What Destroyed The World Trade Centers?

[notepad]

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Notepad, you're so far detached from reality that I doubt that even you believe what you write.

If somebody has committed a crime, then act on it. Go get an indictment. There are plenty of Democrats in office. Get a damn indictment, or shut up.

Many have attempted to procure indictments ...still others continue to bring charges against the corrupt Bush crime family, the guilty within our government.

Unfortunately, it's difficult to bring charges against the perps, or get a court that will even hear a case ...much less a judge who's willing to dispense justice to those who are inclined to murder him or his family for doing so.

Stow your doubts ...I believe wholeheartedly in what I write ...although as in your case, the words do sometimes fall upon deaf ears.





# # #

[Jazzee]

Notepad - I don't think you're playing with a full deck - if you think the CIA did the 911 attacks, how many hundreds of agents do you think were involved?

[notepad]

Originally Posted by Jazzee

Notepad - I don't think you're playing with a full deck - if you think the CIA did the 911 attacks, how many hundreds of agents do you think were involved?

Is that some sort of "trick" question designed to somehow discredit me personally? ...along with your remark alluding to my mental stability, I think you should consider that there are literally MILLIONS of other people who ALSO know the US gov is complicit in these crimes.

...can you maintain that the whole world has gone mad? ...and only you (and John) have been granted immunity from this pervasive illness?




# # #

[John Scott]

Notepad, you seriously think that more than a few people believe that the CIA coordinated the 9/11 attacks?

And, why not answer the question? It had to be at least a couple thousand CIA agents to pull it off, right?

[notepad]

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Notepad, you seriously think that more than a few people believe that the CIA coordinated the 9/11 attacks?

And, why not answer the question? It had to be at least a couple thousand CIA agents to pull it off, right?

John, although you invite me to contemplate the 911 issue, at the same time, even after I post 23+ pages of information on the subject ...rather than take seriously the overwhelming evidence at hand, you instead choose to attack me personally.

...and viciously oppose anything resembling truth or fact.

While I appreciate you allowing forum space to discuss what really destroyed the World Trade Centers, I do not intend to play silly games with you ...or answer ridiculous questions designed only to somehow find fault with me, or to dissuade others from discovering the truth about 911.

Regardless of what you may think or say to others, I do strive to present a case based on science, testimony and fact.






# # #

[South]

Originally Posted by notepad

...can you maintain that the whole world has gone mad?
# # #

The whole world? C'mon.

Open history and pull most any given tragedy of recent times and you've got a small fringe of people who scream government conspiricy (and some who blame them for hairclogs in public restrooms & think they're bugging thier homes). It would have been unrealistic to think something as massive as 911 would go un-noticed by this crowd.

While reading such ideas, which range from the creative to the ridiculous, is entertaining, the idea that there's mass support behind them is as unrealistic as the possibilties presented by the theorists.

I'm not saying you don't truly believe what you're saying, but you're kidding yourself if you honestly think that more than a miniscule percentage of the population is like-minded. Not because they're uneducated, not because they're mislead, not because they don't have your advanced insight, but because the facts as they are tell them a different, more realistic story.

[Atom]

Originally Posted by southnow

I'm not saying you don't truly believe what you're saying, but you're kidding yourself if you honestly think that more than a miniscule percentage of the population is like-minded. Not because they're uneducated, not because they're mislead, not because they don't have your advanced insight, but because the facts as they are tell them a different, more realistic story.

Sounds fair enough. BTW, why do you figure Bush just sat there for thirty minutes in that classroom after being informed of the attack? Don't feel obliged to answer if you don't want, I'm really just curious of what people's opinions are on that.

[littleFella]

Originally Posted by Atom

Sounds fair enough. BTW, why do you figure Bush just sat there for thirty minutes in that classroom after being informed of the attack? Don't feel obliged to answer if you don't want, I'm really just curious of what people's opinions are on that.

I would tend to agree with what southnow and JohnScott wrote about the difficulties in pulling 9/11 off by CIA. Way to many mouths to talk. In a way, it could be possible, by splitting the job into hundreds, or even thousands of little jobs, which in themselves would not raise any suspicion or red flags. Still, the job would be really huge.

But I would gladly subscribe to the idea that CIA and Bush knew of the impending attacks and decided to do nothing, because 9/11 was a perfect fit for their plans to spread "democracy".

[notepad]

Originally Posted by southnow

The whole world? C'mon.

Open history and pull most any given tragedy of recent times and you've got a small fringe of people who scream government conspiricy (and some who blame them for hairclogs in public restrooms & think they're bugging thier homes). It would have been unrealistic to think something as massive as 911 would go un-noticed by this crowd.

While reading such ideas, which range from the creative to the ridiculous, is entertaining, the idea that there's mass support behind them is as unrealistic as the possibilties presented by the theorists.

I'm not saying you don't truly believe what you're saying, but you're kidding yourself if you honestly think that more than a miniscule percentage of the population is like-minded. Not because they're uneducated, not because they're mislead, not because they don't have your advanced insight, but because the facts as they are tell them a different, more realistic story.

If nitpicking my language and trying to minimize the relevancy of 911 will make you feel more secure and in control, then by all means do so.

However, we are not talking about hair balls and bugs here ...in case you haven't been keeping up on current events, look again.

...something as massive as 911 has not gone unnoticed by thinking people.

I agree with you that acknowledging government complicity in 911 has not reached mass saturation, or acceptance ...this is mainly due to a complacent media under strict CIA control.

...and I agree further that the "facts" as they are presented on TV, in magazines, newspapers and popular radio, only mislead and distract from the truth.

...without all the information on 911 readily available and accessible, the public is effectively disabled and ill equipped to make logical, informed choices and decisions.

...that's what is truly sad.







# # #

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by southnow

The whole world? C'mon.

Open history and pull most any given tragedy of recent times and you've got a small fringe of people who scream government conspiricy (and some who blame them for hairclogs in public restrooms & think they're bugging thier homes). It would have been unrealistic to think something as massive as 911 would go un-noticed by this crowd.

While reading such ideas, which range from the creative to the ridiculous, is entertaining, the idea that there's mass support behind them is as unrealistic as the possibilties presented by the theorists.

I'm not saying you don't truly believe what you're saying, but you're kidding yourself if you honestly think that more than a miniscule percentage of the population is like-minded. Not because they're uneducated, not because they're mislead, not because they don't have your advanced insight, but because the facts as they are tell them a different, more realistic story.

THANK YOU!

[notepad]

Originally Posted by littleFella

I would tend to agree with what southnow and JohnScott wrote about the difficulties in pulling 9/11 off by CIA. Way to many mouths to talk. In a way, it could be possible, by splitting the job into hundreds, or even thousands of little jobs, which in themselves would not raise any suspicion or red flags. Still, the job would be really huge.

But I would gladly subscribe to the idea that CIA and Bush knew of the impending attacks and decided to do nothing, because 9/11 was a perfect fit for their plans to spread "democracy".

...hmmm, let me see if I understand you.

...although 911, an operation so complex, so involved and so technically difficult to pull off that it seems practically impossible even for the CIA and all its resources to accomplish, you tend to believe (according to "official" sources) that a small group of Arabs with very limited resources could do the impossible.

...that doesn't sound like a good deduction to me ...more like a conclusion based on lack of pertinent information.





# # #

[South]

Originally Posted by Atom

Sounds fair enough. BTW, why do you figure Bush just sat there for thirty minutes in that classroom after being informed of the attack? Don't feel obliged to answer if you don't want, I'm really just curious of what people's opinions are on that.

It would be hard to say why he reacted the way he did without knowing all the facts. The one thing I've noticed from watching the film from the now famous "goat story" was the amount of time the agent spent speaking to the president. He whispered only briefly in his ear. I would like to know exactly what was said before determining what I think he should have done.

I was on the air doing a morning radio show the day of the attack. When the attacks happened there was a lot of confusion as to what was really happening and what we should be reporting. At first it seemed to just be a terrible accident. When the second plane hit it was clear something more was happening but we weren't sure exactly what it was or who was doing it yet.

If the brief were something to the effect of, "A plane has struck the World Trade Center, more information is coming in", and there couldn't have been much more given the time period, I would have done just what he did, sit and let the kids finish the story rather than jump up like Rambo and storm out scaring everyone. He seemed to me to stay calm and gather the information as it was fed to him.

Perhaps he did wait too long, again I don't know the content of the agents comments.

[South]

Originally Posted by notepad

If nitpicking my language and trying to minimize the relevancy of 911 will make you feel more secure and in control, then by all means do so.

If you don't want your language "nitpicked" then don't dramatize your posts with statements like "can you maintain that the whole world has gone mad". That's you implying that "the whole world" share's your view save the ignorant few of us who just don't get it. You've now acknowledged yourself that you know that's not true.

I'm not minimizing the relevency of 911. The events relevency isn't dictated by support of your theories.

Originally Posted by notepad

I agree with you that acknowledging government complicity in 911 has not reached mass saturation, or acceptance ...this is mainly due to a complacent media under strict CIA control.

That's what I mean. Any flaw in your theories comes with the same answer, "they're being controlled by the government!!!!!" It's just not credible.

Look, we can't even stack up some naked prisoners at a machine gun guarded prison camp under government military control during heated wartime without the cat getting out of the bag and on the national and international newscasts. What you suggest is ludacris.

[littleFella]

Originally Posted by notepad

...hmmm, let me see if I understand you.

...although 911, an operation so complex, so involved and so technically difficult to pull off that it seems practically impossible even for the CIA and all its resources to accomplish, you tend to believe (according to "official" sources) that a small group of Arabs with very limited resources could do the impossible.

...that doesn't sound like a good deduction to me ...more like a conclusion based on lack of pertinent information.

# # #

Either I didn't express myself precisely, or you misunderstood what I wrote.
The difficulty in pulling it off by CIA would not be in the technicalities of the operation, but in that they would have way too many people who could spill the beans. Unless, of course, you are suggesting that Wolfowitz and Bush personally installed explosives in WTC.

[notepad]

Originally Posted by southnow

I would have done just what he did, sit and let the kids finish the story rather than jump up like Rambo and storm out scaring everyone. He seemed to me to stay calm and gather the information as it was fed to him.

Perhaps he did wait too long, again I don't know the content of the agents comments.

There is much information that suggests Bush knew long in advance of 911 that the planes & demolitions were to happen on that day.

As for the supreme commander of all US forces, do you really think the Secret Service would only evacuate the "president" to a safe place if it didn't involve upsetting small children?

C'mon!

...besides, if the 911 attacks had actually been "terrorists", a real possibility existed that could have included the "president" as a target ...thus further endangering the school children.


...and all for a photo op ...what a guy, what a hero.




# # #

[Atom]

Originally Posted by southnow

At first it seemed to just be a terrible accident.

Ahh, ok. Maybe The President "just" thought the same.

Well, thanks for your answer, South .. I know it's a tough question. There are however, much tougher ones that have gone unaddressed, not to even mention unanswered, but I won't bother you or anyone here with them. But there is a very good reason for this, and I believe that this is simply because he is not forced to answer them (yet?). If that day ever comes, I've a feeling the levee is really going to brake bigtime.