9-11 Information ---- NON debatable please

[laphanphon]

since previous thread is locked, and admittedly had a credibility problem, hope this provides some insight and provokes some thought process with us. the following is what i typed up before realizing thread was locked.

Ok, let me first apologize for doing something I said I would not do, jump into a debate, which I still will not do.

THIS IS A NON DEBATABLE ISSUE, YOU EITHER BELIEVE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, I’M AM NOT AND WILL NOT DEBATE THIS ISSUE.

No debate..............i agree, i disagree, didn't change my mind, gave me a new prespective...........still think you are a demented idiot. any one of those comments will do, but one liners please.

I will provide a bit of info, to help give you the opportunity to open you mind to a different possibility to the 9-11 commission which IMHO, is full of lies and omissions of information that would provide real answers to the many questions it created instead of answered.

I look at this thread, and rightfully so, it’s tough to swallow, the people mentioned in above post, as much as I like and enjoy some of their work, their credibility can easily come into question. Barring the above post, I think this post will provide a bit more info, from respected expert in their respected field, along with some of the most respected news, and investigative reporters.

There is one section we will disregard, even though some may be educated, but their credibility can easily be brought into question, as many are attention seekers. There are a few links I shall include, and one person who echoes my thoughts, that will be in quotes. The rest is links, and as these are links in favor of my personal thoughts on the subject, you will surely find just as many in an attempt to discredit the same people in other links.

I was hoping Hillary Clinton would win the presidency, as one of her VP choices on the short list was Gen. Wesley Clark. A separate link will be provided for his comments, other than 9-11 truth links.

Please keep an open mind, and get past the BS of the site, then read the comments of the people who have more knowledge and practical application of their expertise. Real people with real credentials, and no motive than to simply question the 9-11 commission and get to the truth.

As I said many times before, if one theory is impossible, that leaves the door open for the truth somewhere. Though I’m sure we will never know.

There are actually 6 sections of info,
180 military/intelligence
670 engineers and architects
200 pilots and aviation pros
400 professors or various fields
230 survivors and family members, special attention to survivors account of explosions in basement of other part of buildings.

Also many media professional, which you will have to scroll down to, as sadly, they are included with artist, entertainers, as their motive and credibility can easily become suspect, which is sad, as I’m sure many may be sincere, BUT may I strongly suggest you stroll down to media pros, some familiar names I’m sure and respected in their field.

Again, this post is not for debate, just informational, then I will return to my cave, and wait for a good munch/hotel/out and about, hopefully a good review of the HH Jazz Festival. In Nong Khai now, but it’s been done too many times already.

The links, a bit of reading, but I think worth the effort. And apologies for this quite long winded post itself. Just take the time, with an open mind. THANK YOU.

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

[laphanphon]

from above

David A. Johnson, B.Arch, MCP


Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"I was dubious of the official explanations from the outset. You see, as a professional city planner in New York, I knew those buildings and their design. I attended and participated in the hearings at the New York City Hall when the buildings were first proposed. I argued for the buildings on the basis that the interior core represented a way of internalizing the cost of mass transit, which in our system is almost impossible to finance through public bond issues.

So I was well aware of the strength of the core with its steel columns, surrounding the elevators, and stairwells. I should also mention that with a degree in architecture and instruction in steel design (my Yale professor had worked on the Empire State Building) I was and am no novice in structural design.

When I saw the rapid collapse of the towers, I knew that they could not come down the way they did without explosives and the severing of core columns at the base. The spewing of debris from the towers where the planes entered also could not have occurred simply with just a structural collapse. Something else was happening to make this occur.

Moreover, the symmetrical collapse is strong evidence of a controlled demolition. A building falling from asymmetrical structural failure would not collapse so neatly, nor so rapidly, as you have pointed out.

What we are faced with is a lie of such proportions that even to suggest it makes one subject to ridicule and scorn. Who could have done such a terrible thing? Certainly not our government or military. Rogue elements in the intelligence agencies? I have no idea.

But I do know that the official explanation doesn't hold water. An open, honest re-opening of the case is in order. A near majority of Americans agrees with this view. Let us keep pressing for an honest investigation."  http://www.ae911truth.org

Signatory: Petition requesting a reinvestigation of 9/11, signed by more than 600 Architects and Engineers:

"On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates  hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 - specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7.  We believe that there is sufficient doubt about the official story and therefore that the 9/11 investigation must be re-opened and must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that may have been the actual cause behind the destruction of the World Trade Center Towers and WTC Building 7." http://www.ae911truth.org/joinus.php

Editor's note: WTC Building 7 was 610 feet tall, 47 stories.  It would have been the tallest building in 33 states.  Although it was not hit by an airplane, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 7 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11, seven hours after the collapses of the Twin Towers.  However, no mention of its collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission's "full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks."  Watch the collapse video here.  And six years after 9/11, the Federal government has yet to publish its promised final report that explains the cause of its collapse.

and one more tidbit

Media Silent on Clark's 9/11 Comments
Gen. says White House pushed Saddam link without evidence

6/20/03

Sunday morning talk shows like ABC's This Week or Fox News Sunday often make news for days afterward. Since prominent government officials dominate the guest lists of the programs, it is not unusual for the Monday editions of major newspapers to report on interviews done by the Sunday chat shows.

But the June 15 edition of NBC's Meet the Press was unusual for the buzz that it didn't generate. Former General Wesley Clark told anchor Tim Russert that Bush administration officials had engaged in a campaign to implicate Saddam Hussein in the September 11 attacks-- starting that very day. Clark said that he'd been called on September 11 and urged to link Baghdad to the terror attacks, but declined to do so because of a lack of evidence.

Here is a transcript of the exchange:

CLARK: "There was a concerted effort during the fall of 2001, starting immediately after 9/11, to pin 9/11 and the terrorism problem on Saddam Hussein."

RUSSERT: "By who? Who did that?"

CLARK: "Well, it came from the White House, it came from people around the White House. It came from all over. I got a call on 9/11. I was on CNN, and I got a call at my home saying, 'You got to say this is connected. This is state-sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein.' I said, 'But--I'm willing to say it, but what's your evidence?' And I never got any evidence."



Clark's assertion corroborates a little-noted CBS Evening News story that aired on September 4, 2002. As correspondent David Martin reported: "Barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, the secretary of defense was telling his aides to start thinking about striking Iraq, even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks." According to CBS, a Pentagon aide's notes from that day quote Rumsfeld asking for the "best info fast" to "judge whether good enough to hit SH at the same time, not only UBL." (The initials SH and UBL stand for Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.) The notes then quote Rumsfeld as demanding, ominously, that the administration's response "go massive...sweep it all up, things related and not."

Despite its implications, Martin's report was greeted largely with silence when it aired. Now, nine months later, media are covering damaging revelations about the Bush administration's intelligence on Iraq, yet still seem strangely reluctant to pursue stories suggesting that the flawed intelligence-- and therefore the war-- may have been a result of deliberate deception, rather than incompetence. The public deserves a fuller accounting of this story.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1842

[aznyron]

LA thank you for your honesty & your posting we are on the same link when it comes to 9/11
I am with you 100 % on this one those who choose to believe other wise is fine just don't attack us for not believing the 9/11 report if your a non believer don't read it if you have open mind and suspect some thing is not kosher then I suggest you read LA link as well as the one I posted in the thread that locked

[WBU ALUM]

Time to lock this thread, too.

[aznyron]

Time to lock this thread, too.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
what is your fear some one might educate them selfs about 9/11 / it is my understanding when there is more than two people planning a crime it called conspiracy so we had 4 planes involved that day 2 hit the WTC 1 hit the pentagon if you believe that was a plane & 1 went down in some field in PA. so that makes my theory a conspiracy I personally
like talking about 9/11 I want to inform as many people I can about the B/S that was reported in the 9/11 commission
some of you will take issue that fine with me but some of you will change your opinion about 9/11 which is what I am looking to accomplish. like LA said it a non debatable issue with him as for locking this post it only one man opinion
and two opinions to keep it open I rest my case

[WBU ALUM]

Although, I do not believe in the 9-11 conspiracy, I do not chastise others for so doing so.

However, I do take issue with INCORRECT information (i.e. Homeland Security existing before 9-11), and I reserve the right to question/challenge sources (i.e. former professional wrestlers and country western entertainers).

This thread is no different than the last. Time to lock it, too.

[cookie]

and I reserve the right to question/challenge sources (i.e. former professional wrestlers and country western entertainers).

but, but... wasn't a former western actor one of your examples of great Conservatism....????

[WBU ALUM]

and I reserve the right to question/challenge sources (i.e. former professional wrestlers and country western entertainers).

but, but... wasn't a former western actor one of your examples of great Conservatism....????

Are you saying he was not an example of great conservatism?

I believe that even the most liberal of libs believe that Reagan (if that is to whom you are referring) was an example of great conservatism.

Time to close this thread. Off topic. Violates the Rule of Hammurabi.

[cookie]

I reserve the right to question/challenge :-" :-" :-"

[cali4995]

Oh dear, if we lock this thread as well I fear we will be entering "total gridlock"
"all posting suspended" all members must take a "time out" in the corner.

[WBU ALUM]

I reserve the right to question/challenge :-" :-" :-"

Who is preventing you from that, cookie? I did not imply it, nor do I wish it to happen. :-"

Question and challenge all.

[aznyron]

now it 3 to 1 you want to keep trying to lock it WCB ? why do you read it if you think it all B/S

[papaguido]

now it 3 to 1 you want to keep trying to lock it WCB ? why do you read it if you think it all B/S

Well if you're keeping count make it 3-2

[aznyron]

when it get to be we are out numbered then lock it no problems on my end

[konstabel els]

I certainly dont forget the ninth of september - just another reminder of what scum those islamics are. Keep St George in my heart - and keep me English - NO SURRENDER!!

[arjay]

I certainly dont forget the ninth of september - just another reminder of what scum those islamics are. Keep St George in my heart - and keep me English - NO SURRENDER!!

Why KE, what happened on the 9th September?

KE, It's not necessary and it's against forum rules to make racist remarks. Why not just refer to those that did it as terrorists or criminals. You can still be patriotic!

[trubrit]

For Gods sake this is a forum.A forum is all about debate. If you are not prepared to debate your views don't B post them.I am not the least interested in this subject but please don't tell me "NO debates"

[WBU ALUM]

For Gods sake this is a forum.A forum is all about debate. If you are not prepared to debate your views don't B post them.I am not the least interested in this subject but please don't tell me "NO debates"

I want to read more opinions about the underground Jewish conspiracy that is still underground after 8 years.

[aznyron]

that was not posted on this thread and I will not post it I thought you wanted this locked change of heart

[WBU ALUM]

that was not posted on this thread and I will not post it I thought you wanted this locked change of heart

I see no difference in either thread, and I am confused as to why one is locked and the other open. But if the mods are going to allow this one to remain, then I would assume that everything is fair game. However, I can never really assume that because I will bet a Tiger beer that this thread will be locked sooner or later. I still contend that it violates the Rule of Hammurabi.