Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

9/11 Lemmings: Where the Hell is Your Proof?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
veracity Donating Member (993 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:39 PM
Original message
9/11 Lemmings: Where the Hell is Your Proof?
TvNewsLIES Challenges Believers of the Official Version of 9/11:
Where the Hell Is YOUR Proof?


THE BACKGROUND

To this day, there has been no independent official inquiry into the attacks of September 11, 2001. The Kean Commission, with which most Americans are familiar, was based on the Bush/PNAC version of events. It was charged with probing the breakdown of intelligence prior to the attacks and making suggestions for improving communications among the competing agencies involved. The Commission, formed after more than a year of opposition by the Bush administration, did notrepeat...did NOTinvestigate or report about the causes of the attacks.

Far more important to this day there has not been a single piece of evidence presented to the public that corroborates the official government version of the most devastating attack in our history. Think about that. For more than four years, scores of credible experts have challenged the explanations offered by the Bush administration, and yet not a shred of evidence has been offered by the US government to support the official version of events they claim took place on that day.

Even more absurd is that fact that not a single official inquiry has attempted to respond to, discredit, or refute the questions that have been raised. On the contrary, both the American government and the complicit media have dealt with the every single challenge to the 9/11 explanations in two ways. They either totally ignore them or dismiss them out of hand as ridiculous conspiracy theories. Most of the well-researched and revealing findings by independent investigators are unknown to the vast majority of Americans.

Much more, including challenges to the lemmings:
http://tvnewslies.org/html/where_the_hell_is_your_9_11_...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jimshoes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
1. The thought
crosses my mind from time to time. Perhaps someone facing some serious prison time might let some of the truth slip out in the near future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
veracity Donating Member (993 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. the truth is there
Just watch the David Ray Griffin video...(CSpan has an archived copy) as does In the Wilderness.... you'll hear it all. Michael Ruppert let the cat out of the bag...so many 'non-conspirady-theorists' - are out there.

The 9/11 panel in Washington DC had a whole slew of very prominent people who know the truth...and who want the hearings re-opened. It's just being squelched by the media....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
2. Was just sayin' this to a friend.
If you scratch the surface of this thing, you can argue LIHOP or MIHOP but not the official (conspiracy) theory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oblivious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
3. Veracity, you should do a survey here to go along with this.
Question: "Do you believe the official 911 theory?"

or

"Do recent events exposing White House conspiracies lead you to believe that the official 911 thoery might be a lie?"

or something like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
veracity Donating Member (993 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. I'm not ready to hear the answers...
Seriously, the thought that people here might actually have bought into the official version...(as opposed to being skeptical or not having enough information to make a judgment) would really upset me.

But.. why don't you do it and see what happens? I'll peek... :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oblivious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. I don't think people here in general are ready for it.
And if the truth does start to dribble out as whisteblowers gain confidence, I guess we'll hear a lot of the Judith Miller line: "We were all wrong. How could we possibly have known, blah blah."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. The 9/11 Commission Report
makes the Warren Commission Report look thorough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemInDistress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:55 PM
Response to Original message
5. The History Channel aired a show 2 nights ago about
Edited on Fri Oct-21-05 08:11 PM by DemInDistress
disasters and they included the collapse of WT-7,it wasn't struck by a jet yet collapsed into a neat pile 150' high.What caught my eye almost immeadiately was the "puffs of black smoke" emmitted from the 41st thru 47th floors,it was the best picture I seen so far.If anyone
looks at the west face of WT-7 near the south corner of the building
you too could see it was a controlled demolition and Larry Silverstein
clearly stated,"the building was pulled".If I find the photo again I'll try to post it..www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/

edit for one picture from plaguepuppy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. I'll bet you've never seen reinforced concrete fail under stress.
What you called puffs of smoke are in reality the catastrophic failure of the concrete, parts of which disintigrate forming a cloud of fine particulates. This is repeatable. Any good engineering student has seen this and understands perfectly what is going on.

I've gotta invoke Occam's razor on ya here. We have precisely zero evidence of controlled demolition here. No explosives found. No witnesses to the planting of explosives. Nothing. Nada.

But we do have two 110 story skyscrapers collapsing within a few feet of this building. All we hear about that is the whiny special pleading response that "There wasn't enough damage for WTC7 to collapse."

And don't get me started on the ridiculous claim that an airliner didn't hit the WTC, or the Pentagon.

This MIHOP stuff is nothing but garbage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemInDistress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. longship....your out of your mind...
Larry Silverstein admits he had the bulding "pulled" a term used in
controlled demolition,the picture of puffs of smoke were indeed from
a controlled demolition inside World Trade 7.Its obvious,your brain
doesn't recognize what your lying eyes see !!!! Look again at the
pictures/videos in particular the southwest side of the building.In a
split second 8 floors maybe more were visible I'd have to look again.
You sound like a guy who believed bush had no prior warnings of the 911 attacks.Is that right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Your != You are
That would be "You're"

No, sir. I believe what facts I have. We *know* that Bush had prior warnings. We *know* that the warnings were ignored. But does that mean that Bush deliberately flew god-only-knows-what into those buildings? No, it means that they ignored clear warnings and Al Qaeda did what they were threatening to do.

Should the bums in the WH be strung up by their balls (or whatever convenient appendage) for it? You bet!!

But we have people here actually claiming that the planes that were *known* to have crashed into those buildings did *not* fly into those buildings. That, sir, is total rubbish no matter how much special pleading, straw men, and other specious argument is put up against it.

I follow the facts, not unsupported wild speculations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemInDistress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. here ya go .......try google
Amazon.com: Reviews for The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report ...
... from which you can already tell it would have been impossible for WT7 to have
been ... Larry Silverstein, who admitted on PBS that they pulled it down? ...
www.amazon.com/gp/product/ customer-reviews/0393326713?_encoding=UTF8 - 70k - Cached - Similar pages

MIND Exchange
It has been proven conclusively that WT7 was a controlled demolition, since the
owner of the ... Larry Silverstein, admitted as such on public television. ...
www.kurzweilai.net/mindx/show_thread.php?rootID=45336 - Similar pages

The truth behind 9/11?
WT7 building collapsed and that wasnt even hit by a plane. ... and in fact the
owner Larry Silverstein (who made a VERY big amount of money from the whole ...
www.ld4all.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11256 - 75k - Cached - Similar pages
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Sorry, pal.
Edited on Sat Oct-22-05 12:03 AM by longship
I'm sorry that I can't agree with you. As you can tell, I feel very strongly about this. I've spent the last four+ decades of my life working in technological, science, and education. I have a very healthy respect for the scientific method and for rational thinking, neither of which is germaine to the citations you provided.

This conspiracy theory stuff is just too far out in left field. These contrived conjectures fly in the face of known and documented fact. They utilize argument from authority, straw men, non sequitor, argument from ignorance, pseudo-scientific claptrap and virtually every other specious logic.

When it comes down to the bottom line, one has to dismiss these things either as ravings of a lunatic, or the clever fiction of somebody who wants to make money. Considering that this stuff sells so well, and that the specious arguments apparently also convince, I no longer wonder why people like Bush and Cheney have gotten a hold of power.

However, I would have absolutely no problem with this stuff if it was sold as fiction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oblivious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. "This conspiracy theory stuff is just too far out in left field." I agree
I would have no problem with the official 911 conspiracy theory if it was sold as fiction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. Indeed.
Edited on Sat Oct-22-05 01:03 AM by longship
The investigation entirely missed the boat and the target.

The Bushistas ignored clear warnings which a casual observer could have seen. I'm thinking now that this was due to total incompetence. They had their minds and their focus on their political agenda, the Neoconning of America. They didn't care about terrorists until we were attacked.

I'm willing to listen to theories (based on fact, not conjecture) that they willingly let it happen by ignoring the warnings. We have facts to back that up. It was Chimpy's job to protect the country. But the fact that he had the warning and ignored it, whether it was through incompetence or by deliberation, is actually irrelevant. Regardless, we can still hold them all accountable for this.

Concerning the events of 9/11:

Al Qaeda brought down the WTC (including WTC7) by crashing airliners into the two towers. The Pentagon was damaged by a third airliner. A fourth airliner was brought down in rural PA, possibly through action by its passengers. These facts are beyond dispute. There were thousands of on the scene witnesses and millions more worldwide on live media. We don't need mysterious explosions, disappearing airliners full of people, missles from nowhere which nobody saw, etc. to make these bums pay for what they've done. We have everything we need with the facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oblivious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. One fact that is disputable is that Al Qaeda brought down the WTC.
Proof was promised by the Bush and Blair govts, implicating Al Qaeda, but never provided for US national security reasons. So we're required to believe this rather incredible conspiracy theory with no proof presented.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. Al Qaeda did not?
Okay. I give up. Who did it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generarth Donating Member (309 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 02:23 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. My best guess
would be the CIA with the help of MI6. Al Queda may have been contracted to provide help with patsies etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oblivious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 02:42 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. I've seen nothing but theories, so I can only say I don't know.
With this government's lack of credibility, they would need to provide hard proof before I would consider their official conspiracy theory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedSock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #17
26. i have a book for you
incompetence? not possible. no way, no how, not from the evidence.

read "the war on truth" by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed

i'm reading it now and even for someone fairly well-versed in 9/11 research, it is blowing my mind every so often. for someone who doesn't know a lot of this stuff, it will explode their mind.

incredibly well sourced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generarth Donating Member (309 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #9
20. Nope you're wrong
It's not even MIHOP. Its 'did it themselves'. But theres obviously a lot of disinformation out there - so the stuff about a plane not hitting the WTC could be that - but it's very hard to believe that it was a plane that hit the pentagon. But considering what has happenned here, and the audacity of it, anything is possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 04:38 AM
Response to Reply #9
23. do you think you need ridicule to convince people you're correct?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pauldp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #9
24. OK. So what was it about the collapse of WTC7
that does not look like controlled demolition? Perhaps I missed something. There are 4 or 5 angles available (as I'm sure you are aware).

But of course they saved all the steel and tested it for explosives right? That would have been the scientific thing to do given that the collapse was unexplained.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #9
25. "reinforced concrete... under stress"
There was no reinforced concrete in the WTC. The only concrete was a
special lightweight concrete used as a filler on the floors (over the
metal floor pan).




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Exit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
8. "New Pearl Harbor"
The answer is hiding in plain sight. I believe the answer does, of course, extend well beyond the borders of the U.S.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
callady Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
14. An interesting tidbit a few weeks before Bush took office...
there was a break in at the Niger Embassy. You'll see the rest in this short article which is not about 9/11 but it is all connected.


Tell us who fabricated the Iraq evidence

By Norman Dombey

At the beginning of 2001, a few weeks before George Bush took office, there was a break-in at the Niger embassy in Rome. Strangely, nothing of value was taken. Months later came 9/11 and a month after that, as George Bush wondered how to get back at the terrorists, a report from the Italian security service (Sismi) reached the CIA: Iraq was seeking to buy uranium.

<snip>

Ledeen is an intriguing and enduring presence in the murkier parts of US foreign policy. He is an American specialist on Italy with a long-standing commitment to Israel. According to The New York Times, in December 2001, a few months after the CIA first heard the Niger claims, Ledeen flew to Rome with Manucher Ghorbanifar, a former Iranian arms dealer, and two officials from OSP, one of whom was Larry Franklin. In Rome they met the head of Sismi.

Some months later, the documents were published, having been sold to an Italian journalist by a Roman businessman linked to Sismi.So far, so circumstantial. One man who might well know the answer to all this is Vincent Cannistraro, the former head of counter terrorism operations at the CIA. His belief is that the documents were produced in the US but "funnelled through the Italians". When an interviewer asked Cannistraro "if I said Michael Ledeen", he reportedly replied "I don't think it's a proven case ...You'd be very close"

<snip>

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10571.h...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-23-05 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #14
27. Fascinating......so when do we investigate who did the forgeries?
Now, if it is proven that the evidence was faked so that PNAC could get their war on with Iraq....why would a plan to have 9/11 be their "Pearl Harbor" event be so farfetched?

C'mon...19 hijackers manage to sneak onboard 4 commercial aircraft successfully? 4/4, right? Because there were no failures reported that day. Those goshdarn terrorists were unbelievably good that day. And our $400BB/year military was unbelivievably bad that day....so bad, that they couldn't protect Washington, DC with a 40 minute heads-up.

How much money has been made by the MIC since 9/11? Billions upon billions. What's 3,000 lives when there's so much money to be made (or transferred).

When do we get to see the plane flying into the Pentagon? Amazing, 4 crashes...and no sign of airplanes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Oct 01st 2014, 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC