9/11 Conspiracies(threads merged)

[heavycola]

the Marvin Bush link

I agree that he didn't own the company. Did you read my qoute? His actual involvement with the tower's security is SEALED. Thank you for teaching me that though.

He was on the board of a company that did some security installation work in the 1990s. I linked to Stratesec's SEC filing. That was his 'involvement'. it's not sealed, it's there on the internet.

the 'sniffer dogs were stood down' myth

Thanks, I forgot about that one. I was right, they had pulled dogs. Here, I'll give you another good link you can use against me.
http://screwloosechange.xbehome.com/ind ... ded&start=

You link me to a site that says not only that sniffer dogs were in the building on 9/11, but that their presence had recently been increased because of phoned-in bomb threats? And still they found none of the (25 storyeys = 300lbs, so 110 storeys = )12,000 lbs of explosive that had been gradually installed over months previously?
I hope your shot foot gets better soon.

- the 'planes aren't allowed over the pentagon' myth

I never said that Daddy-O, nice work anyway.

thanks.

Good, I do. Now start with my giant list of ignored stuff.

Why? We need to do this on agreed terms. One at a time. The scattergun approach is pointless. We need to take one issue, reach a consensus, then move onto another.

So - let's take dick cheney lying about his whereabouts.
What are your claims, and what is the primary source evidence? and more to the point, what does it have to do with the biggest and most successful conspiracy in history?

[suggs]

I got a youtube video showing that Cheney was in bed with YOUR MUM.

[Juan_Bottom]

He was on the board of a company that did some security installation work. I linked to Stratesec's SEC filing. That was his involvement.

Yes, but what he did there, involving the towers, is sealed. No one really seems to know... I'm not saying that he was involved, only that the records are sealed.

You link me to a site that says not only that sniffer dogs were in th ebuilding, but that their presence had recently been increased because of phoned in bomb threats? And still they found none of the (25 storyeys = 300lbs, so 110 storeys = )12,000 lbs of explosive that had been gradually installed over months previously?

Yep. I said that the dogs had been pulled. You said that that wasn't true. That site, says that we are both right.

So - let's take dick cheney lying about his whereabouts.
What are your claims, and what is the primary source evidence?

The source is testimony from the Secretary of the Department of Transportation. I posted the first two links that popped into my browser in that big giant list of ignored stuff. His testimony never actually made it into the Commission Report.

The claim is taht not only did Cheny lie about where he was, he actually may have literally had his finger on the button. I believe Jay even qouted him a few pages back... "does the order still stand?"

Control of NORAD's take down order had been transferred to Cheny, and Bush only, a few weeks before 911.

[heavycola]

He was on the board of a company that did some security installation work. I linked to Stratesec's SEC filing. That was his involvement.

Yes, but what he did there, involving the towers, is sealed. No one really seems to know... I'm not saying that he was involved, only that the records are sealed.

What do you mean 'what he did there'? 'he' did nothing there!
A company on whose board he sat was one installation contarctor among many employed after the 1993 bombing.
A little primer on company governance:
A board plots the strategy for its company. There are usually 10-15 members, each with an equal vote. Marvin Bush was not chair, nor did he have an executive role. He sat on the board. That's all. He had no more, or less, say in what the company did than his fellow board members. OK?

You link me to a site that says not only that sniffer dogs were in th ebuilding, but that their presence had recently been increased because of phoned in bomb threats? And still they found none of the (25 storyeys = 300lbs, so 110 storeys = )12,000 lbs of explosive that had been gradually installed over months previously?

Yep. I said that the dogs had been pulled. You said that that wasn't true. That site, says that we are both right.

oh sorry - so you meant that 'some' dogs had been pulled? because you seemed to be implying that explosive-sniffing dogs had been removed so that explosives could be planted. Is that not what you meant?

So - let's take dick cheney lying about his whereabouts.
What are your claims, and what is the primary source evidence?

The source is testimony from the Secretary of the Department of Transportation. I posted the first two links that popped into my browser in that big giant list of ignored stuff. His testimony never actually made it into the Commission Report.

The claim is taht not only did Cheny lie about where he was, he actually may have literally had his finger on the button. I believe Jay even qouted him a few pages back... "does the order still stand?"

Control of NORAD's take down order had been transferred to Cheny, and Bush only, a few weeks before 911.

[/quote]

Fine - some links to primary evidence and we're off...

[Juan_Bottom]

oh sorry - so you meant that 'some' dogs had been pulled? because you seemed to be implying that explosive-sniffing dogs had been removed so that explosives could be planted. Is that not what you meant?

That is what I ment. Then you pasted the site and said that no dogs where pulled. Remember now?

I believe this is what I was talking about. But seriously, you've never heard of this before????

Missed you here.
"A gang of Arabs beat NORAD three times in one day, including an attack on the pentagon (the most highly protected airspace on the planet) using boxcutters?
Just after control of take down order is transferred to the President/Vice president only?
http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/260607_mineta.html
http://aolsearcht3.search.aol.com/aol/s ... ery=google
The Secretary of Transportation testified that not only did Cheny lie about where he was on the morning of 9-11, but that he may have actually, literaly, had his finger on the button.
His testimony was removed from the commission report.
The Commission report is full of contradictions/omissions.

Listen closely to Colonel Robert Marr, commander at NEADS on the morning of 9/11, confirm that they knew about, tracked, and sought to intercept and shoot down United Airlines Flight 93 BEFORE IT CRASHED.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Vx6fAK3HUAo
They never even sent up a jet. And yes, take down would have been the order given."

[jay_a2j]

Heavy is one of those 'drunk on the kool-aid' that will never ever be swayed.






mod edited
i will leave it, for now,but back on topic

[Juan_Bottom]

Heavy is one of those 'drunk on the kool-aid' that will never ever be swayed.

It's not about that... It's about getting him to actually look at things a little differently. It seems he, and indeed CC, is used to argueing this a different way than I am presenting it.

I see that quote I was talking about is under you though....

[Pedronicus]

I'm still waiting for an answer

HC - answer me a question regarding 9/11.

What was the advantage of all security footage of the Pentagon impact, being removed from public view?
As far as I see it, the CIA have fueled these 9/11 conspiracy theories.

WHY?

[jay_a2j]

<mod edit>

This is insane. You have got to be kidding me! I can't stand this crap anymore. Clapper the nazi mod, strikes again! There comes a time when calling someone a "kool aid drinker" and it gets mod edited, that it is no longer worth coming to this site. Lack, good luck in finding good help because what you got now (with Clapper at least) is a power drunken,<self edit>. In case dear Clapper deletes this before Lack sees it, I am going to send it to him as well.

Look through the threads Lack, see how Clapper for some reason edits my posts, yet ignores those who flame me in far worse ways. I suggest you hurry before she goes on a deleting campaign to cover her arse.


This site officially sucks.

[Juan_Bottom]

<mod edit>

This is insane. You have got to be kidding me! I can't stand this crap anymore. Clapper the nazi mod, strikes again! There comes a time when calling someone a "kool aid drinker" and it gets mod edited, that it is no longer worth coming to this site. Lack, good luck in finding good help because what you got now (with Clapper at least) is a power drunken,<self edit>. In case dear Clapper deletes this before Lack sees it, I am going to send it to him as well.

Look through the threads Lack, see how Clapper for some reason edits my posts, yet ignores those who flame me in far worse ways. I suggest you hurry before she goes on a deleting campaign to cover her arse.


This site officially sucks.

At least the spot where I qouted you still exists. And yeah, I feel your frustration. My sig is prolly next?

[heavycola]

oh sorry - so you meant that 'some' dogs had been pulled? because you seemed to be implying that explosive-sniffing dogs had been removed so that explosives could be planted. Is that not what you meant?

That is what I ment. Then you pasted the site and said that no dogs where pulled. Remember now?

Let's get this straight.
You said the sniffer dogs were pulled so that explosives could be planted.
Now you say only the extra dogs employed because of phone-in threats, were pulled.
I did not know that extra dogs had been brought in for a short period - but it makes no difference to my point. Sniffer dogs were being used up to and on 9/11. You were wrong.

Missed you here.
"A gang of Arabs beat NORAD three times in one day, including an attack on the pentagon (the most highly protected airspace on the planet) using boxcutters?

I know, isn't it crazy? Isn't it mad that the largest and most successful conspiracy in the history of the universe used such an improbable and dangerous method to achieve their aims?

Just after control of take down order is transferred to the President/Vice president only?
http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/260607_mineta.html
http://aolsearcht3.search.aol.com/aol/s ... ery=google
The Secretary of Transportation testified that not only did Cheny lie about where he was on the morning of 9-11, but that he may have actually, literaly, had his finger on the button.
His testimony was removed from the commission report.
The Commission report is full of contradictions/omissions.

Just to make sure - is this about Mineta's testimony to the commission? I asked for primary source material and I've got the text from the hearings - is that what you are talking about?

[heavycola]

jay - that does suck. Clapper, accusing me of drinking a particular brand of soft beverage is not flaming, and deleting it is a ridiculously heavy handed decision. I call him a tinfoil hat wearer, he calls me a kool aid drinker. See? hardly a profanity free-for-all, is it? And how come jay gets edited?

[Juan_Bottom]

Yeppers HC.

[heavycola]

Yeppers HC.

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.

So.... where's the issue?

[Juan_Bottom]

Turn's out that ther was no shoot down order. And the planes were scrambeled out with two minutes to impact. Intercept was denied.

Cheny lied about even being there. Did you miss the other link? That's why it was stricken, Cheny wasn't there.

[heavycola]

Turn's out that ther was no shoot down order. And the planes were scrambeled out with two minutes to impact. Intercept was denied.

Cheny lied about even being there. Did you miss the other link? That's why it was stricken, Cheny wasn't there.

Your second link takes me to AOL's search page, and i'm at work so youtube is often not an option. But if you have a decent source, please post the AOL link again.

if cheney's testimony was stricken, how do you know there was no shoot-down order?

[Juan_Bottom]

Turn's out that ther was no shoot down order. And the planes were scrambeled out with two minutes to impact. Intercept was denied.

Cheny lied about even being there. Did you miss the other link? That's why it was stricken, Cheny wasn't there.

Your second link takes me to AOL's search page, and i'm at work so youtube is often not an option. But if you have a decent source, please post the AOL link again.

if cheney's testimony was stricken, how do you know there was no shoot-down order?

That's a good question. According to the report(and Cheny himself).... Cheny was in a bomb shelter under the pentagon. He was never in that room talking about "the target is 10 miles out." A few weeks before 911 the take down order was transferred from direct NORAD control, to only the President and VP. So if CHENY WAS in the bomb shelter, then we know he probably couldn't have issued the order anyway... But since we do know that he wasn't in the shelter, we assume that he was talking about shooting down a plane... NORAD was aware of the problem from the start.... but didn't scramble jets until it was too late... Which is actually against pre 911 protocall. The commission report (original) said that NORAD wasn't aware of the problem, until it actually was too late. Anyone with a TV knows that that is impossable.
What I'm getting at is that even if 911 was actually a terrorist attack, our government/military let themselves be beaten. Maybe not actually on purpose, but that they were given every opportunity to take control of the situation, and didn't.
This is doubly significant if you remember that top pentagon officials where warned not to fly on the 10th/11th, and yep, Willie Brown too.
I think this is the link you need to hear?

Listen closely to Colonel Robert Marr, commander at NEADS on the morning of 9/11, confirm that they knew about, tracked, and sought to intercept and shoot down United Airlines Flight 93 BEFORE IT CRASHED.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Vx6fAK3HUAo

[heavycola]

Turn's out that ther was no shoot down order. And the planes were scrambeled out with two minutes to impact. Intercept was denied.

Cheny lied about even being there. Did you miss the other link? That's why it was stricken, Cheny wasn't there.

Your second link takes me to AOL's search page, and i'm at work so youtube is often not an option. But if you have a decent source, please post the AOL link again.

if cheney's testimony was stricken, how do you know there was no shoot-down order?

That's a good question. According to the report(and Cheny himself).... Cheny was in a bomb shelter under the pentagon. He was never in that room talking about "the target is 10 miles out." A few weeks before 911 the take-down order was transferred from direct NORAD control, to only the President and VP. So if CHENY WAS in the bomb shelter, then we know he probably couldn't have issued the order anyway... But since we do know that he wasn't in the shelter, we assume that he was talking about shooting down a plane... NORAD was aware of the problem from the start.... but didn't scramble jets until it was too late... Which is actually against pre 911 protocall. The commission report (original) said that NORAD wasn't aware of the problem, until it actually was too late. Anyone with a TV knows that that is impossable.
What I'm getting at is that even if 911 was actually a terrorist attack, our government/military let themselves be beaten. Maybe not actually on purpose, but that they were given every opportunity to take control of the situation, and didn't.
This is doubly significant if you remember that top pentagon officials where warned not to fly on the 10th/11th, and yep, Willie Brown too.

This is all very confused of you. I'm not sure what you're on about. Cheney did order the plane to be shot down? And why are you still mentioning willie brown after i read that story and showed you why it is not evidence of anything?

Listen closely to Colonel Robert Marr, commander at NEADS on the morning of 9/11, confirm that they knew about, tracked, and sought to intercept and shoot down United Airlines Flight 93 BEFORE IT CRASHED.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Vx6fAK3HUAo

OK, i watched the video. What comes across from the History Channel documentary is that on that morning of 9/11, after planes had hit the twin towers and the pentagon, there was a msicommunication somewhere along the line. That's all.
Do you have any idea how many planes were in the air over the eastern seaboard at the time? Do you realise that the hijackers had turned off the transponders? Do have any idea how nedle-in-haystack impossible it would be to track and down a plane with no transponder in that airspace at that time?
Pilots unsure that they had authority to shhot down a commercial airliner? It';s not very far-fetched, dude.

is that the single strongest piece of evidence you could come up with in this whole thing? That testimony from various figures in authority, about what must have been the most stressful and terrifying morning of their workign lives, doesn't quite tally? Are they expected to rememebr everything to the last detail and minute?

or - just answer this - could it have been human error that led to these discrepancies?

Have you got anything stronger?

[suggs]

Yeah the thing was probably a mess up.
Case closed.

[heavycola]

Yeah the thing was probably a mess up.
Case closed.

Yo. Dunno if anyone cares, but Charlie Brooker - a funny man who writes for the Guardian - did a piece on 9/11 conspiracy theories (where he took the piss, essentially) that garnered the most comments of any online Guardian article ever. All the nutty troofers came out of the woodwork, and were scathed at. Most amusing.

It's worth a read:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... mber11.usa
Especially like the creationists parallel.

[suggs]

Oh that is so good. JAY please read that link by cola.
Every word of it true, especially the stuff about unimportant people trying to give there lives meaning.
Thanks Cola.

[jay_a2j]

Oh that is so good. JAY please read that link by cola.
Every word of it true, especially the stuff about unimportant people trying to give there lives meaning.
Thanks Cola.

No, not "every word of it is true". He said it was his "theory". And way off I might add. I do not find any "thrill" in suspecting my government has a hidden agenda. That they will stop at nothing to push a new world order. I rarely have dreams,(that I remember) so that point is moot. My life has meaning, in Christ- there is no higher meaning. Nice try, just plain wrong.

[Dancing Mustard]

And yet I still don't hear any sensible rebuttal of the "Paperwork Problem".

Plenty of blah blah blah about how much of a martyr Jay feels, how he doesn't agree with the linked article (though he once again fails to logically rebutt it) and about how he loves Sky-Daddy; but no sensible comeback to the gaping hole in his theory's side.

But don't worry guys. Even though Jay might not be able to string a coherent argument together, I'm sure he'll be able to find a couple of youtube crackpots who can't answer the question either.

[joecoolfrog]

Oh that is so good. JAY please read that link by cola.
Every word of it true, especially the stuff about unimportant people trying to give there lives meaning.
Thanks Cola.

No, not "every word of it is true". He said it was his "theory". And way off I might add. I do not find any "thrill" in suspecting my government has a hidden agenda. That they will stop at nothing to push a new world order. I rarely have dreams,(that I remember) so that point is moot. My life has meaning, in Christ- there is no higher meaning. Nice try, just plain wrong.

So just answer the main point, how is it logistically possible to create such a grand illusion ?
Incidently the fact that you clutch so strongly to the concept of an afterlife is a pretty good indication of how much meaning your real life has

[jay_a2j]

Let's see if this works (I know it won't, but humor me)

Complaint!!!! Flaming me and those on youtube ("no matter how small it is")

Even though Jay might not be able to string a coherent argument together

I'm sure he'll be able to find a couple of youtube crackpots who can't answer the question either.

How is it possible joe? To create such a grand illusion? Well, you start my accepting that its not an illusion.