9/11 Conspiracy Theory Non-existent

[Ricardo]

The Conspiracy Theory about the 9/11 terrorist attacks is preposterous. It so happens that on Friday 7th of September, 2001, five days before the attacks, I was changing stations on my car radio and I happened to tune in a station where there was a man being interviewed. The information this person gave to the interviewer given by radical Muslims that have a Mosque here.

The interview went like this:

Interviewer: Sir, what are your plans for the immediate future?

The Man: There are many. The first is to continue protesting at the Federal Court Building.

Interviewer: And the others?

The Man: Like I said before, there are many. We will also protest at the Military Base. And we are forming a group to help us distribute leaflets concerning our ideals.

Interviewer: But, you said that you have many plans. Do you have a specific plan?

The Man: If it is a "Main Plan" you want me to tell you about, I am not going to tell you about it.

Interviewer: But, sir, I want to know something specific about your plans, Because there are protests every day. Protests are an everyday thing!

The Man: If it is about our strategy you want me to talk about, I will not tell you anything. A strategy is something that should be secret.

Interviewer: Sir, I insist! You know me, when I insist, I insist! I know you don't want to tell me what your strategy is, but can you give me a hint? At least a little hint?

The Man: If I gave you a hint, you will probably want to know more, so I won't tell you!

Interviewer: Just give me a small hint.

The Man: No, I won't

Interviewer: Sir, the people out there want to know more about your future plans! Give me a hint! Just a hint! I promise that I will not ask for more!

The Man: OK, so you want a hint? The only thing I can tell you is that we are going to HIT THEM HARD...REAL HARD...and WHERE IT HURTS MOST...IN THEIR OWN TERRITORY! On Monday (Sept. 10, 2001) I am leaving for New York and from there I will be visiting Latin America.

PD: Five days after this interview, the U.S. was HIT HARD, REAL HARD and in THEIR OWN TERRITORY! It seems that the interviewer also knew about the attacks when he insisted on the hint. The person interviewed has ties to Islamic Nations, so he was probably notified of this attack. The person interviewed did not return here until 4 months after the attacks. This interview has convinced me that the conspiracy theory does not exist.

***This information can be verified at WKAQ 580 San Juan, Puerto Rico Radio Station which was recorded on 9/07/01 at around 11:00 To 12:00 noon and the Interviewers name is Ruben Sanchez.

[Back2reality]

We have to just look at the basic facts here.

FACT: President Bush and his neo cons have an official plan called "The Project for the New American Century."
http://www.newamericancentury.org/

The PNAC has been the subject of considerable criticism and controversy, both among members of the left and right. Critics dispute the premise that American "world leadership" is desirable for the world or even for the United States itself. The PNAC's harshest critics claim it represents a disturbing step towards total world subjugation by America, motivated by an imperial and globalist agenda of global US military expansionism and dominance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

A line frequently quoted by critics from Rebuilding America's Defenses famously refers to the possibility of a "catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor (PDF)".[8] This quote appears in Chapter V, entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", which discusses the perceived need for the Department of Defense to "move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts”.[9] The full quote is as follows: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor." Some have used this quote as evidence for their belief the US government was complicit in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. See the article 9/11 conspiracy theories for further information on this topic. Many critics also claim the PNAC believed this "new Pearl Harbor" would justify war on Iraq.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

FACT: 9/11 Provided the excuse needed to go to war with Iraq (even though Iraq had nothing to do with it).

FACT: Five Israelis were seen filming as jet liners ploughed into the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001
http://ww1.sundayherald.com/37707

Their discovery and arrest that morning is a matter of indisputable fact. To those who have investigated just what the Israelis were up to that day, the case raises one dreadful possibility: that Israeli intelligence had been shadowing the al-Qaeda hijackers as they moved from the Middle East through Europe and into America where they trained as pilots and prepared to suicide-bomb the symbolic heart of the United States. And the motive? To bind America in blood and mutual suffering to the Israeli cause.

After the attacks on New York and Washington, the former Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was asked what the terrorist strikes would mean for US-Israeli relations. He said: “It’s very good.” Then he corrected himself, adding: “Well, it’s not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy [for Israel from Americans].”

FACT: 9/11 did not help Islam but it did help the Israelis.

Do we all agree that Pearl Harbour was known about in advance by American Intelligence - and that they permitted the attack in order to have an excuse to get involved with WWII? My copy of the Colins Encyclopaedia says this.

So there is a track record of this (there have been other such apparantly facilitated/allowed attacks: the Bay of Tonkin => Vietnam and the sinking of the Lusitania => involvement in WWI).

There may well be another mega terrorist outrage on the cards to justify war with Iran any time soon. Nukes being detonated in the US is a popular scenario.

All the details about how the twin towers collapsed and whether the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile or not are quite irrelevant really. The facts show that there was a clear motive to at least ALLOW some Islamic patsies to do 9/11 even if the whole thing wasn't devised from beginning to end by Mossad and the Israelis' American friends in the highest places.
Always ask "Qui bono?" = "Who benefits?" and follow the logic of that.

See this Fox News report - it is amazing.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7545.htm

[abaddon]

I count 3 central core columms cut at the base in this photo tell me what u see ????
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/peterholmes7/9-11_thermite1.jpg


this video alone proves 100% bush lied and was in on it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-dcIPR-D4Y

he claims to see the first plane hit on tv but the naudet footage was not seen by anyone till 24 hours after the attack.

fireman says "theres a bomb in the building , start clearing out"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4574366633014832928

police report bombs and a possible van bomb in the towers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvc9C96EyyE

listen to one of the bombs
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5182535448932065917

911 eyewitness listen to 9 bombs going off
part 1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4563604978641682920

part 2
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=65460757734339444

part 3
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1499087335913993078

Auxiliary Lieutenant Fireman and former Auxiliary Police Officer, Paul Isaac Jr.Paul, along with many other firemen, is very upset about the obvious cover-up and he is on a crusade for answers and justice. He was stationed at Engine 10, across the street from the World Trade centre in 1998 and 99; Engine 10 was entirely wiped out in the destruction of the towers. He explained to me that, “many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings, but they’re afraid for their jobs to admit it because the ‘higher-ups’ forbid discussion of this fact.” Paul further elaborated that former CIA director Robert Woolsey, as the Fire Department’s Anti-terrorism Consultant, is sending a gag order down the ranks. “There were definitely bombs in those buildings,” he told me. He explained to me that, if the building had ‘pancaked’ as it’s been called, the falling floors would have met great resistance from the steel support columns, which would have sent debris flying outward into the surrounding blocks. I asked him about the trusses, and quoted the history channel’s ‘don’t trust a truss’ explanation for the collapses. He responded in disbelief, and told me, “You could never build a truss building that high. A slight wind would knock it over! Those buildings were supported by reinforced steel. Building don’t just implode like that; this was a demolition.”

Just after the disaster, Firefighter Louie Cacchioli said, “We think there were bombs set in the building.” Notice he said ‘we’. At 9:04, just after flight 175 collided with the South Tower, a huge explosion shot 550 feet into the air from the U.S. Customs House known as WTC 6. A huge crater scars the ground where this building once stood. Something blew up WTC 6 - it wasn’t a plane; it must have been a bomb of some sort.

full story http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_lavello_050503_bombs.html

[Spades]

Are you guys joking? Look at the basic facts eh. Those are not facts, those are stretchs of the truth. Your biases "neo-cons" seem to be clouding your judgment. Just because you Label something a basic fact doesnt automatically make it a fact.

saying 9/11 provide an excuse to go to war is a deceptive wording intended to draw the reader into thinking that it was only an excuse. If you said something like reason to go to war you would have a better chance of calling that a fact. Do not stretch the truth.

Your statements really are exaggerations, and when you start to exaggerate everything then I guess i can see how you would make yourself believe this.

Abaddon, i've seen a 9/11 consipracy movie already and its a bunch of horse manure. I'll show you later of why its horse manure.

Where are you getting these facts of bombs in a building.

[abaddon]

this video alone proves 100% bush lied and was in on it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-dcIPR-D4Y

he claims to see the first plane hit on tv but the naudet footage was not seen by anyone till 24 hours after the attack.

Spades give me a credible reason for this lie and tell me why wtc7 fell when it wasn't hit ????
why would a conspiracy movie interest me you should watch 911eyewitness the clues in the title !!!! EYEWITNESS

[Spades]

this video alone proves 100% bush lied and was in on it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-dcIPR-D4Y


Dude, wow and you think this proves bush lied? My dad saw the Second plane hit the tower on tv. HE SAW IT. Bush never mentioned what plane he saw, only that he saw a plane hit the tower. Your argument is invalid, period, insufficient evidence.


he claims to see the first plane hit on tv but the naudet footage was not seen by anyone till 24 hours after the attack.

I watch the video 4 times. No where does it say first plane. NO WHERE. HE SAID A plane. Misquoting people gets you into trouble like this. TRY AGAIN.


Spades give me a credible reason for this lie and tell me why wtc7 fell when it wasn't hit ????
why would a conspiracy movie interest me you should watch 911eyewitness the clues in the title !!!! EYEWITNESS

LOL, wtc7 is in between the two trade centers. Get a demolition report or something to find out why it fell if your so curious. It isn't so far fetched if you think about it.

Last statement, what are you talkinga bout? Where is the eyewitness story, how much credibility do they have. How much expertise do they really have of what they are talking about. How close was this eyewitness. Did they actually witness this or was it someone who came after the initial impact. What exactly are you refering to here.

[abaddon]

Dude, wow and you think this proves bush lied? My dad saw the Second plane hit the tower on tv. HE SAW IT. Bush never mentioned what plane he saw, only that he saw a plane hit the tower. Your argument is invalid, period, insufficient evidence.


were talking about the first plane of which there was no footage.


Quote"I watch the video 4 times. No where does it say first plane. NO WHERE. HE SAID A plane. Misquoting people gets you into trouble like this. TRY AGAIN."

NO YOU TRY AGAIN , when Bush is in the classroom the secret service guy comes and and tells Bush about the second plane , in this video he says before he went in the classroom , so we do know what plane he is speaking about. check it out for yourself !!!!!



when it's fireman and police giving the statements and they were there when it happened , I think there statements are a lot more credible than yours . Don't you ????


as for wtc7 i checked out the official report for its collapse and according to FEMA , they don't know ...


911 truth has come a long way since 2001 I suggest you look into what is going on .. http://patriotsquestion911.com

I posted the links to 911 eyewitness in a previous post when u have watched it tell me what the 9 BOMBS going off are ??? I think there BOMBS !!!!

[Spades]

were talking about the first plane of which there was no footage.

NO YOU TRY AGAIN , when Bush is in the classroom the secret service guy comes and and tells Bush about the second plane , in this video he says before he went in the classroom , so we do know what plane he is speaking about. check it out for yourself !!!!!


I dont know what you are talking about, but he states A plane. So I am not seeing how this video proves anything. He says A plane. You somehow get some weird facts that arent showed in this video :confused:

Where is the secret service people telling him these claims you stated. Where does he say first plane. Honestly, where are you getting these claims because i can tell you where your not getting them from, and its the movie.

when it's fireman and police giving the statements and they were there when it happened , I think there statements are a lot more credible than yours . Don't you ????


as for wtc7 i checked out the official report for its collapse and according to FEMA , they don't know ...


www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4

it states actually facts, gives witness of firefighters who confer with my argument and how each structure fell. Wtc is on page 5 if you are interested.

Your quotes aren't exactly good or reliable at all. Your article is of politicians who can think what they want. I provide a factual study on what you say. (Look at the article and it shows what happened).


911 truth has come a long way since 2001 I suggest you look into what is going on .. http://patriotsquestion911.com

I posted the links to 911 eyewitness in a previous post when u have watched it tell me what the 9 BOMBS going off are ??? I think there BOMBS !!!!

The witness's were in the moment and didnt know what was going on during the time. They were in the moment. Your making alot of quantam leaps. For instance in criminal trials there have been studies done about the reliability of evidence. These studies have shown that very often the least reliable evidence is eye witness evidence. This is because eyewitness's are subject to bad memory, contamination by talking to other witness and their influence of what they say, and on and on and on.

Ask any building demolition expert that uses explosives to bring down buildings, or better yet watch the many shows that use demolition ex: discovery channel. They try to get the building to fall straight down, it takes multiple explosives to pulverize each story from the bottom up, sequencially in order to get the building to drop relatively straight down. This takes them, depending on the size of the building, weeks to wire all the explosives. But now your quoting that these guys dropped 3 buildings in a relatively straight fall. I don't think so skipper. You would have noticed the guys wireing all the explosives for the two weeks before the incidence. You would have noticed all that detonation cord being strung althroughout the building between explosive bundles would have been a dead give away. Specially since they'd have to factor in the planes into their equation.

Also, 9 bombs would not have been nearly enough. Take the previous were a vehicle was loaded with a big bomb in the underground parking garage under the Wtc. It didnt make the Wtc fall either.

[nerv14]

The 911 conspiracy seems like complete bullshit but the only thing that freaks me out about it is that there was barely any plane parts in the pentagon after the attack. The parts couldn't have melted, so where are they?