Nut filter: 9/11 "Inside Job."

[Donnyrotten]

Originally Posted by Daft Punk

Question: If the government was supposedly slick enough to pull off 9/11 as an "inside job", why did they not plant WMD's in Iraq? Chinese riddle for you.

They werent very slick. There are huge holes in the official story and its filled with anti science.

Remember, i didnt roll out the "official"version of 9/11 events, the govt did.

So, if one belives everything at face value they told us, and can then poke numerous holes in the story and point out outrageous lies in it as well, does that not point to a need for a truly independant investigation, with no preconcieved notion of the truth.

Watch a video of building 7 coming down and tell me that is a random fire induced collapse.

The fact the dozen or so official parrots who continue to not look at demolition as a cause (Corley and others who were at Oklahoma City as well) shows clearly they dont want the truth, they only want to defend the official tale.

Thats why after 7 years NIST still hasnt explained the buildings demise.If you look the other way from the true cause, like they are, its mighty hard to come up with plausibility, hence 7 years and still no excuses yet.

[Al Czervik]

Oh, why not.

I believe 9/11 was an Operation Northwoods Y2K, if you will.

Although I lean more toward the privatized CIA aspect of who was in control as opposed to the purely "Cheney did it" analysis, I believe Mike Ruppert is in the ballpark.
Crossing the Rubicon: Simplifying the case against Dick Cheney

Privatized CIA analyses here:
Who Killed John O'Neill Summary - Democratic Underground
Webster Griffin Tarpley on 'Synthetic Terror' - Pt. 1

[Polynikes]

Originally Posted by Cym Jim

Instead of confusing this message board with some playground test of manhood, if I were you I'd be more concerned with the fact that people are confusing your posting style with that of Fishhead .

(I'm so sowwy, even if your post in that thread was similarly distasteful ).

I have no idea who Fishhead is. Nor, do I care. However, after being here for awhile, I know that there are a lot of confused people.

Oh, apology accepted.

Thanks.

[Polynikes]

Originally Posted by Al Czervik

Oh, why not.

I believe 9/11 was an Operation Northwoods Y2K, if you will.

Although I lean more toward the privatized CIA aspect of who was in control as opposed to the purely "Cheney did it" analysis, I believe Mike Ruppert is in the ballpark.
Crossing the Rubicon: Simplifying the case against Dick Cheney

Privatized CIA analyses here:
Who Killed John O'Neill Summary - Democratic Underground
Webster Griffin Tarpley on 'Synthetic Terror' - Pt. 1

Thanks for your honesty, al.

[Polynikes]

Originally Posted by Green Genes

I (in response to your post) did not call anyone a nutcase. The person who started this thread made that accusation but I prefer not to stoop to silly name calling.

I'm not "name calling." I'm making a clinical diagnosis. At most, I'm NAMING the psychotics.

[Dr. X]

Originally Posted by Al Czervik

Oh, why not.

I believe 9/11 was an Operation Northwoods Y2K, if you will.

Although I lean more toward the privatized CIA aspect of who was in control as opposed to the purely "Cheney did it" analysis, I believe Mike Ruppert is in the ballpark.
Crossing the Rubicon: Simplifying the case against Dick Cheney

Privatized CIA analyses here:
Who Killed John O'Neill Summary - Democratic Underground
Webster Griffin Tarpley on 'Synthetic Terror' - Pt. 1

+1 for me. Al and are in agreement on all of the above.

[Donnyrotten]

Green Genes...Is this guy qualified???



Another prominent skeptic of the official account of 9/11 is James Quintiere, PhD, former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), who has publicly called for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, “Questions on the WTC Investigations”, at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said [4], referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”


James Quintiere, Ph.D. “I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”

Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become ‘Conspiracy Theorists’, but in a proper way,” he said.

Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST’s failure to provide a report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7. “And that building was not hit by anything,” noted Dr. Quintiere. “It’s more important to take a look at that.”

[spacemaker2]

Sure our government did it.