary/minister level guy that served for many years as specialist in the intelligence area under two different chancellors. his book entiteled "the cia and 911" went really big over here, and is one very serious addition to the truth movement. expecially highlighting on the idea that 911 did not happen incidentally or of it's own, but was much more part of a large plan that has been going on for years. he also got into all of the drug and weapons trafficking being done by the secret services worldwide, and their interaction with one another. i don't know if it is available in an english version, if so, it is certainly worthwhile.

but no....no chancellor, past or present has even gotten close to implying american participation in 911.

[amman254]

sorry, should have read two posts further, partridge allready straightened out the chancellor question....

[PhilosophyGenius]

Amman, I'm assumning you read this book by Andreas Von Buelow. Is that book like other 9/11 books written where it's compiled facts proving a point or is he/she speaking from insider knowedlge or anything of that nature?

[Al Czervik]

I didn't know whether ask the 911blogger nerds this or the nerds over here. I need a DVD burning 101 course so I can burn EGLS, What's The Truth, etc. I have a pretty good Compaq laptop, nothing fancy. My questions are this:

(1) Can I just burn from the google versions and/or 9/11blogger podcasts?

(2) What, if any, software do I need to buy or download to do this?

(3) Once I have burned a DVD, what is the best way to copy them in mass? I don't have two DVD drives in my laptop. I think I read on 911blogger that you can get a pretty good DVD burning machine for not a lot of money. I have a little extra cash to do this. What should I buy and/or how should I do this?

[Gold9472]

Ask the people at Blogger... I have a mac.

[Al Czervik]

Ask the people at Blogger... I have a mac.

Fucking hilarious.

[amman254]

Amman, I'm assumning you read this book by Andreas Von Buelow. Is that book like other 9/11 books written where it's compiled facts proving a point or is he/she speaking from insider knowedlge or anything of that nature?

Sorry PG,
didn't notice your question untill today...

sure, i read the book, and have rebought it a number of times and passed it on to others that i was trying to help understand the sincerity of what we all are talking about. you know, often you get thrown in this "off the wall-ct bag". and the fact that this gentleman has served here in germany for a good number of years in the government gives him of course a bit more clout.

i really enjoy the book because of the fact that, as you mentioned he does of course get onto some of the well and often mentioned general 911 facts, but he really sticks pretty much to the down to earth topics, and doesn't throw a lot of "wild theories" around that could tend to scare off a newby.

what makes his book unigue, is his insight in the intelligence community over the last 40-50 some years, and how he brings what happend on 911 into a historical background, along the lines of, "why should this shock us, that the secret services, or the government itself be in on such a plot....they have been working systemmatically like this for years, on all different fields". and he illustrates this through his insights on drug and weapon trafficking.

and as i said, he stays real seriouos the whole time and doesn't get polemic in his theories. solid serous discussion.

the exact name of the book is,
Die CIA und der 11. September. Internationaler Terror und die Rolle der Geheimdienste.

from andreas von bühlow.

if i can help you in some other way regarding the man, just contact me through a pm.

take care, ron

[PhilosophyGenius]

Thanks for the info.

[Truth Searching]

Is http://www.911blogger.com down? I can't get to it now.

[Gold9472]

It appears so.

[samweller]

Hi folks,

This is my first post. When I hear people being called "conspiracy theorists" -- isn't the "official story" a theory, also. A pretty bad one at that. And also a lie.
The so called truth that has been repeatedly shoved down our collective throats the past 5 years (19 muslims with boxcutters taking orders from a man that lives in a cave) is also a theory. The Swiss Cheese Theory.

I don't call myself a conspiracy theorist. I call myself a Citizen For Truth.

like John Lennon says "Gimme Some Truth..."

-samweller

[Gold9472]

Thanks for signing up.

[PhilosophyGenius]

Is it possible to sue this Administration over 9/11? If so, why hasn't anyone tried?

[Gold9472]

Is it possible to sue this Administration over 9/11? If so, why hasn't anyone tried?

Look up Ellen Mariani, and Stanley Hilton.

[PhilosophyGenius]

That was covered up nicely.

[Gold9472]

Someone suing the Bush Administration for the crimes of 9/11 not being covered by our media?

Nah, that's not news.

[olson5256]

I have heard that some of the hijackers are alive. Is there any proof given to this?

[Gold9472]

I have heard that some of the hijackers are alive. Is there any proof given to this?

At the time of 9/11, people who were flashed on the screen as "hijackers" turned up alive. That story was buried. The family members asked FBI Director Robert Mueller about the mistaken identity of the hijackers, and never received a response. There are several articles out there that say some of them are still alive. The problem is, why haven't they come forward since? Another problem is, the 9/11 Commission didn't even bother to address this aspect of the investigation. They just ignored the reports as if they never existed. This thread has more details.

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4795

[freedomrik]

I have a question. I have seen the video and heard the audio of them saying to pull the building(with dynomite)

Just how long would it take to set up for a controled demo of a 47 story building?

[Gold9472]

I have a question. I have seen the video and heard the audio of them saying to pull the building(with dynomite)

Just how long would it take to set up for a controled demo of a 47 story building?

Professor Jones speculated it would take 10 men, 40 trips. I think that's right.

[freedomrik]

Doesn't sound like it was a split second decision like they first made it out to be, and then another word about it.

Are they ( the powers to be) actually denying, now, that they brought the building down themselves?

[Gold9472]

Doesn't sound like it was a split second decision like they first made it out to be, and then another word about it.

Are they ( the powers to be) actually denying, now, that they brought the building down themselves?

No, it doesn't seem like a "split second" decision. My friend and I were talking about that not too long ago. The argument is... if he gave the order to "Pull It" late in the afternoon, then that means either the building was already pre-wired, and he knew, and so did all of the firemen that were there that day, or firemen somehow have the ability to wire buildings in a ridiculously fast fashion. I haven't looked into whether or not firemen have the ability to bring down buildings quickly. I have heard that back in the early 20th century, firemen would bring a building down, rather than let the fire spread. Obviously they had to have done that somewhat quickly because they were trying to contain the fire. Is this method still in use today? I don't know.

The PTB, to my knowledge, have never taken credit for bringing the buildings down.

[Gold9472]

During that particular discussion, my friend and I came up with a theory. And it goes against some information regarding things we've heard. Regarding the buildings being shut down, and maintenance crews being sent in. Most people who believe in Controlled Demolition, think that those were the individuals who wired them.

This "new" theory makes sense to a certain extent. However, there's absolutely no way to verify it (that I know of).

Imagine if you will, the United States is invaded. Somehow, a country miraculously manages to invade what is currently a country that has the most powerful military apparatus in the world.

If that happened, doesn't it make sense that there is information that we have that we don't want our invaders to? Information stored in Federal Buildings for example. How would you quickly dispose of information currently being stored in Federal Buildings? Hmmmmm...

The theory is that certain buildings in the United States are wired upon creation. In the event that we need to destroy the information within, quickly.

Then, you look at the offices that were within Building 7. I don't remember the list off the top of my head, but it was the Secret Service, the Securities and Exchange Commission, The CIA, the FBI I believe, and a few others. Organizations that have information that might be considered dangerous in the hands of our "invaders".

The problem with this theory is that people wouldn't work in buildings they knew were wired with explosives. If this was the practice of our Government, it would be one of the MOST classified pieces of information we have. Not something a schmuck like me could get.

The other problem is... what happens if there's a fire in the building? Would that detonate the explosives? Are there explosives that can resist fire? I believe Thermate can according to Professor Jones.

Anyway, thought I'd share.

[somebigguy]

I have heard the theory that Jon speaks of, and believe that the perps may have been using that to explain the collapses once the truth of controlled demolition was ultimately revealed, and then they chose not to follow through with the plan.

I'm thinking Silverstein's comment was intentional to slowly let the cat out of the bag, but they must have had second thoughts on the plan, possibly due to lawsuits if they made such a claim as prewired buildings, and cancelled the job. Now they're back to fighting the truth of controlled demo tooth and nail.

Regarding whether Pull it meant they went in and setup the explosives on the afternoon of 9/11 to bring the tower down, that theory does not hold water for several reasons.

First of all, if the fire was supposedly as bad as they'd have us believe, causing them to make the decision to demolish the building rather than fight the fire (that statement alone is nonsense, how is it easier to demolish rather than fight a fire), how the hell would they be able to go in, plant explosives on every floor and pull off the most perfect controlled demolition job anyone has ever seen. Remember, the fire was supposedly so bad, they didn't want to go in and fight it.

Secondly, on the afternoon of 9/11, after the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil in history, its extremely unlikely that they would be trucking in explosives to downtown New York.

[Gold9472]

Buildings in the early 20th Century weren't built as well as today's buildings... Remember the Chicago Fire of 1871 ( http://www.chipublib.org/004chicago/timeline/greatfire.html )? It makes sense that they brought them down... It would be interesting to ask a firefighter about that procedure if it exists.

[Gold9472]

They weren't built as well meaning fire would spread more rapidly in those old buildings...

[reprehensor]

I have heard the theory that some Federal buildings are pre-wired, but it's just a rumor AFAIK. It does have some logical appeal, but I can't comment on whether or not explosives would have a viable 30-year shelf-life.

Here's a crazy theory, feels like a psyop;

http://lot08.gnn.tv/blogs/11972/DaNtE_s_9_11_InFeRnO

If Jones' findings are independently verified by another university lab, expect some sort of limited hang-out story to roll out. Otherwise, operation "deny, deny, deny" will continue.

[PhilosophyGenius]

I have heard the theory that some Federal buildings are pre-wired, but it's just a rumor AFAIK. It does have some logical appeal, but I can't comment on whether or not explosives would have a viable 30-year shelf-life.

Here's a crazy theory, feels like a psyop;

http://lot08.gnn.tv/blogs/11972/DaNtE_s_9_11_InFeRnO

If Jones' findings are independently verified by another university lab, expect some sort of limited hang-out story to roll out. Otherwise, operation "deny, deny, deny" will continue.

Intersting article.

Regarding the WTC being built to collapse, think back to when that US spy plane landed in China years ago when Bush first took office. When that plane landed the crew went through a rehearsed prccedure of destroying certain documents and equipment so that the enemy wouldn't be able to get there hands on them. So I'd imagine that secret documents held within the WTC would have the same type of thing; no need to self-destruce the enitre building.

And even if they did keep the building rigged in case shit happens, what happens if the wrong shit happens like a small fire? The whole building would collapse from someone dropping a cigarette in the wrong place or something.

[AuGmENTor]

Intersting article.

Regarding the WTC being built to collapse, think back to when that US spy plane landed in China years ago when Bush first took office. When that plane landed the crew went through a rehearsed prccedure of destroying certain documents and equipment so that the enemy wouldn't be able to get there hands on them. So I'd imagine that secret documents held within the WTC would have the same type of thing; no need to self-destruce the enitre building.

And even if they did keep the building rigged in case shit happens, what happens if the wrong shit happens like a small fire? The whole building would collapse from someone dropping a cigarette in the wrong place or something.Number 1)No you can't smoke in those bldgs anymore, and they knew that was coming even then. I remember when you could smoke in the grocery store, or even in a hospital room, as long as the person wasn't on oxygen. But they stopped it in like 81.
2) Explosives like that aren't detonated by heat or shock. I'm no demo guy, but we used to play with c4 sometimes, and you could bang it with a hammer. Plus, you're not going to go to toss out the coffee grinds and accidently demolish the bldg. That shit would be hidden behind wallboard and stuff, not where it can be accidentally detonated. If nothing else, these guys have been terrorrizing/ blowin shit up for years. They know how to wire a bldg without it coming down on accident. And even if it DID, they could just say thay Osama did it

[PhilosophyGenius]

Number 1)No you can't smoke in those bldgs anymore, and they knew that was coming even then. I remember when you could smoke in the grocery store, or even in a hospital room, as long as the person wasn't on oxygen. But they stopped it in like 81.
2) Explosives like that aren't detonated by heat or shock. I'm no demo guy, but we used to play with c4 sometimes, and you could bang it with a hammer. Plus, you're not going to go to toss out the coffee grinds and accidently demolish the bldg. That shit would be hidden behind wallboard and stuff, not where it can be accidentally detonated. If nothing else, these guys have been terrorrizing/ blowin shit up for years. They know how to wire a bldg without it coming down on accident. And even if it DID, they could just say thay Osama did it

Well, you know what I mean. And another thing, explosives deteriorate over time and the the guys who build the tower say they didnt know how it collapsed. So I don't think the towers were designed with 'sefl-descruct' capabilities.

That would be pretty funny if someone threw a coffee grind and accidentally collapsed a building. Hehe.

And is this payback for that other thread?

[AuGmENTor]

And is this payback for that other thread?
What ever could you be talking about, kind sir?

[Al Czervik]

Jon, I was thumbing through the Popular Mechanics book at the store today and one thing that jumped out at me is they say that the only internal (continental) intercept from the Cold War until 9/11 was Payne Stewart's flight (all others were offshore). Do you have any contact with Bowman or somebody similar to comment on this? This seems preposterous, but if true, a lot of our arguments about failure of air defenses are pretty much discredited. Let me know what you think.

Oh, and no worries, that book doesn't touch most of your favorite stuff like Sibel or ISI connections...

[Gold9472]

Jon, I was thumbing through the Popular Mechanics book at the store today and one thing that jumped out at me is they say that the only internal (continental) intercept from the Cold War until 9/11 was Payne Stewart's flight (all others were offshore). Do you have any contact with Bowman or somebody similar to comment on this? This seems preposterous, but if true, a lot of our arguments about failure of air defenses are pretty much discredited. Let me know what you think.

Oh, and no worries, that book doesn't touch most of your favorite stuff like Sibel or ISI connections...

So you're saying a plane has never gone off course, had radio problems, transponder problems, etc... within the United States?

[Gold9472]

And what happened to Payne Stewart's flight? 6 military aircraft eventually were on that plane by the time everything was said and done. What was the difference between that day and the day of 9/11?

[Al Czervik]

So you're saying a plane has never gone off course, had radio problems, transponder problems, etc... within the United States?

Well, someone in the book says this pretty explicitly about no domestic interception. You get a flavor for it here at "9/11 miss" with this ADIZ bull.
http://www.911myths.com/html/67_intercepts.html

I'm with you, I can't believe in 15-20 years they never sent up a firefighter to check out someone. It's incomprehensible. But, if true, the incompetence theory holds a lot more water on this one point at least.

[Al Czervik]

And what happened to Payne Stewart's flight? 6 military aircraft eventually were on that plane by the time everything was said and done. What was the difference between that day and the day of 9/11?

Ha, I hate to play shill, but you know they argue that it actually took a pretty long time to track down Stewart's plane and if you throw in the chaos of 9/11, things were much different and there were not so many readily available planes.

[Gold9472]

Well, someone in the book says this pretty explicitly about no domestic interception. You get a flavor for it here at "9/11 miss" with this ADIZ bull.
http://www.911myths.com/html/67_intercepts.html

I'm with you, I can't believe in 15-20 years they never sent up a firefighter to check out someone. It's incomprehensible. But, if true, the incompetence theory holds a lot more water on this one point at least.

I sent a letter.

Hi NORAD,

I was hoping you can help me out. It's hard to find any information on this particular subject. In the event of an air emergency, what is the average response time of an intercept?

Any help you could give would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Jon Gold

The response...

Sir: Unfortunately there are too many variables to give you an accurate answer. The bottom-line is we have alert aircraft at various locations throughout the U.S. (and Canada with NORAD) and it would just be a matter of minutes from the time they are notified until they where airborne. So then it depends on where our aircraft took off from and where is the "target" aircraft--you can look at our Air Force aircraft fact sheets on the F-15 and F-16 fighters (Canada uses mainly CFA-18 aircraft) to determine their speed and look up the speed of the target aircraft with a web search to roughly calculate the time and place the intercept would occur depending on the location of the aircraft. The fact sheets are located at this web site: http://www.af.mil/factsheets/

Here's a very rough example from a non-pilot (me): An F-15, with a top speed of 1,800 mph could intercept an aircraft 600 miles away flying parallel to where the fighter took off in 20+ minutes or so, now if the "target" aircraft is flying at 600 mph and heading toward the place where the fighter took off then the intercept would be at the 400 mile mark and would likely take only 13 minutes or so--theoretically, depending on winds and weather, etc...

vr

MSgt Timothy L. Hoffman, USAF
Superintendent, Alaskan Command Public Affairs
9480 Pease Ave, Ste 136
Elmendorf AFB, AK 99506
DSN 317-552-7567/2341; comm. (907) 552-7567/2341
Fax: 317-552-5411

My response...

Thank you very much for your timely, and informative response.^ Would this have been true on 9/11?

Again, thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Jon Gold

His response...

I can't say for certain...but probably not, because before 9/11 our focus was protecting our airspace from EXTERNAL threats--i.e. threats coming from outside North America. Also, before 9/11 as far as I know there was no codified command and control procedure for intercepting civilian domestic flights--since there was never a need for those procedures.

hope this helps,

Tim

My response...

Hi MSgt Hoffman...

I know this is a response that took a while, but after re-reading your response... it doesn't make sense to me that with the money that we spend on defense, no one in the military was focusing on INTERNAL threats at the time of 9/11, and before. If NORAD didn't focus on INTERNAL threats, then who did?

Thank you.

Jon Gold

Dr. Robert Bowman has been quoted as saying, "I know the procedures."

I haven't heard from MSgt Hoffman yet.

[AuGmENTor]

That is fuckin awsome.... Getem Jon!

[Gold9472]

NORAD
Unanswered Questions From The Family Steering Committee

http://911independentcommission.org/norad31804.html

March 18, 2004

1. Was NORAD aware of the four hijacked planes veering off course even before being reported by the FAA? If not, please explain why NORAD which monitors 7000 flights a day, was unable to track the four aberrant flights.

Linda Slobodian writes in “Norad on Heightened Alert: Role of air defence agency rapidly transformed in wake of Sept. 11 terrorist attacks”

“Where was Norad, the multimillion-dollar, 24-hour eyes and ears of North American skies, when the hijacked planes embarked on their sinister missions?

Ironically, Norad was doing its job: peering 300 kilometres out into the Air Defence Identification Zone encircling North America. Its task: to help assess, within two minutes, if each of the 7,000 incoming aircraft every day is friend or foe….

When the second plane hit the other World Trade Center tower, Norad swiftly shifted its attention to help prevent possible further attacks.

Norad was instrumental in getting fighter jets -- normally on 15-minute alert -- airborne within eight minutes. ”

http://cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/calgaryherald101301.html

2. Why weren’t the jets able to intercept the hijacked planes if they were airborne within eight minutes of notification?

3. Why did NORAD wait until after the second plane hit the WTC to try and prevent possible further attacks?

4. Why weren’t the fighter jets that tailed flights 11 and 175 as they crashed into New York’s WTC, rerouted to intercept flights 77 or 93, before they crashed into the Pentagon and Pennsylvania?

5. Where surveillance satellites orbiting North American airspace on 9/11?

• What exactly does the satellite imaging reveal?
• What companies own these satellites?
• Where are the records and logs for these orbits?

Recommendation: Examine the records and logs of surveillance satellites.

NORAD

1. At precisely what time was NORAD notified of each plane being hijacked? What was their response? What is the name of the individual who determined from which bases the F-16s should be scrambled from? What are the names of the pilots of these f-16s?

2. Whose decision was it to not utilize the F-16s' weapons?

3. Whose decision was it to not fly the F-16s at maximum speed?

4. Why didn't the F-16s intercept the hijacked airliners?

5. Please draw up a chart of NORAD's response to the Payne Stewart Lear jet incident vs. the 9/11 incident. Why was protocol not followed on 9/11? What is the name of the individual who did not follow protocol? Where are the transcripts from the F-16s? Where is the log and record from NORAD?

6. What satellites were orbiting North American airspace on 9/11? What exactly does the satellite imaging reveal? What companies own these satellites? Where are the records and logs for these orbits?

[Gold9472]

Ha, I hate to play shill, but you know they argue that it actually took a pretty long time to track down Stewart's plane and if you throw in the chaos of 9/11, things were much different and there were not so many readily available planes.

The original report by ABCNews stated that Payne Stewart's plane was intercepted within 19 minutes. 911myths.com/Popular Mechanics states that they changed time zones, and it actually took an hour and 19 minutes. As you can see from my correspondence with NORAD, that is an unreasonably long amount of time for an intercept.

[Gold9472]

An F-15, with a top speed of 1,800 mph could intercept an aircraft 600 miles away flying parallel to where the fighter took off in 20+ minutes or so, now if the "target" aircraft is flying at 600 mph and heading toward the place where the fighter took off then the intercept would be at the 400 mile mark and would likely take only 13 minutes or so--theoretically, depending on winds and weather, etc...

[Gold9472]

Wiki says...

"After the events of September 11, 2001, the NORAD mission evolved to include monitoring of all aircraft flying in the interior of the United States."

So, their "excuse" is that NORAD didn't monitor the airspace within the United States at the time of 9/11.

Ok, that makes sense to me. The reason there was no military response on 9/11 was because there was absolutely no one monitoring the skies over America.

Reason being, planes that fly over the continental United States never have any technical problems. They never fly off course. They have transponders that never fail, and so on.

That makes perfect sense.

[answerplease?]

This question may have been answered a million times but I can't seem to find the answer anywhere on the web... maybe my search terms or something.

But why is there no Memorial at Ground Zero yet? What is the delay? What is the eventual plan for it and what's taking so long?

TY!

[PhilosophyGenius]

This question may have been answered a million times but I can't seem to find the answer anywhere on the web... maybe my search terms or something.

But why is there no Memorial at Ground Zero yet? What is the delay? What is the eventual plan for it and what's taking so long?

TY!

My understanding is that there are tons of people with different ideas as to be what should be done and debate over cost, so all of those things combined would equal a long delay.

[Red7]

Here is my idea after reading and watching 9/11 material for the past 6 week's, it seems most have ideas on how things went down now what we need is solid "PROOF" from somebody - they are out there, here is my idea, get every 9/11 site and band together and offer a HUGE REWARD so we all can get back to our lives, I did this before on another topic on another board and you would be suprised at the e-mails I had recieved, I still get them 4 years later - This will work!!

I want to silence the non believers!!

[shorebreak]

Wiki says...

"After the events of September 11, 2001, the NORAD mission evolved to include monitoring of all aircraft flying in the interior of the United States."

So, their "excuse" is that NORAD didn't monitor the airspace within the United States at the time of 9/11.

Ok, that makes sense to me. The reason there was no military response on 9/11 was because there was absolutely no one monitoring the skies over America.

Reason being, planes that fly over the continental United States never have any technical problems. They never fly off course. They have transponders that never fail, and so on.

That makes perfect sense.Not to mention the fact that if there ever was a massive air assault on the US - let's say 1,000 Chinese, Russian, and North Korean fighters and bombers - there wouldn't be any need for air defenses inside CONUS (Continental US).

That makes sense too. They never thought of that possibility.

And if it was an ICBM attack, why would NORAD care where the inbounds were headed? These conspiracy theorists are going waaaay overboard with their mass hysteria. I mean, our military is good, but nobody ever said they were that good.

And besides, just because the FAA monitors every inch of North American Airspace, why would anyone think NORAD might do the same thing? Really, why would NORAD have an interest in monitoring our airspace? There only task is national security.

[PhilosophyGenius]

Has there been any type of verification about what was found at the scene of the Petagon? Things such as the flight recorder, passengers bodies, ect...

[mikej]

helloi'm tryin gto work out why people tie 911 to the iraq war so closely. I don't see the supposed war on terror being linked to US foreign policy Iraq, Iran etc. they'd have same intentions for these countries anyway, 911 may be referenced as one reason but its not presented is the new driving force behind US foreign policy is it?
so what am i missing?
cheers
[from uk]

[AuGmENTor]

Hello mikej, welcome to the board. The people who tie 911 to the Iraq war are people who watch the mainstream news for their information. President Bush recently gave a speech where he made a refrence to 911 in the same sentence as Iraq. A repoter called him on it, and asked, "what does 911 have to do with Iraq?" There was a long pause, after which GW said, "Nothing" and moved right on to the next topic, without acknowleging the statement he had just made. No one finds it odd that be basically publicly ADMITS that 911 has nothing to do with Iraq. Suff these posts and you will find that speech, as well as about a million other things that will show you just how fulla shit these people are.

[Gold9472]

helloi'm tryin gto work out why people tie 911 to the iraq war so closely. I don't see the supposed war on terror being linked to US foreign policy Iraq, Iran etc. they'd have same intentions for these countries anyway, 911 may be referenced as one reason but its not presented is the new driving force behind US foreign policy is it?
so what am i missing?
cheers
[from uk]

Bush says 9/11 drives US policy

http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5059713

(Gold9472: Then I can't think of any reason why we shouldn't re-investigate 9/11. U.S. Policy is destabilizing the planet.)

(Vienna, Austria-AP) June 21, 2006 - President Bush says Europeans who blast US foreign policy should put themselves in America's shoes.

He took questions in Austria Wednesday about the unpopular Iraq war, confrontation with Iran, North Korea and the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba.

A reporter asked about a poll from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press that found Europeans see the US involvement in Iraq as more of a danger than Iran's nuclear program. Bush dismissed that idea as "absurd," saying the US is an open democracy and a threat to no one.

Bush says 9/11 changed America. He says European critics of the US might see the attacks as a "moment," but that he feels the attacks required a fundamental change in US foreign policy.

[Apollyon]

In one NIST report it claims:

Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius

However their own reports suggest that steel from the impact zone could not have been above 250C (400C at central core). [http://wtc.nist.gov/media/P3MechanicalandMetAnalysisofSteel.pdf]



Why can't experts in the same company even decide on the truth?



The strength of steel at 1100C is 10% of room temperature and at 250C it is over 90% of its original strength.



They also claim in the same document (Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster) that thermite can't heat steel to 700C whereas a short jaunt over to wikipedia reveals that it can reach temperatures of 2519C in seconds.



Just who do they think they are? What is going on? Who are we supposed to trust? Why aren’t we allowed to swear in these forums? I have been struggling with this all night and I have reached the end of my tether. The whole sordid affair is beginning to tick me off. These guys are supposed to be the top 200 structural engineers in there field. They have had years to come up with a plausible story. Millions have been spent, thousands of pages produced. Why can’t they give me a straight yes or no.



I guess my question is: is it conceivable, in a month of Sundays, each falling on a blue moon; that the impact, coupled with the fire, could have brought down both towers in the way we saw?



*exhausted and slightly out of breath* cheers.

[bgiltner]

Mark R. V. Southern

Does anyone know the circumstances around his death?
http://bgtruth.blogspot.com/2006/04/strange-death-of-mark-southern.html

Looks like he had the Middle East language knowledge that the bin Laden videos and other propaganda was fraud.

[Casey]

I truly believe that 9/11 had to have been an inside job, because it just doesn't add up....no way. Yet people in this country for the most part, seem to believe it DID happen just as our government said it did. And if you try to speak to most people about the absurdity of it all, people think you're nuts. But oh well, I'd rather know the truth...

I have tons of questions but a few of them are:

Why does al Queda and/or the Saudis allow us to blame them for 9/11?
What happened to all the people on the planes?
If Barbara Olsen did not call her husband from the plane, why would Ted Olsen lie about that? Was he involved?
What about all the other alleged calls home? Were they fake?
Are the news channels involved in this coverup?
What would happen if a huge majority of people in our country began to openly criticize our government for lying about 9/11? What would our government do?

And that's just some of my questions.

Thank you in advance.

Keep up the good fight.