Just What will it Take before we get an impartial investigation? Are we that far gone?


"http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495;article=126427"

John.........

What will it take for some to understand that it was two planes that took down the towers and the government was NOT part of it?

mainedawg
Posted Tue 22 September 2009 07:25 PM
John.........

What will it take for some to understand that it was two planes that took down the towers and the government was NOT part of it?



Uh huh, but why not mention bldg 7 and the pentagon, the who, what, and why? We know bldgs collapsed its everything else thats in question
and has been evaded. Specially the pentagon attack 90 min after the nation was attacked, a defence less capitol tracking an unauthorized A/C through restricted airspace right to target with not a shot being fired. How could that be accepted and not questioned? All we get is to choose which side of the he said she said rheteoric we want to believe.

I don't see any truth exposed.

Shockey

quote:

Originally posted by shockey:
I don't see any truth exposed.

Shockey

Oh really? how can you say that? What are you reading? Were you one of the commissioners? Why would hand picked commissioners choose to resign and come forward? As I said in a prior post, Denial is not just a river in Egypt. Just a wild guess, but are you from TEXAS?

Guess I'm just stupid.
Perhaps you could point out in detail the truth.
Nope not from texas. Drove thru there several times, does that count?

Shockey

shockey
Posted Thu 24 September 2009 06:05 AM
Guess I'm just stupid.
Perhaps you could point out in detail the truth.
Nope not from texas. Drove thru there several times, does that count?

Shockey


no it dont. Not stupid Niave and trusting is a better word. There is no proof so far only unanswered questions and observations. A divided nation and people taking side on a serious issue that could only be answered by a commission of the countries brightest credible experts in every field of science, engineering investigation, arcitecture, with full authority
and access to records. No exceptions. Only then will the truth be exposed and the opinions take a back seat.

I realy didn't think you could point out any truth. I just figured I would ask.

Shockey

Questions:

Why did the twin towers collapse?

Why did the 3rd building implode? (I watched that sucker go down. Yep. I was there, across the river in Union City, NJ. Got pictures to prove it.)

The first one is a very interesting question. They shouldn't have gone down at all. They were built to withstand a direct hit from a 747. I asked my husband who builds high rises. He watched the films and thought and thought and thought and said that evidently someone didn't do their job! He went into detail of the process of strengthening the concrete, especially at the corner virticals and central core, by rebar (standard use in high rises) and other materials that I can't remember now (it's been a while.) He did say that the high temperatures from the fire would cause the slabs to expand and eventually the tension cables inside to finally snap, but the temperatures would have to be excessively high.. higher than what the burning fuel should have caused. That expansion would push out on the corner verticals causing them to 'pop' and bow. What he doesn't understand is.... if the building were built to withstand the direct hit of a 747, then it shouldn't have buckled unless someone inside the construction company used faulty or substandard materials to cut costs and then inspectors either were inept, blind, or taking kickbacks. Which is all to common.

The second question is a bit harder to figure out. Why did building 7 collapse? 57 Stories of red brick went down like a house of cards. Straight down. It wasn't hit by anything yet it went down from the bottom up, not top down, kinda like what you see when they intentionally demo an old building. That didn't make any sense at all. They did say in the reports that day that building 7's fall was imminent and 1 or 2 other's possible, but the other two didn't go.

Watching the film, you can see the 'explosions' at the corners of the towers running below the tide of collapse. This, according to my husband is brought on by the weight of the upper slamming against the slabs below and buckling the steel. That is very understandable in the contractor's mind. What throws him is the beginning of the collapse unless, as stated above, someone didn't do their job when they built the darn things.

quote:

Originally posted by Marine5711:
Questions:

Why did the twin towers collapse?

Why did the 3rd building implode? (I watched that sucker go down. Yep. I was there, across the river in Union City, NJ. Got pictures to prove it.)

The first one is a very interesting question. They shouldn't have gone down at all. They were built to withstand a direct hit from a 747. I asked my husband who builds high rises. He watched the films and thought and thought and thought and said that evidently someone didn't do their job! He went into detail of the process of strengthening the concrete, especially at the corner virticals and central core, by rebar (standard use in high rises) and other materials that I can't remember now (it's been a while.) He did say that the high temperatures from the fire would cause the slabs to expand and eventually the tension cables inside to finally snap, but the temperatures would have to be excessively high.. higher than what the burning fuel should have caused. That expansion would push out on the corner verticals causing them to 'pop' and bow. What he doesn't understand is.... if the building were built to withstand the direct hit of a 747, then it shouldn't have buckled unless someone inside the construction company used faulty or substandard materials to cut costs and then inspectors either were inept, blind, or taking kickbacks. Which is all to common.

The second question is a bit harder to figure out. Why did building 7 collapse? 57 Stories of red brick went down like a house of cards. Straight down. It wasn't hit by anything yet it went down from the bottom up, not top down, kinda like what you see when they intentionally demo an old building. That didn't make any sense at all. They did say in the reports that day that building 7's fall was imminent and 1 or 2 other's possible, but the other two didn't go.

Watching the film, you can see the 'explosions' at the corners of the towers running below the tide of collapse. This, according to my husband is brought on by the weight of the upper slamming against the slabs below and buckling the steel. That is very understandable in the contractor's mind. What throws him is the beginning of the collapse unless, as stated above, someone didn't do their job when they built the darn things.

Having been on that project in supervisory capacity, from dig out to top off 6 years + I can assure you no short cuts were taken. Concrete was core sampled after each pour for integrety. and yes the bldgs were designed to withstand multiple airline hits. It was built like a huge antenna with the core support cables anchored deep into bed rock at the base with multiple cables every 20 ft or so around the entire slurry wall to support shock and sway. Even it by some chance the floor support brackets attached to the main core weakened by fire failed and caused a domino pancake effect, The 43 main supports would still be standing unless cut.

Answer; Military Grade Thermite...residue was allegedly found in the basements of the Twin Towers. The heat of the thermite explosions would melt the support beams and the collapse is guaranteed, beyond poor construction.

quote:

Originally posted by john2x:

quote:

Originally posted by Marine5711:
Questions:

Why did the twin towers collapse?

Why did the 3rd building implode? (I watched that sucker go down. Yep. I was there, across the river in Union City, NJ. Got pictures to prove it.)

The first one is a very interesting question. They shouldn't have gone down at all. They were built to withstand a direct hit from a 747. I asked my husband who builds high rises. He watched the films and thought and thought and thought and said that evidently someone didn't do their job! He went into detail of the process of strengthening the concrete, especially at the corner virticals and central core, by rebar (standard use in high rises) and other materials that I can't remember now (it's been a while.) He did say that the high temperatures from the fire would cause the slabs to expand and eventually the tension cables inside to finally snap, but the temperatures would have to be excessively high.. higher than what the burning fuel should have caused. That expansion would push out on the corner verticals causing them to 'pop' and bow. What he doesn't understand is.... if the building were built to withstand the direct hit of a 747, then it shouldn't have buckled unless someone inside the construction company used faulty or substandard materials to cut costs and then inspectors either were inept, blind, or taking kickbacks. Which is all to common.

The second question is a bit harder to figure out. Why did building 7 collapse? 57 Stories of red brick went down like a house of cards. Straight down. It wasn't hit by anything yet it went down from the bottom up, not top down, kinda like what you see when they intentionally demo an old building. That didn't make any sense at all. They did say in the reports that day that building 7's fall was imminent and 1 or 2 other's possible, but the other two didn't go.

Watching the film, you can see the 'explosions' at the corners of the towers running below the tide of collapse. This, according to my husband is brought on by the weight of the upper slamming against the slabs below and buckling the steel. That is very understandable in the contractor's mind. What throws him is the beginning of the collapse unless, as stated above, someone didn't do their job when they built the darn things.

Having been on that project in supervisory capacity, from dig out to top off 6 years + I can assure you no short cuts were taken. Concrete was core sampled after each pour for integrety. and yes the bldgs were designed to withstand multiple airline hits. It was built like a huge antenna with the core support cables anchored deep into bed rock at the base with multiple cables every 20 ft or so around the entire slurry wall to support shock and sway. Even it by some chance the floor support brackets attached to the main core weakened by fire failed and caused a domino pancake effect, The 43 main supports would still be standing unless cut.

I have no doubt that the buildings were well built and trust that you and everyone there did their jobs. Contractors (especially the Gen. Supers such as my husband) stake their reputations on such things. Please don't take it that he was implying that something shady was going on with the construction. He was merely telling me what it would take to bring those momma's down like that (construction wise.) Otherwise, it would take explosives at the structural strong/weight baring points.

On a personal note: Nice work, very impressive. The supervisors don't never get any of the glory if all goes well and all of the blame if something goes wrong. My husband's last tall building was the Marina Blue in Miami. 60 story. Not quite the impressive 100+ of the twins but not to shabby

quote:

Originally posted by dragonflyer04:
Answer; Military Grade Thermite...residue was allegedly found in the basements of the Twin Towers. The heat of the thermite explosions would melt the support beams and the collapse is guaranteed, beyond poor construction.

yeppers.. that's what he said also (though I don't recall what type he mentioned).. thus the 'flash' not just merely debris from buckling. Jet fuel alone wouldn't burn hot enough besides most of it was burned on impact in the flash explosion.

quote:

Originally posted by Marine5711:

quote:

Originally posted by dragonflyer04:
Answer; Military Grade Thermite...residue was allegedly found in the basements of the Twin Towers. The heat of the thermite explosions would melt the support beams and the collapse is guaranteed, beyond poor construction.

yeppers.. that's what he said also (though I don't recall what type he mentioned).. thus the 'flash' not just merely debris from buckling. Jet fuel alone wouldn't burn hot enough besides most of it was burned on impact in the flash explosion.

I think most who post here that say the airliner and kerosene took down the towers, have no idea of the size of those main support columns. on these steel jobs the most dangerous times are when these cranes are lifting themselves, Thats when they drop steel that takes out the unpoured tin pan flooring below and workers with it. we had a plan that when they were lifting if we heard falling steel above the safest place was in the web of the closest main support in case the floor was taken out. That web could hold two men so imagine how large they were? There were 43 of them that made up the core of each tower. there was no way they were melting from kerosene and could with stand a barrage of howitzers. So much needs to be investigated by pros.

quote:

Originally posted by john2x:

quote:

Originally posted by Marine5711:

quote:

Originally posted by dragonflyer04:
Answer; Military Grade Thermite...residue was allegedly found in the basements of the Twin Towers. The heat of the thermite explosions would melt the support beams and the collapse is guaranteed, beyond poor construction.

yeppers.. that's what he said also (though I don't recall what type he mentioned).. thus the 'flash' not just merely debris from buckling. Jet fuel alone wouldn't burn hot enough besides most of it was burned on impact in the flash explosion.

I think most who post here that say the airliner and kerosene took down the towers, have no idea of the size of those main support columns. on these steel jobs the most dangerous times are when these cranes are lifting themselves, Thats when they drop steel that takes out the unpoured tin pan flooring below and workers with it. we had a plan that when they were lifting if we heard falling steel above the safest place was in the web of the closest main support in case the floor was taken out. That web could hold two men so imagine how large they were? There were 43 of them that made up the core of each tower. there was no way they were melting from kerosene and could with stand a barrage of howitzers. So much needs to be investigated by pros.

True. Those that have never been intimately involved in the building of this type of structure have no clue just what it would take to bring one down.

Instead of worrying about the mechanics of destruction, how about we think about the means by which we can make the world a better place?

quote:

Originally posted by OldAFcop:
Instead of worrying about the mechanics of destruction, how about we think about the means by which we can make the world a better place?

How about the mechanics of war?

How to Start a War

The American Use of War Pretext Incidents (1848-1989)

RICHARD SANDERS / Coalition to Oppose the Arms Trade (COAT) May02

Throughout history, war planners have used various forms of deception to trick their enemies. Because public support is so crucial to the process of initiating and waging war, the home population is also subject to deceitful stratagems. The creation of false excuses to justify going to war is a major first step in constructing public support for such deadly ventures. Perhaps the most common pretext for war is an apparently unprovoked enemy attack. Such attacks, however, are often fabricated, incited or deliberately allowed to occur. They are then exploited to arouse widespread public sympathy for the victims, demonize the attackers and build mass support for military “retaliation.”

Source: Mindfully.org

Which gives a historical view of the major and most recent wars and the reasons (real reasons) they were fought.

If we can stop that, the world would be a better place. True?

"http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm"

Get a life John. My sister was there and she clearly saw an airliner crash into the building.

quote:

Originally posted by AirForceAggie:
"http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm"

Get a life John. My sister was there and she clearly saw an airliner crash into the building.

OK Aggie supposed thats the case, Now the question would become how did that unauthorized airline manage to penetrate the most secure restricted airspace on the planet, heavily guarded 24/7s 365 days a year, by automated fail safe defense missile systems, manned fully armed fighter jets sitting on specificaly designated runways ready to be launched at a moments notice,and backups, 90 mins after the country is under attack and not a shot fired in defense. The VP and staff are in a secure bunker mins after the initial attack, And 90 mins later tracking this unauthorized A/C all the way to target being updated on its progress and the VP saying the orders still stand. This sworn testimony by sect Norman Minetta to the 9/11 commission is determined to be non essential and ommited. Dont you find that even a little suspicious??

When you can explain that post again Id sure like to know and you seem to have all the answers. Untill such time dont be so pompus as to suggest people should get life when you need some altering of your thought process. Break free of the sheeple crowd and use the god given common sense the good lord endowed you with.

quote:

Originally posted by john2x:

quote:

Originally posted by AirForceAggie:
"http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm"

Get a life John. My sister was there and she clearly saw an airliner crash into the building.

OK Aggie supposed thats the case, Now the question would become how did that unauthorized airline manage to penetrate the most secure restricted airspace on the planet, heavily guarded 24/7s 365 days a year, by automated fail safe defense missile systems, manned fully armed fighter jets sitting on specificaly designated runways ready to be launched at a moments notice,and backups, 90 mins after the country is under attack and not a shot fired in defense. The VP and staff are in a secure bunker mins after the initial attack, And 90 mins later tracking this unauthorized A/C all the way to target being updated on its progress and the VP saying the orders still stand. This sworn testimony by sect Norman Minetta to the 9/11 commission is determined to be non essential and ommited. Dont you find that even a little suspicious??

When you can explain that post again Id sure like to know and you seem to have all the answers. Untill such time dont be so pompus as to suggest people should get life when you need some altering of your thought process. Break free of the sheeple crowd and use the god given common sense the good lord endowed you with.

lol, fail safe missile defense systems???? You have been reading one too many Clancy books. they had to move patriot batteries in because there are no fixed AA defenses for DC. As for flying into restricted airspace, do you remember the 14 year old kid who flew his piper cub into the White House lawn during the Reagan Admin? As for armed fighters, prior to 9/11, the ready alert fighters were stood down due to the assumption that the Cold War was over. They actually had to ramp up fighters and arm them, which took time as they didn't have fighters standing on ready alert. So, I will say again, get a life. There is no conspiracy other than the Saudis attacking the US.

Aggie your high if you think you can talk logic and facts to truthers, this is their response to reality

quote:

Originally posted by AirForceAggie:

quote:

Originally posted by john2x:

quote:

Originally posted by AirForceAggie:
"http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm"

Get a life John. My sister was there and she clearly saw an airliner crash into the building.

OK Aggie supposed thats the case, Now the question would become how did that unauthorized airline manage to penetrate the most secure restricted airspace on the planet, heavily guarded 24/7s 365 days a year, by automated fail safe defense missile systems, manned fully armed fighter jets sitting on specificaly designated runways ready to be launched at a moments notice,and backups, 90 mins after the country is under attack and not a shot fired in defense. The VP and staff are in a secure bunker mins after the initial attack, And 90 mins later tracking this unauthorized A/C all the way to target being updated on its progress and the VP saying the orders still stand. This sworn testimony by sect Norman Minetta to the 9/11 commission is determined to be non essential and ommited. Dont you find that even a little suspicious??

When you can explain that post again Id sure like to know and you seem to have all the answers. Untill such time dont be so pompus as to suggest people should get life when you need some altering of your thought process. Break free of the sheeple crowd and use the god given common sense the good lord endowed you with.

lol, fail safe missile defense systems???? You have been reading one too many Clancy books. they had to move patriot batteries in because there are no fixed AA defenses for DC. As for flying into restricted airspace, do you remember the 14 year old kid who flew his piper cub into the White House lawn during the Reagan Admin? As for armed fighters, prior to 9/11, the ready alert fighters were stood down due to the assumption that the Cold War was over. They actually had to ramp up fighters and arm them, which took time as they didn't have fighters standing on ready alert. So, I will say again, get a life. There is no conspiracy other than the Saudis attacking the US.

As I said get off that sheeple path and start using some of the logic that has been provided you by your maker. Could you actually believe the most protected airspace in the free world was defenseless? What about what norman Minnetta testified to about the orders still standing as Cheney tracked the plane right to target. And as for manned ready alert fighters, your really out of the loop. I myself was buzzed after flying over Plum Islands restricted Airspace the second time in less than 90 min flying VFR and flying the reverse course ater having lunch at Groton on a sunday afternoon.

quote:

Originally posted by john2x:

lol, fail safe missile defense systems???? You have been reading one too many Clancy books. they had to move patriot batteries in because there are no fixed AA defenses for DC. As for flying into restricted airspace, do you remember the 14 year old kid who flew his piper cub into the White House lawn during the Reagan Admin? As for armed fighters, prior to 9/11, the ready alert fighters were stood down due to the assumption that the Cold War was over. They actually had to ramp up fighters and arm them, which took time as they didn't have fighters standing on ready alert. So, I will say again, get a life. There is no conspiracy other than the Saudis attacking the US.

As I said get off that sheeple path and start using some of the logic that has been provided you by your maker. Could you actually believe the most protected airspace in the free world was defenseless? What about what norman Minnetta testified to about the orders still standing as Cheney tracked the plane right to target. And as for manned ready alert fighters, your really out of the loop. I myself was buzzed after flying over Plum Islands restricted Airspace the second time in less than 90 min flying VFR and flying the reverse course ater having lunch at Groton on a sunday afternoon.[/QUOTE]

John, you're going to believe what you want to believe despite all of the facts we have presented contradicting what you say. Fact, there are too many witnesses that actually saw the planes hit to make nonsense of your assertions. Fact, Patriot batteries were actually moved in because there are no fixed AA defenses in DC. Fact, Air National Guard fighters, who provide most of the ready interceptors, were stood down after the Cold War as a cost saving measure. Fact, you need to get a life.

quote:

Originally posted by AirForceAggie:

quote:

Originally posted by john2x:

lol, fail safe missile defense systems???? You have been reading one too many Clancy books. they had to move patriot batteries in because there are no fixed AA defenses for DC. As for flying into restricted airspace, do you remember the 14 year old kid who flew his piper cub into the White House lawn during the Reagan Admin? As for armed fighters, prior to 9/11, the ready alert fighters were stood down due to the assumption that the Cold War was over. They actually had to ramp up fighters and arm them, which took time as they didn't have fighters standing on ready alert. So, I will say again, get a life. There is no conspiracy other than the Saudis attacking the US.

As I said get off that sheeple path and start using some of the logic that has been provided you by your maker. Could you actually believe the most protected airspace in the free world was defenseless? What about what norman Minnetta testified to about the orders still standing as Cheney tracked the plane right to target. And as for manned ready alert fighters, your really out of the loop. I myself was buzzed after flying over Plum Islands restricted Airspace the second time in less than 90 min flying VFR and flying the reverse course ater having lunch at Groton on a sunday afternoon.

________________________________________________
John, you're going to believe what you want to believe despite all of the facts we have presented contradicting what you say. Fact, there are too many witnesses that actually saw the planes hit to make nonsense of your assertions. Fact, Patriot batteries were actually moved in because there are no fixed AA defenses in DC. Fact, Air National Guard fighters, who provide most of the ready interceptors, were stood down after the Cold War as a cost saving measure. Fact, you need to get a life.[/QUOTE]
________________________________________________
Yes AA, people saw planes hit, but were they airliners? What kind of planes were they? There are lots of witnesses stating categorically they were NOT. They were a kind theyd never seen before with no glass to the windows. No such contradictory witness information would ever make it to the final 9/11 commission report. Along with the firemen reports of numerous charges going off inside the towers immediately prior to collapses.

To this day. no explanation, including the official Federal NIST report explains the SCALE, SPEED AND SYMMETRY of the collapses of the wtc towers. All indications point to a controlled demolition and the NIST report does nothing to dispel that!.

Some of the footage shown on mainstream TV to the nation of plane impacts were TOTAL and COMPLETELY DOCTORED FAKE FOOTAGE!!. The 9/11 attacks was as much a media event as anything else. It was a shock and awe event that would galvanize the country behind a war president and give him any approval required to wage war on the perpetrators of that horror!. From the passage of the patriot act limiting constitutional rights and freedoms, the wholesale & arbitrary classification of people defending themselves against our invasion of their country as "enemy combatants" or "terrorists", the legal & constitutional enabling of torture by our govt; the so called "war on terror" began. Did our country change or what??

No AA, the arguments over 9/11 attacks are already done with. The official explanation of the attacks via 9/11 commission report is completed. But lots and lots and lots of unanswered questions remain and I DO NOT expect them to be truthfully answered at an official level as the horrifying truth to them would be political suicide for lots and lots of people. Your pathetic explanations of patriot missile batteries being moved and standing down of Air National Guard fighters are out and out lies in the face of NORAD's complete absence that day. Showing up late and unarmed to the biggest penetration of our nations defences. No AA.....we didnt have a cold war for 40 yrs with a Soviet communist enemy, just so 19 religious zealots could pull off the unimaginable.

The employing of new-age warfare weaponry still unknown in the public mainstream, the wholesale hijacking of the media to maximize the shock and horror, all made "the show" that was the 9/11 attacks. The TRUTH about the 9/11 attacks is as ugly and grotesque as anything I know.

quote:

Originally posted by 23003657:

quote:

Originally posted by AirForceAggie:

quote:

Originally posted by john2x:

lol, fail safe missile defense systems???? You have been reading one too many Clancy books. they had to move patriot batteries in because there are no fixed AA defenses for DC. As for flying into restricted airspace, do you remember the 14 year old kid who flew his piper cub into the White House lawn during the Reagan Admin? As for armed fighters, prior to 9/11, the ready alert fighters were stood down due to the assumption that the Cold War was over. They actually had to ramp up fighters and arm them, which took time as they didn't have fighters standing on ready alert. So, I will say again, get a life. There is no conspiracy other than the Saudis attacking the US.

As I said get off that sheeple path and start using some of the logic that has been provided you by your maker. Could you actually believe the most protected airspace in the free world was defenseless? What about what norman Minnetta testified to about the orders still standing as Cheney tracked the plane right to target. And as for manned ready alert fighters, your really out of the loop. I myself was buzzed after flying over Plum Islands restricted Airspace the second time in less than 90 min flying VFR and flying the reverse course ater having lunch at Groton on a sunday afternoon.

________________________________________________
John, you're going to believe what you want to believe despite all of the facts we have presented contradicting what you say. Fact, there are too many witnesses that actually saw the planes hit to make nonsense of your assertions. Fact, Patriot batteries were actually moved in because there are no fixed AA defenses in DC. Fact, Air National Guard fighters, who provide most of the ready interceptors, were stood down after the Cold War as a cost saving measure. Fact, you need to get a life.

________________________________________________
Yes AA, people saw planes hit, but were they airliners? What kind of planes were they? There are lots of witnesses stating categorically they were NOT. They were a kind theyd never seen before with no glass to the windows. No such contradictory witness information would ever make it to the final 9/11 commission report. Along with the firemen reports of numerous charges going off inside the towers immediately prior to collapses.

To this day. no explanation, including the official Federal NIST report explains the SCALE, SPEED AND SYMMETRY of the collapses of the wtc towers. All indications point to a controlled demolition and the NIST report does nothing to dispel that!.

Some of the footage shown on mainstream TV to the nation of plane impacts were TOTAL and COMPLETELY DOCTORED FAKE FOOTAGE!!. The 9/11 attacks was as much a media event as anything else. It was a shock and awe event that would galvanize the country behind a war president and give him any approval required to wage war on the perpetrators of that horror!. From the passage of the patriot act limiting constitutional rights and freedoms, the wholesale & arbitrary classification of people defending themselves against our invasion of their country as "enemy combatants" or "terrorists", the legal & constitutional enabling of torture by our govt; the so called "war on terror" began. Did our country change or what??

No AA, the arguments over 9/11 attacks are already done with. The official explanation of the attacks via 9/11 commission report is completed. But lots and lots and lots of unanswered questions remain and I DO NOT expect them to be truthfully answered at an official level as the horrifying truth to them would be political suicide for lots and lots of people. Your pathetic explanations of patriot missile batteries being moved and standing down of Air National Guard fighters are out and out lies in the face of NORAD's complete absence that day. Showing up late and unarmed to the biggest penetration of our nations defences. No AA.....we didnt have a cold war for 40 yrs with a Soviet communist enemy, just so 19 religious zealots could pull off the unimaginable.

The employing of new-age warfare weaponry still unknown in the public mainstream, the wholesale hijacking of the media to maximize the shock and horror, all made "the show" that was the 9/11 attacks. The TRUTH about the 9/11 attacks is as ugly and grotesque as anything I know.[/QUOTE]



Minor details 23003657.
The sheeple are either just plain brain dead,
Conditioned, or in denial and just cant see it any way but the official version which they consider unpatriotic to question.

Thats why we are as a nation were at this point in American history where little is questioned beyond official versions that make no logical sense. God help us.

The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies
Gordon Duff Salem-News.com

How long have we watered the Tree of Deceit with the blood of patriots?
The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11
John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″

(CINCINNATI, Ohio) - In John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version... is almost entirely untrue...

The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.

Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities' School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.

Does Farmer have cooperation and agreement from other members of the Commission? Yes. Did they say Bush ordered 9/11? No. Do they say that the 9/11 Commission was lied to by the FBI, CIA, Whitehouse and NORAD? Yes. Is there full documentary proof of this? Yes.

Farmer states...“at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened... I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. This is not spin.”

The 9/11 Commission head, Thomas Kean, was the Republican governor of New Jersey. He had the following to say... “We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth. . . " When Bush's own handpicked commission failed to go along with the cover up and requested a criminal investigation, why was nothing done?

9/11 Commission member and former US Senator, Bob Kerrey, says, "No one is more qualified to write the definitive book about the tragedy of 9/11 than John Farmer. Fortunately, he has done so. Even more fortunately the language is clear, alive and instructive for anyone who wants to make certain this never happens again."

With the only "official" 9/11 report now totally false, where do we go from here? Who is hurt by these lies? The families of the victims of 9/11 have fought, for years, to get to the truth. For years, our government has hidden behind lies and secrecy to deny them closure.

In 2006, The Washington Post reported..."Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission..."

What does Farmer's book tell us? Farmer offers no solutions, only a total and full rejection of what was told and his own his own ideas concerning the total failure of honesty on the part of the government, a government with something to hide.

Farmer never tells us what. Nobody could keep a job in the public sector speaking out more than Farmer has. What were Farmer's omissions? There are some. Now that we know that intelligence given the 9/11 Commission wasn't just lies from our own government but based on testimony coerced through torture from informants forced to back up a cover story now proven false, a pattern emerges.


We know that, immediately after 9/11, many more potential suspects and informants were flown directly to Saudi Arabia by Presidential order than were ever detained and questioned. We will never know what they could have said. Their testimony would have been vital to any real investigation were they not put beyond the reach of even Congress and the FBI.

Putting aside all other questions of recent evidence of CIA involvement with bin Laden prior to 9/11 or altered physical evidence involving the Pentagon attack, any failure to call to account the systematic perjury committed by dozens of top government officials, now exposed as a certainty is an offense to every American.

What do we know? We know the conjecture about 9/11 still stands but for certain, we know we were lied to, not in a minor way, but systematically as part of a plot covering up government involvement at nearly every level, perhaps gross negligence, perhaps something with darker intent.

Are we willing to live with another lie to go with the Warren Report, Iran Contra and so many others? Has the sacrifice of thousands more Americans, killed, wounded or irreparably damaged by a war knowingly built on the same lies from the same liars who misled the 9/11 Commission pushed us beyond willingness to confront the truth?

Have we yet found where the lies have begun and ended? There is no evidence of this, only evidence to the contrary. The lies live on and the truth will never be sought. The courage for that task has not been found.

Can anyone call themselves an American if they don't demand, even with the last drop of their blood, that the truth be found?

How long have we watered the Tree of Deceit with the blood of patriots?