Honkeys 9/11 poll

[|Bengal Migration|]

[quote name='bengalrick' post='297993' date='Jul 21 2006, 09:12 PM'][url="http://www.prisonplanet.com/pullit.mp3"]the comment in questin[/url] so your saying that there is no way in hell, that he was talking about pulling out of the operation?

alot of things happened on 9.11 that never happened before that day... its not out of the realm of possiblities, no...

i'll ask again:

you have to be more than the owner or the FD to be able to control detinate a building... also, why isn't the insurance company gonig after them? it takes a long time to plan a controlled demolition... how did they sneak all the bombs past all of them people?[/quote]
You're right. It takes a long time. BJ will likely tell you that Silverstein is in on it as a Zionist. Zionist or not (i enjoy reading BJ's posts, but it's an area that I have not studied enough to comment intelligently on), yes, I think Silverstein is part of the plot. How/when explosives were planted, I have no idea. But this to me is a helluva lot more likely than the laws of physics taking the day off, and allowing a fire to take down a steel frame building for the first time in history. Again, use your eyes and not your ears. Have you seen the Madrid fire? How on earth can you explain that one building would crumble to dust in an instant, while another could burn all night long, and be left with ITS STEEL FRAME INTACT? This makes no sense. It is not logical.

If we were to have discovered that each and every steel frame building in the US was suseptible to collapse from fire, I for one, would like to think that someone would do something about it. Perform a study, change the sprinkler system requirements, anything. Wouldn't it be in the best interests of everyone? But it hasn't happened. Perhaps that is becuase the powers that be know that fire doesn't really pose this type of threat. Have any other explanations?

All three buildings turned to dust. This has never happened before anywhere without a demolition taking place. No where. Not even at the pentagon

I use #7 specifically to make my areguement, because it wasn't hit by a plane, and didn't have plane fuel as an option, therefore it is easier for most to consider as a sign that the story is crap. I'd also argue that the jet fuel arguement is crap too, but let's just stick with #7 for now. Since there is no official explanation to fight against, it should be the easiest to consider logically. At least it was for me as I began my study into this.

[JohnnyUtah]

I really enjoy reading this board at work (helps the day go by a lot faster) and just thought I'd share this link I found a while back. I think the author ( a lecturer on civil engineering) does a pretty good job answering a lot of the questions asked about the collaspe of the wtc. Even he can't explain what happened to #7 though...any have fun with this:

[url="http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml"]http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml[/url]

[Guest BlackJesus]

[quote name='JohnnyUtah' post='298017' date='Jul 21 2006, 04:41 PM']I really enjoy reading this board at work (helps the day go by a lot faster) and just thought I'd share this link I found a while back. I think the author ( a lecturer on civil engineering) does a pretty good job answering a lot of the questions asked about the collaspe of the wtc. Even he can't explain what happened to #7 though...any have fun with this:

[url="http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml"]http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml[/url][/quote]


[b]a good site by BYU that looks at the same issues ... and comes to a different conclusion [/b]


[url="http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html"]http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html[/url]

[|Bengal Migration|]

[quote name='JohnnyUtah' post='298017' date='Jul 21 2006, 09:41 PM']I really enjoy reading this board at work (helps the day go by a lot faster) and just thought I'd share this link I found a while back. I think the author ( a lecturer on civil engineering) does a pretty good job answering a lot of the questions asked about the collaspe of the wtc. Even he can't explain what happened to #7 though...any have fun with this:

[url="http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml"]http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml[/url][/quote]
Welcome to the group!!

[JBandJoeyV]

just wondering, but would the destruction of building 7 help silverstein and the other conspirators that much? what difference does it make if just 1 and 2 fall compared to if 1,2, and 7 all fall...i mean im sure its probably a million dollars here or there in insurance, but is it that worth it to make such a controversy?

[|Bengal Migration|]

[quote name='CJandRudiJ' post='298035' date='Jul 21 2006, 09:52 PM']just wondering, but would the destruction of building 7 help silverstein and the other conspirators that much? what difference does it make if just 1 and 2 fall compared to if 1,2, and 7 all fall...i mean im sure its probably a million dollars here or there in insurance, but is it that worth it to make such a controversy?[/quote]
Some quick thoughts...

1- Insurance fraud
2- selling off the scrap metal
3- profits from building the new towers

[Guest BlackJesus]

[quote name='CJandRudiJ' post='298035' date='Jul 21 2006, 04:52 PM']just wondering, but would the destruction of building 7 help silverstein and the other conspirators that much?[/quote]




[quote][size=4][u]What Was In Building 7? [/u] [/size]

Building 7 was one of New York City's larger buildings. A sleek bronze-colored skyscraper with a trapezoidal footprint, it occupied an entire city block and rose over 600 feet above street level.

Built in 1985, it was formerly the headquarters of the junk-bond firm Drexel Burnham Lambert, which contributed to the Savings and Loans collapse, prompting the $500-billion taxpayer-underwritten bailout of the latter 1980s. At the time of its destruction, it exclusively housed government agencies and financial institutions. It contained offices of the IRS, Secret Service, and SEC.

Tenant Square Feet Floor Industry
Salomon Smith Barney 1,202,900 GRND,1-6,13,18-46 Financial Institution
IRS Regional Council 90,430 24, 25 Government
[b]U.S. Secret Service 85,343 9,10 Government [/b]
[b]C.I.A. N/A N/A Government [/b]
American Express Bank International 106,117 7,8,13 Financial Institution
Standard Chartered Bank 111,398 10,13,26,27 Financial Institution
Provident Financial Management 9,000 7,13 Financial Institution
ITT Hartford Insurance Group 122,590 19-21 [Insurance]
First State Management Group, Inc 4,000 21 Insurance
Federal Home Loan Bank 47,490 22 Financial Institution
NAIC Securities 22,500 19 Insurance
Securities & Exchange Commission 106,117 11,12,13 Government
Mayor's Office of Emergency Mgmt 45,815 23 Government

This list is based on a table published by CNN.com, which did not include CIA, whose tenancy was disclosed after the attack in the New York Times article. 1

One of the most interesting tenants was then-[b]Mayor Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management,[/b] and [b]its emergency command center on the 23rd floor.[/b] This floor received 15 million dollars worth of renovations, including independent and secure air and water supplies, and bullet and bomb resistant windows designed to withstand 200 MPH winds. 2 The 1993 bombing must have been part of the rationale for the command center, which overlooked the Twin Towers, a prime terrorist target.

[b]How curious that on the day of the attack, Guiliani and his Entourage set up shop in a different headquarters,[/b] abandoning the special bunker [b]designed precisely for such an event[/b]. 3[/quote]


[url="http://www.wtc7.net/background.html"]http://www.wtc7.net/background.html[/url]

[JBandJoeyV]

That still doesnt show me why they would wanna destroy it...or am i missing something...

[|Bengal Migration|]

[quote name='CJandRudiJ' post='298045' date='Jul 21 2006, 09:58 PM']That still doesnt show me why they would wanna destroy it...or am i missing something...[/quote]
I gave 3 quick points on this above. They are the most obvious reasons I can think of.

[|Bengal Migration|]

[quote name='BlackJesus' post='298040' date='Jul 21 2006, 09:54 PM'][url="http://www.wtc7.net/background.html"]http://www.wtc7.net/background.html[/url][/quote]
Nice post, BJ

More background/opionions on "pulling" the video here, Rick, BTW
[url="http://www.wtc7.net/pullit.html"]http://www.wtc7.net/pullit.html[/url]

[Abu-Zayd]

Each person bears the burden of their own actions and stands. Those who adhere to government versions are like the sleeping people who exist only within the matrix knowing nothing else but the fantasy concocted to keep them sleeping. They are like the unwitting storm troopers in Star Wars who somehow believe they are doing good by following the empire and rooting out the 'rebels'. I don't ever watch movies, but these two I have seen, and they were rather interesting, and seem to have some parallel to reality.

If a person is sincere, a patriot only need show that something is fishy and the sincere seeker goes out and does the leg work to discover for themselves the truth. Remember the words of Thomas Jefferson--

"When the government fears the people, you have liberty; when the people fear the government, you have tyrrany."
Which of the two do we have today??

A patriot who values liberty--freedom--keeps the plight of the people fresh on his mind. The slave falls for silly hypothetical concepts of 'patriotism' but the people are nowhere in the picture. The people ARE the nation, the concept of 'the nation' is a tool to break the bonds of allegiance to the people and to redirect loyalty to 'the nation'. What they don't understand is that 'the nation' is the elite structures, NOT THE PEOPLE.

A patriot would never say, "the government is my friend, you are my enemy", instead he would say, "oh, something is fishy, eh? Lets find out what and ensure our liberty is not taken from us by these power hungry elitists." Oops, we are waaaaaay beyond that aren't we?!

Secondly--the bias in the thinking regarding Israel/Palestine is staggering. BJ, you pointed out a quote from CJ that went something like, "Palestinians want to decimate Israel, Israel just wants to stop the attacks." My Lord! Talk about hook, line, and sinker. Talk about thinking black is white and white is black. In the mexican turroriss example, what would happen if mexicans started a mass exodus to Ohio, say Cincinnati, and say that we all did not have paper deeds of our properties (as was the case in Palestine, they did not have deeds, they just passed the land from one generation to the next). And lets say that these mexicans established 'absentee landlords' and 'purchased' our lands from under our noses and told us to get out! Then, they bribed China into enforcing this action, and decided Ohio would be THEIR homeland, because they interpret their mexican bible to say that it is. This is what happened. They told the rest of us that we would be only allowed to live on Vine street, Linn street, McHenry in Westwood, and the 'lower east end', or we were terrorists and would be jailed in places that make abu ghraib and XRay seem like a resort. Wouldn't the rest of the states call BS, and attack the Mexicans? Of coarse and that is also what happened. But in addition to China, they had been working on the Russians as well, and with the help of the powers, the Mexicans thwarted the attack of the states. Now, how long after this do the states sit down and say, "Hey, these Mexicans are here, are gonna be here, and we can't do nuttin 'bout it." Hell no. I think we would fight till we got our land back, especially if you and I had established little tent (refugee) cities to live in temporarily until we got our land back, and we had families that grew up in those refugee areas of Vine, East End, Linn, and McHenry.

What would you do?? What if they controlled the 'mass communication' medium of the time, and repeated to everyone so consistently that Ricks and the AbuZayds and the BJ's and the CJ's were nothing but terrorists who hated them cuz they were Mexicans, and that we are animals who only want death for them, and blah blah blah!!! What would you say to those people??? Would these people be correct?

Come on guys, get history straight, then talk about the present, much less the future.

AZ

[JBandJoeyV]

sorry for believing the people that know the most about the whole situation and not a few guys on a football forum that think they know everything and argue about it while they are getting hard so they can wank it again...


i guess that makes me a sleeping idiot or something...

[Guest BlackJesus]

[quote name='CJandRudiJ' post='298362' date='Jul 21 2006, 11:44 PM']sorry for believing the people that know the most about the whole situation[/quote]


[b]and who would be these guys ??? .... list some of them .... [/b]

[JBandJoeyV]

anyone in the government that has all the information...and all the info about the israelis and all those things that they dont let out...

[Guest BlackJesus]

[quote name='CJandRudiJ' post='298376' date='Jul 22 2006, 12:03 AM']anyone in the government that has all the information...[/quote]


[b] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]


are you sure you aren't a teenager ?


god help the worlds future with a majority of people like this out there [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//37.gif[/img]


you are Goebbels dream [/b]

[|Bengal Migration|]

I tend to agree most with AZ's Matrix point above. That is a vivid example of what I was trying to get at when I suggested you look at the world with your own eyes, without the imagery of the backstory in the back of your mind as you begin. Think of it this way, if the "red pill" in that movie were nothing more than a placebo, this is ultimatley what would have happened to Neo. Remember how in the film Neo doesn't need the computer screen to see the matrix around him after he learns to see it on his own? Some of us have learned to see history without the influence of media propaganda in such the same way.

CJ, I understand why this is difficult to swallow. No one wants to believe that their govt is not telling them the whole truth, or that it does not act in the best interests of its people. But I'm guessing if you live in New Orleans, you'd be much more inclined to consider this position.

We had no idea the storm could be this bad. We responded as fast as we could.
-Really? Then why the did the National Weather Service post the info days beforehand?

And of course my favorite two lines from that event, which went something like this:

-"You know, most of these people didn't really have much of anything to lose, anyway, so you know, this is really working out pretty well for them." -Barbara Bush, GWB's momma

-"Way to go, Brownie. You're doing a helluva job" -GWB

When you use Katrina as a backdrop to understand how little this govt seems to cherish the lives of Americans who "Don't have much anyway", you'll start to see the hipocracy of these supposedly xtian people.

As a patriot, ask yourself whether the deeds and actions of your government are consistent with the job it is their duty to perform. I would have to argue no, unfortunately. Surely, this is not true of every member of the govt, but unless you decide to question the govt at all, you stand no chance of determining who in office we need to get rid of, and who to keep. (and i'd argue the first list would be exponentially longer...)

But remember, ultimately, the choice to question at all is a decision that you must make on your own. And it's one the founders of the nation would have wanted you to answer. They saw how power could corrupt. This is part of why they felt the need to leave their homelands in the first place, and why they told us to be ever vigilant as the price to ensuring our freedom.

This is also one of the reasons that the Estate Tax (which GWB falsely claims is about saving family farms, which were indeed exempt from it) was originally put into place. To limit the power and influence of the wealthiest Americans, so that the needs of the masses would not be forgotten (and to encourage the wealthy to give away some of their excessive wealth to charities before their dealths, so that it could be put to immediate use instead of waiting for the inevitable death and taxes bit)

I understand that this concept of questioning the government's actions has to be infinitely more difficult for someone who's family has a military background. In a military action, the chain of command is sacred. You cannot question. You must follow order in order to ensure success.

Your contribution to freedom as an average citizen, though, is exactly the opposite of the soldier's. It is to vigilatly watch to ensure that our freedoms are not being encroached by power elites of this, or any other country. Well, BJ's "Lobby" and the Patriot Act are the two most obvious examples are how difficult this is to do. One has seemilgly convinced half of our nation that surrendering rights to the govt is a patriotic act, when NOTHING could be farther than the truth, the other is so buried into obscurity by the media reporting, that it doesn't see the light of day without extensive research. Both of these points (and the estate tax one above) are examples of how the media is used not to tell the *facts*, but rather to provide spin, with certain news networks doing a lot moe spinning that others. It surely makes it a lot harder for someone to follow along, especially when they have bills to pay, a familty to feed, etc.

My advice to you CJ, is to keep looking, keep thinking, keep asking, and most importantly, to try and keep an open mind as you do so. Sure, you might very well decide that we are all a bunch of nut cases. But I can assure you, that we hold Americas freedoms as being sacred just as much as any soldier or govt official. We just want to make sure the govt is "fighting" for the right causes, and not just providing a nice cover story through the media as the power elites take every damn thing they can get their hands on. Our role to be played in democracy as average citizens is to watch, learn, and discuss these issues to make sure that our govt continues to maintain our freedoms, rather than to usurp them for *ANY* reason.

Taking this back to 911 to keep on topic, this is why I question the official story. I started to question it when I learned that DC was finally defended in the air by planes from Norfolk VA, not Andrews AFB some 15 miles away. Having lived in the area for nearly 20 years, this smelled fishy as hell to me, so I decided to keep looking, and investigate. Now it's far from the only fishy part of the official story in my eyes, but I didn't come to that conclusion overnight. It took literally hundreds of hours, and dozens of sleepless nights of research. But with American history as a hobby, and no kids to feed, it was easy for me to do.

My point in readily sharing the info that I do, is that I understand the average person likely does't have the same amount of spare time to do as I did, so I try to make it easy for you to find the information that I have. My only wish is that you will take the red pill so to speak, and try to judge that information on its own, without the bias which comes from accepting the offical story as gospel truth. Again, I will never ask you to believe in my POV. I am not looking for followers. I truly believe that to decide what to believe is *your* duty to your nation. I'm just trying to put *all* of the facts out there so that you can make an informed decision.

(yawn... i need some coffee...)

[Homer_Rice]

[quote]Your contribution to freedom as an average citizen, though, is exactly the opposite of the soldier's. It is to vigilatly watch to ensure that our freedoms are not being encroached by power elites of this, or any other country.[/quote]

Excellent stuff. This ought to be the "First General Order of a Citizen Sentry." Meshes well with #5: To quit my post only when properly relieved (by the next generation.)

[Abu-Zayd]

It is not wise to think that you or I are incapable of thinking and arriving at valid conclusions, much less doing research for information and knowledge. The danger is that once we relinquish our decision making to 'experts', the experts can be readily produced, and then we have a rule of experts who are paid to espouse the opinions / ideas of the elitists who reward/punish them.

If you know anything about PR and spin, this is exactly how it works. The book, "Trust Us, We're Experts" by Rampton and Stauber shows you how this process takes place. Check it out, if you want to learn the underside of 'expert opinion'.

What I am insisting is that we SHOULD NOT abandon our right to make informed well thought out opinions and decisions based on intelligent and open minded fact finding and research. We SHOULD NOT defer our responsibility to THINK to 'experts', as we have done. And we are capable of independent thought. And if you realize that you are not, then perhaps you will need help, but be ever watchful of he who would advise you in order to make himself your master.

AZ

[|Bunghole|]

[quote name='fredtoast' post='297088' date='Jul 20 2006, 09:33 AM']What is there to debunk? They claimed that they heard about the attacks and went out to film it. There is no proof that this isn't the truth. I don't doubt that they were possibly Israeli spies, but that doesn't prove that they had advance knowledge of the event. The U.S. also has spies in Isreal. I would hope that they would do the same thing (except the celebrating part).

[b]My question is if Isreal was behind all of this then why did they frame Saudi Arabians? That is the one (and only) country in the middle east that the U.S. is not going to retaliate against. Why not Syrians, Lebonese, Iranians, Iraqis, or Palistenians?[/b][/quote]
Why those are some very good points, Fred!
Anyone know the answer?

[Guest bengalrick]

[i]How curious that on the day of the attack, Guiliani and his Entourage set up shop in a different headquarters, abandoning the special bunker designed precisely for such an event. 3[/i] - from bj's post above

could it be b/c two 120 foot towers fell pretty close to them, and building all acrossed the NY skyline, including [url="http://www.goarch.org/en/special/september11/stnicholas/"]saint nicholas church[/url], WTC 3, and WTC 4, WTC 6...

[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/WTC_Building_Arrangement_and_Site_Plan.jpg[/img]

there were supposidely fires in [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center"]most[/url] of the wtc buildings too... that would explain that

[Guest bengalrick]

[quote name='WhoDeyUK' post='298053' date='Jul 21 2006, 05:07 PM']Nice post, BJ

More background/opionions on "pulling" the video here, Rick, BTW
[url="http://www.wtc7.net/pullit.html"]http://www.wtc7.net/pullit.html[/url][/quote]

this link gives three reasons, and shows it's biases pretty clear:

1. the owner of the building told the FDNY fire fighters to domolish this building... it gives no reasons why this couldn't be true... as i've said, the owner of the building does NOT make this decision... and even if he did, the firefighters are NOT the people that pull the plug and demolish shit... this is done by a specialist group that focuses on controlled demolition... for this theory to be true, we have to believe that the firefighters are in on the scheme to move the drug dogs out of building 7, so they could move in the explosives, so they could destroy a bunch of files for the CIA and for rudi guliani... and not just a few firefighters, but a large amount of them, b/c they had to train to learn how to do controlled demolitions correctly, and had to get those bombs in there... in addition, the insurance companies are in on it b/c they didn't ponce on the ability to get back their extremely large sum of money that they gave him when the building fell, and instead ate it for some unknown reason... please, does any of this make sense?

2. when he said "pull it" he meant the firefighting operation... but they say that there was no firefighting operation going on... what was he talking about, when he was speaking then, when he said "[b]You know, we've had such terrible loss of life,[/b] maybe the smartest thing to do is just pull it"... are you saying that it makes no sense for the owner of the building to be talking to the FD commissioner and saying to stop the operation? but it does make sense, that these same two people are saying they should demolish the building, even though neither person has teh authority or expertise to make those decisions or do those actions? come on, this option does not add up at all... neither does the official story really, but this one is even worse...

3. the third option is that the statement was made to confuss the situation and make us all go in the wrong direction.... this reason is the closest to be true, exept he didn't imply that they were to demolish the building at all... in his explaination, he debunks it himself: [i]Searching Google with the query demolition pull and filtering out sites referring to the Silverstein pull-it remark returns only one result in about 10 pages of results that uses 'pull' to mean demolish:

City staff have contacted the property owner by phone to request that he obtain a demolition permit and pull down and demolish the building[/i]

but still, here is the next line: [i]A review of the numerous websites that assert that Silverstein's remark constituted an admission of demolishing WTC 7 is revealing. [color="#3366FF"](no its not imo)[/color] [b]Few such sites note that the physical characteristics of the collapse exactly match conventional demolitions, or that fires have never before or since felled steel-framed high-rise buildings[/b] [color="#3366FF"](both are great points... no chance that the fire did this by itself... and it does look just like a collapse)[/color] -- two facts that constitute an overwhealming case for the controlled demolition of WTC 7. Instead, the pull-it controversy seems to have created a distraction, eclipsing the case for controlled demolition.[/i]

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Bunghole' post='298557' date='Jul 22 2006, 11:05 AM'][quote]My question is if Isreal was behind all of this then why did they frame Saudi Arabians? That is the one (and only) country in the middle east that the U.S. is not going to retaliate against. Why not Syrians, Lebonese, Iranians, Iraqis, or Palistenians?[/quote]

Why those are some very good points, Fred!
Anyone know the answer?
[/quote]

Can't speak to the question, but will offer this food for thought.

Look at the culture of assymetrical war. Consider the period right after the Russians were booted out of Afganistan. At that time, you had a lot of fairly well-trained mercenaries who were unemployed. Same as in the US after the Bay of Pigs, some of these folks, who have taken a liking to the "lifestyle," are going to be picked up by intelligence networks and put to work on other tasks. Just as some exile Cubans have done a lot of the dirty work for the US in the past 50 years, or as some unemployed South African mercs/assets were used after the apartheid period in various countries in Africa, some of these folks--who happen to be Muslim--were available for work.

[Guest Coy Bacon]

[quote name='CJandRudiJ' post='297973' date='Jul 21 2006, 03:47 PM']For stating the truth? Palestinians have made it known that they wont be happy until there is no more israel...i mean look at their maps for instance, they dont even have israel on them...[/quote]


Israhell has made it pretty clear that it won't be happy until there are no more Palestinians. Look at the historical map and see how Palestinian held land has shrunk. Look at the level of response. By the way look at the maps of Greater Israel. Who says, beside self-interested people, that there should be an Israhell? It seems to be more trouble than its worth. Look at the resources US taxpayers waste annually on propping up this fascist pissmire of violence and decadence.

[JBandJoeyV]

The only reason why the palestinians are gradually losing territory and stuff is because their people wont be happy till all of Israel is gone, and they go about this by suicide bombing innocent people...then Israel retaliates against the palestinians...not the other way around and it has never been the other way around

[Abu-Zayd]

[quote name='Coy Bacon' post='298635' date='Jul 22 2006, 01:10 PM']Israhell has made it pretty clear that it won't be happy until there are no more Palestinians. Look at the historical map and see how Palestinian held land has shrunk. Look at the level of response. By the way look at the maps of Greater Israel. Who says, beside self-interested people, that there should be an Israhell? It seems to be more trouble than its worth. Look at the resources US taxpayers waste annually on propping up this fascist pissmire of violence and decadence.[/quote]


I just posted the Greater Israel map on "Israel's Grand Design....".

“Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can't help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East.” - John Sheehan, S.J.