Chavez says it's plausible Washington orchestrated Nine-Eleven attacks

[sabra]

http://www.kristv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5397881&nav=Bsmh

Chavez says it's plausible Washington orchestrated Nine-Eleven attacks

CARACAS, Venezuela Venezuela's president says it's "not absurd" to think that Washington had a hand in the Nine-Eleven attacks.

The South American leader who claims the U-S launched wars in Afghanistan and Iraq only to solidify political power, now contends a building like one of the World Trade Center towers "never collapses like that" and "could have been dynamited."

Hugo Chavez (OO'-goh CHAH'-vez) says a program he saw on Venezuelan state T-V included a theory about how the U-S could have carried out the attacks in order to, in his words, "justify the aggressions that immediately were unleashed" on Afghanistan and Iraq.

In a speech to supporters in Caracas, Chavez says it's a "hypothesis that is gaining strength."

[kurth]

1. One out of every three Americans agrees with him

And most of the world.

[brentspeak]

6. They do?

Where's the survey?

[kurth]

15. See:

One-third of people questioned in a Scripps Howard/Ohio University national poll last month said they think it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that people in the federal government assisted in Sept. 11 or took no action because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East.

http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_D_911conspire10.art.388b6d8.html

[Name removed]

17. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mcscajun]

29. If that "one-third" resulted from one question, then it was poorly written

The two choices should have been separate questions.

1) Do you believe that the federal government assisted in (causing) 9/11?

2) Do you believe that the federal government simply took no action to prevent 9/11?

I hate getting double-choice questions like that in polls. It would be like answering: Did you stop beating your wife or are you kicking your dog now? Any positive answer will be ambiguous. If I answer Yes, what am I saying? That I beat my wife, kick my dog, or both?

[0007]

169. No survey is needed!

[murray hill farm]

26. It amazes me that since 1/3 of our country believes it,

That there is no news coverage of the widely held belief, no docu studies or docu dramas or any word in print..no media journalistic specials. Even if they do not believe it at all, if 1/3 of the country does believe, then it deserves attention and discussion and debate, but......NO!

[mikelewis]

27. The truth is putting on its shoes.

A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.
Mark Twain

[murray hill farm]

31. I love it!

I thought I had read all of Twain, but do not remember that one. Thanks, I will save it.

[bvar22]

47. *

:dem:

[Henny Penny]

69. But now we have the Internet... the truth is speeding up! n/t

[ProudDad]

88. The press is controlled by

the repukes...

[Zynx]

181. Most Americans believe the Bible is literally true.

Most Americans don't believe in Evolution. Most Americans think that the stock market crash caused the Great Depression.

Just because a lot of people think something is true does not mean it should have any coverage.

[doctor_garth]

203. exactly

most americans believe the government DIDN'T have anything to do with 911. Only 1/3 does. So you shot yourself in the foot, your argument is at fault.

[Zynx]

224. My point is that many people can believe something that is totally wrong

The vast majority of people know that the Holocaust happened, but there are a lot of nutjobs out there who doubt that it happened or doubt the scale. They are a bunch of idiots and the same applies for the vocal minority regarding 9/11 conspiracy theories. My point stands that a lot of people believing something doesn't make it true so do not cite polls to bolster arguments about the veracity of a conpsiracy theory.

[rinsd]

227. Now there's some logic for you.

Person A puts forth that something is truth based on significant percentage of people beliving it.

Person B posits that popular belief and the truth are neither synonymous nor mutually exclusive.

You decide person B has proved person A's theory.

This may help in the future, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy

This one will help with this argument

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

[beachmom]

206. Actually, there was in Time magazine

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html

It's a good article, about how the Truth, that 19 hijackers could pull this off is so difficult to swallow that people come up with something that actually is more comforting to them, oddly enough. For them, it's easier to blame the federal government than to accept the unfathomable notion that such a small group of men could reek so much havoc so quickly on our country.

[coalition_unwilling]

218. National Pentagon Radio (NPR) ran a highly dismissive story a

couple weeks ago on "Morning Edition." I listened long enough to re-assure myself that they were going to take that same smirking, simpering attitude I now associate with them post-Iraq. Sure enough, about 2 minutes in, the NPR commentator showed his true colors, failing to respond to the specific allegation and, instead, impugning the integrity of the person making the allegation.

[lynne]

50. I have a hard time believing the one out of three ratio -

- as I've talked to tons of people - as have all of us - since 09/11/2001. In all that time I've run into a few, maybe two or three, who entertain such a theory. A far cry from one out of three.

I'd be interested to know the demographics of the participants but I didn't see that included. I think this poll is skewed, possibly due to the way the question was asked.

[morgan2]

52. I've talked to a lot of different people about it

most people under 30 seem to admit there is a possibility the government was involved. Most people won't say they believe it, but most younger people will admit its a possibility. Older people are much more reserved in their beliefs, and won't even entertain the idea.

[Benhurst]

152. Yeah, years of having your head stuck up your ass makes

seeing clearly difficult.

[Lost4words]

230. I'm 52 and I predicted something like 9-11 on December 12/2000!

the day SCOTUS gave the keys to the WH to dimson. It was the next logical step for the junta!

These traitors didnt fool me for one second, at the very least they allowed it to happen, I am glad some of you are finally coming around to reality, its only been 6 GD years!

When I even heard Dem's saying he rose to the occasion after 9/11 I wanted to puke my stomach out.

[Benhurst]

237. I'm ten years your senior, and I'm in total agreement with you.

:toast:

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

137. I heard this theory on the day itself. Two of my, well educated, not

prone to hyperbole, coworkers immediately said that gwb orchestrated the attacks to distract from the tanking economy.

And the cabal's power grabbing, cash grubbing actions since 9/11 haven't done much to dispel that thinking.

MKJ

[jacklambert]

162. tanking economy...

so we are to believe that to deflect attention away from the tanking economy, *ush and his ilk were going to perpetrate an act that would further tank the economy???

I'm not buying it.

I just think that this does an incredible disservice to the men and women who perished on 9/11. Specifically those on the airplanes that were used as guided missles by the terrorists. I knew someone on the plane that hit the North Tower. Those that say planes weren't used and it was all smoke and mirrors do incredible damage to the memories and the families of those killed.

[NVMojo]

174. I believe there may have been a deliberate PNAC effort to jam things that

morning ...such as the NORAD stuff by Cheney and his henchmen. Remember the PNAC stance on the need for a Pearl Harbor-like event to happen in order to get us taxpayers to foot the bill for a mass and long term infusion of cash into defense spending for world wide military domination by the US.

[coalition_unwilling]

221. You need to read "The New Pearl Harbor" by David Ray Griffin.

It's a pretty dispassionate survey of the varius theories surrounding 9/11, including the official narrative which is a conspircay theory also (19 dis-affected Saudis conspired against the US).

You will be able to read it and retain your respect for those who perished. I can guarantee you will be left thinking "What if?" and, if you're like I am, will emerge from the experience hopping mad.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

138. dupe.

MKJ

[Captain Hilts]

55. No. Latest survey is 16%. nt

[rman]

165. another survey says 59%

[hack89]

74. That's still fewer than those that believe in Creationism..

do numbers of believers equal truth?

[John Q. Citizen]

102. Someone disproved creationism ? When are they publishing and in which

scientific journal?

I'm looking forward to that. I've always been suspicious of the theory, myself, but I was under the impression it was unprovable either way.

Wow, you learn something new on DU every day.

[Benhurst]

155. Every thinking person knows that the world was created when

the great God Bejuen farted, starting the Big Bang.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

2. Well, isn't that special. n/t

[Name removed]

3. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Psephos]

4. Yes, he's a brilliant authority on structural engineering

and has deep experience in political intrigue.

Peace

[LaPera]

8. Thanks!!! Yes, he really is , Chavez is indeed brilliant.!!!!

Your right only a stupid foolish idiot dumb clown would believe a fire made the buildings collapse!!!

Just to stay alive with the fascist Bush administration out to kill any way they can, in order to steal and get their hands on that Venezuelan oil takes brilliance!!!!

[fujiyama]

85. I guess many structural engineers

are all "stupid foolish idiot dumb clowns ", huh?

I'm sorry, but all the "evidence" that the buildings were brought down by anything other than the planes is incredibly unconvincing. I'm not talking about WTC 7, where there is a slight possibility the building was pulled after it was likely it was in such bad shape, but the two main towers. I don't see why it's necessary to believe the two towers were rigged with explosives when you had two 767s loaded with fuel crashing into the buildings.

[John Q. Citizen]

103. 3 buildings, 3 random events, three stagiated collaspes. It makes one

wonder why anyone would spend the time and big money hiring a professional controlled explosives demolition company to drop a building, doesn't it?

[WinkyDink]

135. Then those "structural engineers" who are opining are talking out

of their butts.

ALL the steel---AKA, the EVIDENCE to be STUDIED by STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS---was hauled away ASAP as garbage.
NEVER examined or studied.

And, of course, there had never been a precedent nor has there been a successor.

[paulk]

211. one of the biggest lies told by the conspiracy theorists

is "ALL the steel---AKA, the EVIDENCE to be STUDIED by STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS---was hauled away ASAP as garbage.
NEVER examined or studied."

This is simply not true.


"NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web site, http://wtc.nist.gov. This included consideration of a number of hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse. "

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm


Of course, you're going to say that the NIST investigation was just made up...

[John Q. Citizen]

241. No more than the experts would make up WMD. They spent a lot of

time studing that too. The experts know!

Experts spent a long time studying elections and all those machines were certified by experts. Elections can't be stolen on a wide spread basis in the US, it would take a huge conspiracy. The experts told us. So believe it.

REMEMBER don't trust your own lying eyes, trust the experts!!!

[FogerRox]

238. I just saw a video about a guy studying some beams kept in NJ

at the landfill.

[John Q. Citizen]

242. I just saw a video of Iraqi WMD.

[greccogirl]

178. You are wasting your time.

Those that want to believe this aren't going to be convinced by anything.

[coalition_unwilling]

222. Over 20 eye- and ear-witnesses c;laimed to have witnessed

explosions before the buildings collapsed.

Jef fuel (kerosene) reaches a maximum temperature of 1200 F. Steel melts at 2000 F. Hydrocarbon fires from building materials and jet fuel were probably not hot enough to cause the buildings' collapse by weakening the steel.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

10. This will do wonders for the poor of Venezuela!

I want to be able to wholeheartedly support Chavez. Really, I do. I just wish he'd keep his fucking mouth shut once in a while.

I guess it was time to grab the headlines again.

[Psephos]

12. I share your feelings exactly. n/t

[LaPera]

14. yes, only right-wing leaders should speak their mind on US imperialism!

[stepnw1f]

23. Oh... Snap! (nt)

[KaptBunnyPants]

56. The sweet sound of God's Word is a dagger to the hearts of demons

I'm sure you do wish he would shut up. I'd just be happy with seeing your every wish go unfulfilled.

[stepnw1f]

60. BTW - Welcome to DU

and good catch.

[KaptBunnyPants]

62. Thank you, glad to be here.(nt)

[Name removed]

105. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rman]

164. Deep experience in political intrigue and clandestine operations

of US origin.
I suppose i don't need to remind anyone of the history of US intervention in Latin America.

[CJCRANE]

5. Watch "9/11: Press for Truth".

The political and financial questions and revelations in that documentary are shocking enough with no need to delve into "controlled demolition" etc.

[brentspeak]

7. In other words, Chavez is a crackpot

[mikelewis]

30. Yep and he's in good company...

[0007]

172. You've been so wrong for so long but your so right tonight..

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lse7581011]

61. And Possibly

Absolutely correct!

[treestar]

140. He only said it was "plausible"

Not that it was so.

[trixie]

9. After seeing

www.newamericancentury.org I have to totally agree.

[Peace Patriot]

16. Yup, here's just the opener, for laughs....

"The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle.

"The Project for the New American Century intends, through issue briefs, research papers, advocacy journalism, conferences, and seminars, to explain what American world leadership entails. It will also strive to rally support for a vigorous and principled policy of American international involvement and to stimulate useful public debate on foreign and defense policy and America's role in the world.

William Kristol, Chairman

www.newamericancentury.org

---------------------------------

Talk about crackpots.

(.org my ass)

[partylessinOhio]

11. Chavez just says what I been thinking since 9-11.

[bamacrat]

13. He better watch out telling the truth like that.

Why is it that other countries get leaders with half a brain, and we get one with a pea for a brain. Its not fair damnit we're Ammrka.

[Sadie5]

18. Chavez might have a big mouth

But he only says what zillions of others are thinking and afraid to say. You go Guy!!!

[reprobate]

207. You mistake Bush for Cheney. HE is the power behind the throne.

[Igel]

19. Creationism's also a proposal that's gaining strength,

numerically.

Since when did we start believing what state-run media tell us, or that reality really is dependent on majority opinion. Were that the case, we'd never have started to believe the world was round.

[VegasWolf]

94. What??? The world is round? Then why don't the people at the bottom

just fall off into space? Just teasing! :)

[Double T]

20. Who the hell knows what the REAL TRUTH is about 9-11,........

Iraq, Afghanistan or anything else bushco has been involved in.

[stepnw1f]

24. A Couple People on this Board

evidently think they do....

You are right. NOBODY knows.

[Canadian_moderate]

21. Must be true if Chavez says so.

I hate Bush as much as the next person, but claiming the Bush administration orchestrated the attacks is simply giving fuel to those who claim the anti-war side is led by a few nutcases.

I happen to think that the attacks would have probably also happened if Gore had been president. What is more important, however, is the different way in which Gore would have responded. I doubt he would have left the job in Afghanistan unfinished and moved on to Iraq, which had no connection to the 9/11 attacks.

As an outsider, I would warn Americans who dislike or hate Bush not to be too eager to support foreign leaders such a Chavez. It takes away your credibility and makes it harder for a Democrat to be elected president.

[springhill]

49. And why do you think that would have happened?

You are saying he would have gone on vacation after getting a PDF saying Bin Laden determined to strike in the United States? You are saying that he would have ignored the various warnings from many other countries that there was something terrible coming down? Or are you saying he would have let it happen, Just like this administration, because he had intentions, just like this administration, of going to war in Iraq and so they needed the excuse to do it? Or maybe you believe that, just like this administration, he was out to grab as much power as possible? Maybe he would have trotted out the pre-written patriot act just like Bush did?

You know something, the dots are there. From the very first controversey concerning the energy meetings to the current wars; they all go together.

[ngant17]

59. Not just Chavez, the Germans and French have been saying it

I strongly encourage all Americans in the USA to support Chavez and his Bolivarian Revolution. And try to buy Citgo gasoline whereever possible.

Bush doesn't have the mental savvy to scheme out something as big as 911.

But lots of people inside federal gov. were working behind the scenes to implement the attack, and if Osama was involved, it was only on a lower level.

[beachmom]

208. No thanks. n/t

[ima_sinnic]

78. 9/11 would NOT have happened under President Gore's watch.

period, end of story.

[fujiyama]

91. Gore wouldn't have sat around chopping wood and playing golf

in the summer of '01. Throughout the Clinton administration he had taken the issue of terrorism very seriously including at one time pushing for strong anti terror legislation which was called "exagerrated" by repukes at the time.

It's possible a Gore administration would have made the same mistakes Bush did prior to 9/11, but I have a difficult time believing Gore would have ignored Clarke's warning all throughout the summer.

But as you said, the aftermath would have been very different, with no unecessary war in Iraq.

[FogerRox]

239. it wasnt mistakes...... ABLE DANGER

[Laughing Mirror]

22. Who had the most to gain from 9-11?

Saddam? Chávez? Bush?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

25. Osama? n/t

[Canadian_moderate]

32. I would say Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda

Bush ended up doing exactly what they would have wanted him to do.

He walked straight into every trap they laid out for him.

As for the favourite line supporters of the war in Iraq like to use all the time when they justify the invasion of Iraq, you know "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", I would sya that is exactly why we should not have invaded Iraq. Saddam was an enemy of bin Laden, he was an Arab secularist who oppressed religious extremism, and that why we should have used him the way we used Stalin to defeat Hitler in WW2.

[VegasWolf]

96. Easy! Halliburton and Exxon! They had more to gain by MILES. nt

[Laughing Mirror]

125. Ding Ding! We finally have a winner

They've sure made out like bandits haven't they.

[greccogirl]

180. Bin Ladlen. The person who did it.

[Zynx]

183. Under the same logic, JFK was shot by Lyndon Johnson, Lincoln was

shot by Andrew Johnson, GM and Ford were resposible for bombing Pearl Harbor(they made so much money off the war), Home Depot conjures hurricanes, etc...

Just because someone benefits does not mean they did it.

[Laughing Mirror]

189. Yes but when you have same people who send us to war being the same people

being the same people who own the oil companies and the Halliburtons, that is Bush & Cheney, that changes the equation. Those two are responsible for it and they and theirs gained huge profits from exploiting it.

[seriousstan]

28. Chavez: no one ever found a single remnant of that plane. DEBUNKED!!

"A plane supposedly crashed into the Pentagon, but no one ever found a single remnant of that plane," Chavez said, citing a television program he had seen on Venezuela's state television.



FACT: Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?c=y&imageID=468257&caption=%3Cspan+class%3D%22captionintro%22%3EAFTERMATH%3A%3C%2Fspan%3E+Wreckage+from+Flight+77+on+the+Pentagon%E2%80%99s+lawn--proof+that+a+passenger+plane%2C+not+a+missile%2C+hit+the+building.+PHOTOGRAPH+BY+AP%2FWIDE+WORLD+PHOTOS
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=6&c=y

The enemy of my enemy is sometimes an idiot.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

33. Well, let's be fair to Chavez.

In this case, or enemy is an idiot, as well as the enemy of our enemy.

[seriousstan]

35. One does not excuse the other.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

37. LOL n/t

[Hoping4Change]

51. Given that Popular Mechanics is owed by Hearst, I'm sure that

it is a bona fide source of information.:sarcasm:

[rinsd]

160. LOL......as opposed to Capt. Thermite? Or Dear Hugo?

[Hoping4Change]

190. The problem of citing Pop Mechanics is the presumption

scientific impartiality. These days scientific disinterestedness is no longer a given.

[ProudDad]

90. Why has no-one else

seen all of this "evidence"?

Also, Mr. Kilsheimer was paid a lot of money by the Pentagon, an obviously un-biased source of information -- oh, yeah, and an expert on aviation crash scenes :sarcasm:

http://www.masonrymagazine.com/8-02/rising.html

[oblivious]

119. That's interesting. Kilsheimer got to pick all the contractors.

Fromboluti remembers, "Evey asked, 'Who do you want to work on this project?' Kilsheimer submitted a list of those he thought could do the job. The Pentagon said okay and picked the team in a day."

[Bhaisahab]

132. deleted - duplicate post

[Bhaisahab]

133. Hello.

The Popular Mechanics article debunking 911 'theories' was written by Ben Chertoff, cousin to then Homeland Security boss Michael. That alone makes it highly suspect. It also is accused of manufacturing claims supposedly made by the 911 truth movement, and then going on to debunk them, while ignoring the actual questions raised by researchers.

Also, the photo provided by you is:



Are you certain this is a part of the plane that crashed? It could be anything, say a piece from a truck or a car. You can actually see the pentagon in flames in the background, and this little piece is all that is remaining in front of it? Where did the rest of the debris go, if indeed a plane crashed into the pent?

Could it be that the person quoted in the Popular Mechanics article - Allyn E. Kilsheimer - is lying?

From: http://www.syska.com/Government/news/article.asp?Articles.ART_ID=121
Dated: Sept 24, 2001
The Pentagon Renovation Office has also contracted Allyn E. Kilsheimer, a Washington, D.C.-based engineer, to be its structural expert for Wedges I and II.


Hmmm......

[rinsd]

159. Hugo is reaching out to the foilers, I guess.

[greccogirl]

182. Sometimes an idiot? Chavez is always one. Especially

with this ridiculous stuff.

[VegasWolf]

34. Doesn't everyone believe that burning kerosene brought down three

massive concrete and hardened steel buildings in what appears best to be a vertically stabilized, controlled demolition? Well, I guess it is as easy to believe that as for the fundies to believe that there are invisible sky people all around us and a mean god to send us to hell if we cross him.

[seriousstan]

36. They should, it is a fact........

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=4&c=y

[VegasWolf]

39. If you believe what those two "writers", self-admittedly not engineers,

wrote in their "story", well then good for you. There too many real engineers and scientists who have doubts. Prior to this story, no fire has EVER brought down a concrete and steel building. 1832 degrees Fahrenheit is still way below even the softening point of hardened steel. And it would take
more than a brief pocket of 1832 Fahrenheit temp to do anything. But, hey, since you have such a hardon for debunking everyone on this thread who doesn't believe what you and your two "writers" from Popular Mechanics believe, then carry on. No one will ever convince you true believer types.

[seriousstan]

42. Back at you. Since Chavez is not an engineer either, are you?

I will rely on the opinion of experts like these.....

retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety

senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction

Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted

Furthermore, I have posted 2 replies, before this one. Hardly "debunking everyone on this thread who doesn't believe what you and your two "writers" from Popular Mechanics". Exaggerate much......oops, I guess you do.

Nice to see you outside the 9/11 dungeon though.

[VegasWolf]

44. We can cut this short, you have your experts the other side has theirs. nt

[katinmn]

200. My recommendation

Use the ignore feature. Certain people will suck up your energy arguing their cause endlessly.

[MrPrax]

84. Did you hear the debate?

Goodman had a debate yesterday with the editorof Popular Mechanics and the maker of Loose Change...

I figure you probably know about it, but I will post it for anyone interested...

Democracy Now

There's a two story wood frame house down the road a few blocks from me -- completely engulfed and gutted by fire -- yet even after nearly a year, it still stands.

Do you suppose there is a movement in the armorment industry to build bombs with jet fuel instead of explosives -- afterall we just went through an entire century of warfare, strife, civil war, etc where entire armies would fire missle after missle at building-type targets without nearly this level of success.
These guys managed to fulfil the wet-dreams of the world's warlords three times -- and they used aluminium planes. Maybe the west should simply build cheap jets with big fuel tanks -- probably cheaper than a cruise missile and tens times more effective!

:shrug:


Another Ground Zero -- bet it got pretty hot

[VegasWolf]

89. Yes, I heard the debate! It was allright, as typical of debates each side

disagrees with the other. If found it particularly interesting that some goverment officials, particularly the coroner from the PA crash site were not even allowed to talk with the loose change guys. I wasn't to impressed with the two Popular Mecahnics writers though, last time I read Popular Mechanics they were talking about Mars colonies at the end of the 1980's.

[MrPrax]

93. LOL oh yeah...

I remember piece they had when the shuttle was first proposed and they were lobbying for funding in the late 70s. The arm on the shuttle was going to 'grab' asteroids out of the sky and drag them back to earth.

Do you know an asteroid might have trillions of dollars in minerals and limit the impact of earth based mining!!!

Sold me...but I was 15 ;-)

[VegasWolf]

98. Cheers! We might be about the same age! nt

[IChing]

114. See they attack and cannot explain metal that lasts melting for a week

In the whole that there is no remembrance of.

[TankLV]

175. NAME ONE. You can't - because ALL engineers KNOW what happened to the

building.

NOT ONE ENGINEER makes ridiculuous claims as you do.

NOT ONE.

[frylock]

71. the nist report stated that the metal was exposed to temps of 600°..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=125&topic_id=45315
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-3Draft.pdf

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."

Yet, in all of history, only 3 skyscrapers have ever collapsed due to "combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper".

[VegasWolf]

75. There you go! Destroying the Bush propaganda with information. nt

[BrokenBeyondRepair]

116. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire,"

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2991254740145858863&q=wtc+melt+steel+before+collapse

[rman]

126. No kerosene in wtc7, tests fail to reproduce collapse

FEMA concluded the diesel fuel fires are a very unlikely cause of the collapse of that building.
Yet it fell in on itself even more neatly than the towers.

FEMA
World Trade Center Building Performance Study
http://www.fema.gov/library/wtcstudy.shtm
Chapter 5 - WTC7 http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf (pdf)

5.7 Observations and findings (page 31)
(...)
"The specifics of the fires in WTC7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue."

----

Also experiments failed to reproduce significant weakening of steel due to fire:

World Trade Center Building Performance Study
Apendix A
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apa.pdf

In the mid-1990s British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cordington to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900 C (1,500-1,700 F) in three of the tests well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600 C (1,100 F), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments.

[WinkyDink]

136. After-the-fact guesses to toe the Party line. No evidence studied.

Paper and rugs will melt STEEL???

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

38. So publish, dude.

Since you've obviously got the credentials to tell us all about controlled demolition, how about publishing some of that sweet nectar of truth in a peer reviewed journal?

[VegasWolf]

40. I suppose you have a faint idea of science? Could you even read the

publications that are even out there now?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

41. I have, actually.

Point me to a MIHOP publication in a proper peer reviewed journal, and I'll happily read it, too!

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

46. You seem to be under the impression...

...that something published without peer review on the web carries the same weight as something published in a peer reviewed journal. You are incorrect. So I ask you again - a cite, please. One paper, just one, supporting the MIHOP/demolition hyphothesis, publised in a peer reviewed journal. I don't require a link - just the reference, if that's what you've got.

[VegasWolf]

48. Nope, not that impression,

I am a scientist, but not a mechanical engineer. I understand publication very well thank you. I have already pointed you to the writings of PhDs who contest the government story. I assume that you do understand how pressure can be brought down on academics. Why they haven't published is a question to them. I find the burning kerosene hypothesis to not have much credibility, obviously you do. Like I said to the other poster, each side has their own experts. I simply find the whole BushCo explanation a flight of fancy, like sky people. Time will tell.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

53. Well...

I am a scientist

Then you should be intimately familiar with the idea that there is a profound difference between material published without peer review on the internet, and material published with peer review in a journal.

Furthermore, I find it exceedingly odd to find a scientist or academic of any description claiming that a PhD counts for anything in terms of the validity of one's research. Were that the case, peer review would be a mostly unnecessary exercise.

As for your comments about "pressure" on academics, obviously there are academics who feel comfortable supporting the controlled demolition hypothesis in public, and once again I find it exceedingly odd that none of them have even tried to publish. (I am making the assumtion here that if they tried and failed, we would have heard something about it.)

If, as has been claimed, 1/3 of Americans support MIHOP, I find it very unlikely that not one of them is in a position to publish.

MIHOP will be subject to the same rigors as every other new theory if, and when, any of its supporters chose to publish findings with some scientific basis. There is no special MIHOP dispensation for doing away with the normal process. I don't read geology papers from HorizontalSubductionistsForAndeanTruth.com, and I see no reason to make an exception for the MIHOP hypothesis.

Edit: typos.

[Henny Penny]

72. The old trust me " I'm a scientist routine" eh?

I'm a scientist too and I find your view of the peer review system frankly rose tinted. The suspension and hounding of academics who subscribe to the LIHOP or MIHOP theories mean that there is hardly likely to be a rush of experts in the field to verify or negate their hypotheses.

Still, I can't fault you for effort.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

127. Well...

Then the only solution I see is to throw out the peer review system on account of MIHOPpers feeling like they're not getting a fair shake. And that seems ridiculous.

[Henny Penny]

143. If thats the only solution you see, I worry about you!

There's no need to throw out the whole peer review system, but there is a need to recognise its shortcomings.

Anyone working in research will know that even well respected authors in prominent journals may publish stuff that is not repeatable or has to be seriously amended after it has been published. The idea for the research might well come from the Nobel Laureate but the results will come from an overworked post doc who is probably under huge pressure to get results fast...

It is really only once a paper has been published and the experiments repeated by others or the conclusions used as a basis for other research that shortcomings may arise. And if the research is in an obscure area they may never be found.

The Jan Hendrik Schon case is an example of how the peer review system might fail... and his fraud was probably uncovered simply because the work was in a hot subject area, nanotechnology. It is also an example of its sucess... Schon's published work was seen by others working in the field (after it had supposedly been validated by peer review) and they decided to check it because it did not tally with their own results.... et voila.

I'd like to see Jones publish in a peer reviewed journal, but the reason he hasn't done so might not be as simple as "the work is rubbish". The fact that he has been suspended from his post seems to point to other more worrying factors.

[0007]

176. Where'd yibbehobba, our scientific expert?

[treestar]

141. It would seem a scientist would have to persuade just like anyone

else and that scientists could disagree; so I never fall for the idea "I'm a scientist, you're not, therefore just believe me." If a "scientist" really did understand it, they would be able to explain it.

I've heard every explanation for why these fires could have "weakened" the steel so it would collapse. They defy common sense. Melting point is meaningless if you believe them. Something only starts to "weaken" at its melting point, it does not "start to weaken" at a lower temperature.

If there is an explanation for why this might still happen in the towers, the "scientist" never bothers with it.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProudDad]

92. How many "peer reviewed"

articles written by people (and reviewed by people) who have had access to ALL of the information have you read?

The main point is that we have NOT been given the facts. The facts are still "classified" like everything else in this fascist police state called the U.S. of A.

[Phrogman]

115. I used to be a scientist also

But that was last week on a different board, this week I'm a former ambassador, and next week I'm thinking about becoming a spaceman, so I can argue about star wars.

Don't ya love this internets?

[VegasWolf]

122. Yes, but very few have the IQ to pull off lies for long. There are a lot

very smart people here and blatant liars don't last long.

[progressoid]

156. So, you're saying that Bush et. al. have high IQs...

They've been pulling off this "lie" for 5 years now. Wow, they must be geniuses.

[VegasWolf]

171. Why, are they posting on this forum? I didn't know! nt

[VegasWolf]

150. Since my previous reply to you was deleted, I'll try one more time. As

others have pointed out to you, your concepts of peer review are rosy tinted at the very least. You are the one bringing up MIHOP, LIHOP, and other theories. I stated nothing more than I thought the theory of burning kerosene bring down a steel and concrete building was absurd. I, of course, stand by this statement.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

151. Thanks for leaving out the crucial element of structural damage...

...due to impact.

[VegasWolf]

154. That hardly explains the third tower going down, does it? nt

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

157. Structural damage and massive uncontained fire?

Why yes it does, actually.

[VegasWolf]

170. No, it really doesn't! No steel and concrete building other than the

mysterious WTC buildings collaspe has ever been brought down by fire. But, if you say Bush's propaganda is true, then it must be true. Bye bye.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

179. Why do you insist on ignoring structural damage?

And speaking of diverging from science, I think you've just achieved escape velocity. Back to the dungeon!

[VegasWolf]

191. LOL. We see who's reached escape velocity. Let's see, isn't name

calling the last refuge of the incompetent? Why do you Bush apologists want to ignore the fact that no plane crashed into WTC-7, ergo, no massive structural damage.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

193. No planes crashed into the Tacoma Narrows bridge, either.

And that managed to fall down. When are you guys going to realise that buildings collapse for different reasons? 7 did suffer structural damage and uncontained fire.

Find any peer reviewed papers for me yet?

[VegasWolf]

194. Okay. If you say so, it must be true. When you went to school did

they teach you the difference between a building and a bridge? Just curious?

[VegasWolf]

192. BTW. Both you and that SeriousStan use the same arcane "dungeon"

terminology. How many identities do you have on this board. Fess up, you really are George W. aren't you?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

195. "dungeon" is one of the nicknames...

...for the various incendiary (pun not intended) topic forums like 9/11, gun control, and Israel/Palestine that were created to keep their respective keyboard armies from overrunning GD. There are a great many people here who use this terminology. Do a search. I only have one identity on these forums. And stop insulting Stan by associating him with the likes of weirdos like me.

[VegasWolf]

196. LOL. The association was merely based on congruence of, well to be nice,

shared "ideas" between you two.

[stepnw1f]

58. and that's "the official BUSH government story"

let's win this election and then have a REAL investigation.

[oblivious]

128. Has the official CT evidence ever been submitted for peer review?

[Vidar]

45. Glad to hear him say it.

[Say_What]

54. Bloomberg article...Chavez called Bush a ``coward,'' ``assassin,'' ``drunk

:bounce:

...Chavez called Bush a ``coward,'' ``assassin,'' ``drunk'' and ``donkey.''



http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a4.mbCEWbsbQ&refer=home

[goforit]

64. Well...he is!

[yurbud]

67. of course. Only a coward would practically dare the most powerful nation

in history to take him out.

It would be much braver to toady to Bush and sell out his own people.

[Say_What]

149. I especially liked

the term 'donkey'

:rofl:

[BrotherBuzz]

65. Chavez, "Bush you are a Donkey"

A little chuckle from Your tube dot commie thingy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYYQT21p7l8

Enjoy! :rofl:

[RangerSmith]

82. but in the next

breath the guy is smart enough to have pulled off the 911 attacks.

which is it? You can't have it both ways....

well, and have a shred of credibilty left anyway...

[ProudDad]

95. Nobody has suggested that bush

pulled of 9/11.

Now Cheney, et. al., they're capable of doing it.

bush wasn't told anything until he was reading "My Pet Goat".

[VegasWolf]

99. Well, they could have shown Bush a crayon drawing of a jet and a big

building. Just guessing.

[yurbud]

66. didn't some russian general say this right after 9/11 too?

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[yurbud]

70. Former head of German intel & Bundestag intel chair agree with Chavez:

Eckehardt Werthebach, former president of Germany's domestic intelligence service, Verfassungsschutz, told AFP that "the deathly precision" and "the magnitude of planning" behind the attacks of September 11 would have needed "years of planning."

***


Andreas von Bulow served on the parliamentary commission which oversees the three branches of the German secret service while a member of the Bundestag (German parliament) from 1969 to 1994, and wrote a book titled Im Namen des Staates (In the Name of the State) on the criminal activities of secret services, including the CIA.

"Ninety-five percent of the work of the intelligence agencies around the world is deception and disinformation," von Bulow said, which is widely propagated in the mainstream media creating an accepted version of events. "Journalists don't even raise the simplest questions," he said adding, "those who differ are labeled as crazy."

[RangerSmith]

76. Getting behind this guy is one fo the

few things that could cost us an almost assured majority in the House.

[VegasWolf]

77. I don't think that is what is being discussed, but lets win the election

and have a REAL investigation!

[RangerSmith]

79. I honestly

believe those calling for a "real" investigation won't take anything less than what they believe now to be the truth.

So, whats the point of wasting the time and money?

I'm all for an investigation into what the administration did after 911 and all those lies, but the bottom line is the bush administration isn't smart enough to have pulled this off.

It's really hard for me to believe that so many here really think they are that smart.

[VegasWolf]

83. Not true. David Copperfield has proved that you can pull off a huge

illusion, i.e., making a 737 airplane surrounded by audience members disappear, with just a small number of people "in the know".

Why do you believe that if Democrats push for an investigation, that it will be biased. Do you really believe the Republican administration so much?

Why do you think people here believe "that they are really that smart" just because they disagree with the stated Bush answers to 9/11?

In all honesty, many people here are really gifted as to say for example, Free Republic dot Com posters. There they can barely muster an aggregate 92 IQ among the entire group of them.

[RangerSmith]

130. lol

Hardly proves your point man! In fact if anything it shows the flaws.

Copperfield's assistants gave away the trick to the first person willing to pay a few hundred dollars! Google it!

Man, I can't believe in a serious discussion about 911, David Copperfield even comes up. That is really freakin sad.

Can't you see how far you are stretching to not accept reality?

[VegasWolf]

148. Sad is right, for all the people who accept BushCo's blatant stories.

Keep accepting Bush's reality and see where it takes you.

[Name removed]

232. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProudDad]

97. You're wrong on 2 accounts

1) We sure would accept the results of a "Real" investigation.

2) There are people in the bush admin who ARE smart enough to have pulled it off. They're NOT named bush but they are there.

on edit:

They're smart enough to have cleaned the democrats' clocks for 12 years!

[RangerSmith]

107. well, yeah

have you read this thread?

[ProudDad]

109. Yes

the whole bloody thing...

Including the knee-jerk anti-Chavez's and the knee-jerk "but americuns wouldn't do that" zealots.

[stepnw1f]

225. Did you Vote for Mr. Dipshit Too?

Now read the thread again, because most everyone here didn't. Yes, they were smart enough not to vote for him, which says enough. Now why do you believe what the right wing says about Chavez? Remember, the right wing has only good things to say about Mr. Dipshit!

[Henny Penny]

144. If there was a proper investigation the numbers not accepting

the outcome would be in the low single figures percentage-wise. In the absence of such an investigation we have the numbers of doubters rising exponentially.

[yurbud]

184. with voters or big business? If you presented it as Chavez vs. the OIL

companies, people would choose him.

If the Democrats want to consistently win, they might grow some balls and go after one of the big dogs (like big oil) that are tearing us to pieces instead of kicking us in between the dog bites.

Otherwise, they might as well call themselves the party that screws you with lube instead of without, so it doesn't hurt as much as when the republicans do it.

[LiberalMandrake]

80. WTC "planes" - a bigger lie than the Pentagon and Shanksville "planes"

The second impact "live", three seconds repeated dozens of times on 9/11 - that was the only video with a plane released on 9/11. A plane but no crash is visible in that video.

But the BIG LIE framework requires regular upscaling. So videos of the frontal "impact" were released the days after. And those videos can be immediately exposed as fake, by simply comparing them with footage of tests of real planes crashing.

This leads to another consequence of the BIG LIE framework: the bigger the lie the easier it is to expose it.
Those videos of the frontal "impacts" expose the video released by the media on 9/11 as fakes.
Or in other words, it exposes the fact that the WTC "planes" is an even bigger lie than the Pentagon and Shanksville "planes"...

[smitty]

87. I'm a little confused here, so help me out. Are you saying

that no planes hit the World Trade Center?

[Sterling]

104. Plz stop.

It's one thing to think critically and be open to the idea that 9-11 is not what it seems. What you are suggesting is just retarded and counter productive to exploring the truth about that day.

It's people like you that get in the way of real questioning of that event with idiotic bullshit like you just posted.

[mhatrw]

123. Why are you here?

If you believe this stuff, why would you say it?

[jacklambert]

163. What???

As i said in an earlier post, you do an incredible disservice to those families that lost loved ones in the planes that were hijacked into the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and Shanksville. I hope that you have enough intellect to know that. You certainly haven't shown any in your posting.

[Nutmegger]

81. Anyone have extra butter?

:popcorn:

[ProudDad]

86. I'm not convinced that they did orchestrate 9/11

but I think it's plausible.

They are ruthless fascists and there is ample precedent for ruthless fascist false-flag operations.

Remember the Reichstag fire?

At best though, even if they didn't, they sure as hell allowed it to happen either by choice or gross (semi-premeditated) incompetence... They got the "Pearl Harbor" they wanted...

On edit: VIVA CHAVEZ!!!! :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[lovuian]

100. Chavez spoke what many are thinking

He's not afraid!!!

[indepat]

147. And a helluva risk-taker

[mikelgb]

101. I find it telling

that those who find the 911 theories ridiculous always find the time to come to these threads and detract

[Cookie wookie]

243. Agree. I've learned to use the ignore button liberally

when I come to this forum. I stopped coming for a long time because people would hijack the thread and go off on tangents that had nothing to do with the OP, not to mention how destructive that was to any opportunity for real discussion or inquiry. And then I discovered the ignore button. Things are much nicer now, but every time I come I still have to add more to the list. Lots and lots of "thems".

As to Chavez's comments, the more who get wise and speak out the better.

[MasonJar]

106. You just have to love the guy! Keep it up, Chavez. I bet Bush

rues the day that he took on this tiger.

[chat_noir]

108. Pentagon: Why won't the FBI release the confiscated video tapes?

Sheraton Nation Hotel cameras
gas station security cameras - last structure between the hillside and the pentagon
Virginia Department of Transportation cameras covering Route 27

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXHLBz5ypgo

[bamacrat]

110. How many more people in the public eye have to say this.....

before someone listens. There has been movies documenting how the US could have been involved, Chavez, and not to mention 1 OUT OF 3 Americans. I mean cmon, how much are we going to let the Bitch regime get away with?

[smtpgirl]

111. I believe that too

IMO, that is the MO of the WH, create smoke screens to hide the "real" down & dirty stuff they are doing

[Name removed]

112. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[praeclarus]

113. 1/3 of Americans is probably low....

... just like people were ashamed to say they voted
for * at exit polls, I'd be willing to bet a lot more
people believe it than are willing to say, even in
an anonymous polling situation.

I'd also be willing to bet that a whole lot more
than 1/3 of the rest of world believe it since they
are probably not quite as sheeple-ized as we are
here.

[jacklambert]

161. I think this is pure craziness talking...

There seems to be no smoking gun in this theory. No one "involved" in the conspiracy has stepped forward. No memos, papers, e-mails, recordings or documents have surfaced regarding the planning of this "conspiracy".

I just don't see it.

This is as ridiculous as the "List of People that the Clintons had murdered", that circulated among the righties during the Clinton years. It's just people trying to find half-truths to fit their agenda.

[rman]

167. If you don't see it you're looking in the wrong place

check out
www.911pressfortruth.com
No conspiracy theories, but a lot of questions that make people in high places nervous.

[Katzenjammer]

205. How many people involved in Northwoods came forward?

Answer: zero. They all kept their mouths shut. Had the classification period not expired, we probably still wouldn't know about it.

[judaspriestess]

117. This admin new very very quickly that planes had been

hijacked and they did NOTHING. I firmly believe *ush and his cronies allowed this to happen. can we say PNAC?

[1932]

118. IMHO, Chavez is saying this because...

...he's in an election where the other side is supported by the US and it's in Chavez's interest to suggest that US leadership is insane.

Chavez may believe it, he may think it's more probably than not, or he may think that there's a small chance that it's true. But he's talking about it because of the election.

[RadiDem]

120. Big deal - So does ex-bush official Morgan Reynolds

[texpatriot2004]

121. Extremely Plausible nm

[Matilda]

124. I think Chavez is just stirring the pot.

He has an election coming up, and Bush is always throwing stuff at him, so why shouldn't he throw
something back?

[katinmn]

198. Chavez has been talking about Bush role in 9/11 for many months

This isn't something he just popped out with today.

[Eclectic Man]

129. Open mouth, insert foot.

Chavez to world: Notice me, notice me.

World to Chavez: Grow up, son.

[katinmn]

199. Welcome to DU!

;-)

[humbled_opinion]

131. Bush is given way too much credit

Imagine how deep a 9/11 conspiracy would have to run and if its Cheney or Rove then wouldn't it have been simpler for them to have an elite team bury some manufactured WMD in the Iraqi desert to forgo the controversy... Conspiracy theories .... Lets get back to the real business of getting elected and finding out why we really went to war in Iraq.

[Tripmann]

134. To deny the possibility of MIHOP or even LIHOP...

You have to accept that on the same day as the biggest terrorist attack the world has ever seen, than a huge amount of improbable coincidences occured. Taken on their own they are unlikely, but for them to happen in relation to one event puts the odds of them being merely chance outside the realms of probablilty.

If the 9/11 investigation had been handled like an ordinary police investigation, who would have been arrested?

But, feel free to ignore the overwhelming odds or evidence. Could an administration that lied america into an invasion, slaughter and quagmire not be capable of at the very least complicity in the events of 9/11??

[treestar]

142. * is too dumb, but Cheney and the Military Industrial Complex are

not - as to too many people for a conspiracy, how many is too many? There were at least 20 if the official story is to be believed.

Cheney has been looking for an excuse to take over as dictator since the 70s. See the plans he and Rummy made in the 70s for "protecting" the government in the event of nuclear attack. It involved someone taking over as a dictator (supposedly until the Republic could be restored.)

Cheney has had decades to plan this out and get himself into position. Not say it can be proven certainly, just that it is plausible and certainly in line with Cheney's apparent desires regarding power.

[humbled_opinion]

145. Depending on what exactly you believe happened...

The numbers of complicit persons changes, i.e., if you believe that controlled demo brought down the towers it would take weeks and tons of explosives planted in the buildings to do that. If you believe that no plane crashed in Pentagon... complicits require the airlines that say the flight took off and never landed and the people on the plane i.e., where are they.... IMO these conspiracies are too far fetched. If you want to claim that the government was complicit in that it new that the terrorists were in the U.S. and failed to act then I agree but that is as far as you can go and if that happened those that knew would have been leaking live sieves by now or would be dead.... again if he could pull of a conspiracy of this magnitude how hard would it have been to plant WMD's in Iraqi desert and claim that is why we went to war....

[treestar]

146. Anything is "plausible" especially when you consider the deviousness

of those who want power. Reading the Northwoods plan, from the early 60s no less, can give you an idea of how clever they can be at staging things. They want power and control, remember.

We are just saying these things are possible, not that they are true.

Our relative innocence and lack of deviousness makes us think no one else can be evil enough to pull it off. It might not take any more than 100 conspirators, if they have been working together since the 70s, it is at least remotely possible. If somebody cracks and talks, they are just dismissed as crackpots and the likes of Cheney know that. Then they have threats to use against others to keep them silent.

Again not saying it is so, just that dismissing the possibility just because it takes "too many people" doesn't really take into account just how devious and evil these people can be.

[NVMojo]

177. now that our soldiers deaths in Iraq are about equal to the deaths of 9-11

do you think for one minute that any of this phases Dick Cheneys' conscience? They don't care. Collateral damage, 3,000 deaths for their cause? 6,000? collateral damage.

[bdamomma]

210. cheney has everything to do with 9/11 him and rummy

bush was not as dumbfounded in this event as he was sitting in that classroom for 7 minutes, he knew exactly what happened.

[leesa]

139. Not plausible, certain. Cheney was in charge of those drills that day was

he not? He set up the smoke screen to get the job done.

[RoveRage]

166. He put the chimp on a plane to keep him out of the way. n/t

[PATRICK]

153. Another theory

Plausible, yes. In the absence of information because of the cover up, whitehouse-wash it isn't shocking.
Considering the even more plausible coup and assassination attempts against Chavez, he is certainly entitled. Personally, I think what is even more set in concrete, minus specifics, is that Bush/Cheney wrote off national anti-terrorism defense as undesirable for many pernicious reasons stemming from one overriding and ruthless strategy, mainly to exploit and move forward no matter what happened. Never to be distracted by ANY other duty or event but to let others be and then lead them by the nose in your direction. Dare the weak to stop you, capitalize on their goodwill, preoccupation with government SERVICE
and move ahead. Let no setback or popularity decrease stop you(but they did because they were cowards and fundamentally weak themselves). Whatever opportunity rears up that activates and distracts people spin it your own use. Let no popularity stop you either but spend it like the advantage it is.

They knew this coming in as weak, illegitimate leaders with many problems on the horizon. Bi-partisanship, negotiation, defense were all rejected out of hand and the good will accorded a new president was left to the Might Wurlitzer to defend as a useful myth for the suckers. The Team could care less.

With this heinous and very orchestrated thinking in all their tight circle everything that follows clicks into place and it is no wonder that in all the world the only beneficiaries of ANYTHING in the Bush regime has been in descending order, the Inner Circle, the corporate pals, the flunkies, the controlled GOP. But as it descends lower the masses of loyalists and profiteers find themselves left behind, betrayed, in jail and worst of all- exposed and generally hated with justification.

If you needs these people, these "geniuses" to have great nefarious plans, despair you seekers after Nemesis. It is one philosophy, uniformly unchanging behind chameleon spin and Big Lies. After that the devil is in the details and Cheney is in the WH. They expend no energy or time on details, just on taking what they want from the gullible. Which means they are dedicated and active enemies of 99 % plus of the American and world population.

[reprobate]

214. Well said, Patrick. I live in the hope that one day, one of those

involved will leave behind a diary, journal, etc, of the real story behind the administration of fascism we now face.

I read John Deans "conservatives Without Conscience" and now have more of an idea just how these 'Authoritarians" think. Whatever they believe, they believe with absolute certainty regardless of facts. This holds true for all "authoritarians". And they can belong to either party, tho most are republicans.

This would explain why some, even on this web site, could defend the idea that this administration was not responsible IN SOME WAY for what happened on 9/11. It also explains how some, like Cheney and Bush and Limpballs could be so evil as to not even care how history will judge them. That would be the deal breaker for me and for most people. Not for them. They simply DO NOT CARE how people may judge them.

I highly recommend the book.

[RoveRage]

158. Nothing, absolutely NOTHING, would surprise me with this band of criminals

I can't wait to see the entire gang of thugs up for trial and November's election will be the first step.

[NVMojo]

168. It's great to see the accusation in HEADLINES!!!

[TankLV]

173. Let It Happen On Purpose - at least. All the evidence points there.

As far as his "dynamite" and other suppositions, it's ridiculuous.

But that the REPUKES and this WAR CRIMINAL misadministration had a hand in planning it - I would not now rule this out in light of all the evidence of their LIES and machinations that have come to light since before the 2000 Selection.

Criminal Negligence.

Intentionally looking elsewhere.

[katinmn]

185. Viva Chavez! Tell your elected reps to support Venezuela's bid

to be on the Security Council.

Bolton vehemently opposes Chavez on the countil. That alone means it is best for humanity.

[Codeine]

186. Good grief

Can somebody put this in the Dungeon where it belongs? :eyes:

[katinmn]

197. People should know what is going on in the world. Dontcha think?

Even corp media is covering it.

No more censorship.

[CornField]

187. I find it hard to believe some think they had nothing to do with it

I've asked questions time and time again to people in and out of political spheres (i.e., Why did it take the military minutes to scramble fighter jets to observe a golfer's plane which had went off course, but no such actions were taken on Sept. 11th?)

Protocal which had been in place for YEARS and had worked seemlessly for YEARS was disregarded that day. The only mechanism/organization that could have made such changes (or created the circumstances which would have resulted in those changes) is our own government.

Quite frankly, I don't care anymore if the towers came down due to the fire and/or due to additional explosives. (Although I did watch the re-run of live coverage on 9/11 and was shocked to see all the reporters broadcasting from ground zero, the firefighters and law officers they interviewed and man-on-the-street types all talking about the additional explosions in the towers.) I don't care anymore if it was plane or a missle which hit the Pentagon. I don't care if flight 93 was brought down by the passengers or if it was shot down. At the end of the day, the results are the same and the same citizens are dead.

The true failure on that day happened first thing in the morning when our own military did not scramble jets to observe the commercial airliners who were off course. There was no physical contact made (military pilots flying up and looking at the aircraft in question) and, in the entire history of our nation, that has never happened -- before or since.

Who has the authority and/or power to prevent or disrupt the military from following orders which have stood on the books for just about forever? Hint: There's only one answer.

[BrokenBeyondRepair]

188. bingo

[jacklambert]

201. I think you're giving the government and military too much credit...

they are not as fast acting as you claim it to be, even in the best of circumstances.

I doubt that when the golfers airplane first went off course that fighter jets were scrambled within a couple of minutes. And even if it was speedier than on 9/11, I would call it a sign of the times, not a conspiracy.

For someone like you who is clearly speculating as to how things in the military should work or speculate on what they did or didn't do, I think this is a pretty unbelieveable scenario you are pushing. Again, it only does a disservice to those who were killed on 9/11.

[CornField]

223. A disservice?

Me? Speculating on a public discussion board? A disservice?

Let's first discuss the golfer's plane I mentioned in my first post. Not just one set of fighter jets were scrambled. Within 10 minutes (repeat: 10 MINUTES) of air traffic control losing communication with Payne Stewart's Learjet, two F-15s were scrambled from Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida. Those pilots made the sight observation that all the aircraft windows were frosted (lending to the theory that the cabin lost pressure in high altitudes). Those two F-15s were then replaced by two F-16s from Eglin Air Force Base, also in Florida... replaced a bit later by four F-16s and a midair refueling tanker from the Tulsa (Oklahoma) National Guarde... replaced by two more F-16s from Fargo, North Dakota who shadowed the plane to its ultimate crash site in South Dakota. This last set of planes were hoping someone on board would revive after the plane began to descend and they pulled up very close, but still could not make direct visual contact due to the frost inside the other plane. There were a total of 11 military plane scrambled that day to deal with one non-commercial Learjet.

Before you elect to berate me on military/air traffic control procedures which you obviously no very little about, I'd suggest you educate yourself. At the very least, learn how to do a google search.

Now, back to the whole "disservice" thing...

Please take a moment to compare the price tags of the 9-11 Commission (which was put in place roughly a YEAR following the attacks on the WTC and Pentagon) to the price tag of the investigation into Bill Clinton's blow job. That's a disservice.

Please take a moment to look over the Senate's report relating to Iraq and 9-11 -- or should I say discussing the non-relationship of Iraq and 9-11. There was no connection, there were/are no weapons, there was/is no nuclear threat and Iraq wasn't a hotbed of terrorist activity until we arrived on the scene. That's a disservice.

Please take a moment to review the wonderful words of our great leader: "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" (Sept. 17, 2001) -- however -- "I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him... I truly am not that concerned about him." (March 13, 2002) THAT'S A DISSERVICE!

Pleae take the time to investigate how many people in New York on Sept. 11, 2001 have died due to respiratory problems. Consider how many more will follow suit. Now consider that the Office of the Inspector General of the EPA released information in 2003 which states unequivocally that the White House instructed the Environmental Protection Agency to give the public misleading information. All statements released from Sept. 12 on by the EPA were vetted, changed, approved, enhanced by the NSC (National Security Council in the White House). THAT'S A FUCKING DISSERVICE!

Finally, I wish I was "clearly speculating as to how things in the military should work... or what they did or didn't do." The truth, however, is that nothing I wrote is speculation. Prior to and following Sept. 11, 2001, any aircraft off course and without communication by the FAA is reported to the military and military jets (armed or not) are scrambled for a first-hand view of the plane. It doesn't take an hour... hell, it doesn't even take half an hour. Something happened on that day to prevent our good men and women in uniform (and I do believe they are good people) from fulfilling a basic safety precaution function. I'd like to know what it was, wouldn't you?

[bdamomma]

202. I have been thinking that for a very long time

that this government orchestrated that whole attack, so again, why is there no memorial to honor those that died in Sept. 2001...or any rebuilding of the Gulf States, this regime just does not care about the American people.

[VegasWolf]

204. Au contraire! Bush cares about SOME white, wealthy Amerikans!

:toast:

[bdamomma]

212. oh yea, he only cares about that 1%.

[doctor_garth]

209. God bless you Chavez

for confronting these serial killers.

We'll never know for sure, but Bush is capable of much worse, so I don't know why people would be shocked with yet another crime committed by his crime family.

1- Those planes could have been stopped way before they reached the WTC, why weren't they?

2- Buildings don't fall that neatly as those did, unless by controlled demolition.

[jacklambert]

213. question...

1. What is the average response time of an F-16 from where it is stationed to where it could/should/would have intercepted those planes?? Where were the closest F-16's stationed, and what was the chain of command requirement to get them off the ground to intercept (and maybe shoot down one of these commercial airliners).

2. You think those buildings fell neatly?? Didn't you see the destruction that took place around the Towers. The incredible plume of debris that rose from the tip of Manhatten. That didn't happen neatly. It happened with the force of gravity.

[VegasWolf]

215. It looked pretty neat to me. Looked almost like a picture-perfect

controlled demolition.

[jacklambert]

216. you might need a little more demolition experience n/t

[VegasWolf]

219. Hey, I call them like I see them, just like you true-believers do. I'll

stick with my interpretations thanks. You can have yours.

[Tripmann]

244. Read a book called "the new pearl harbour"

It will give you information in relation to the fighter jets scrambling i.e. they were not scrambled from the closest bases and, when scrambled, would have had to fly at 300-600 miles per hour to match timelines given by norad when they can hit 1500 miles per hour.

It will also give you information on the demolition theories.

[FogerRox]

240. NJ had f-16's and Cape Cod had f-15's

Im guessing 10 minutes to scramble, 2 minutes to climb to altitude, then its mach 2.2 for the f-16. FRom Cape Cod and McGuire in NJ, thats maybe 6 minutes. I have heard the f-15's were diverted south away from Long Island.

20 minutes to have CAP over NYC. Once a flight is in position playing CAP, nothing can get close to the city.

[doctor_garth]

245. I see that

the 911 Commission's brainwashing techniques worked on you too.

A 5 yo. can see that September 11 didn't happen they way Bush is telling us it did. Go talk to one.

[Snivi Yllom]

217. another reason to disregard Chavez

now he's a conspiracy nut

[VegasWolf]

220. So, why do you hate Chavez? nt

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

226. You're either with the Bolivarian revolution, or against it!

Sorry, couldn't resist.

:evilgrin:

[rinsd]

228. Oh boy, now you've done it!

:spank:

[VegasWolf]

231. Love your tagline! nt

[rinsd]

234. Thanks

:thumbsup:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

235. Finally...

Something we can agree upon.

[VegasWolf]

236. LOL! That's good!!!

[doctor_garth]

246. at least Chavez

is not a lamb who believes every word he sees on Fox News and CNN, like you seem to be.

[KansDem]

229. Wow! Is this guy psychic, or what...? (eom)

[kitty1]

233. Slip some sodium pentathol (truth serum) into Cheney and cronies

and see what develops. That's probably the only way you'll get any kind of truth out of them. And that might not even work.