Zero Evidence that 9/11 Was an Inside Job

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/02/9-11panel.pentagon/index.html

So the 911 commision was "Paranoid"?

 

This is amazing.What part of seeing 2 huge jets fly into those
towers by Young Muslim men do you find unbelievable.Because that
did happen.All this other nonsense about how those aircraft
couldn't possible generate enough heat and damage to level those
towers is still a matter of physics.That somehow Bush/Cheney and
some secret inner CIA were just waiting to dentonate explosives
after those aircraft struck is amazing.More like appaling.
Now why would there be need to detonate those Towers.The attack
was far enough of a False Flag all on it''s own.

 

I didn't say the government covered up its involvement, I suggested that it's very likely that the government covered up the fact that it was capable of determining that 9/11 was going to happen and that it failed to do so. That it had more information than we know it did, yet it still failed to prevent it.

 

The 6th floor of the school book depository provided the perfect angle of projection for both bullets that hit Kenendy. There was nothing physically impossible about the shots. The wittnesses have all kinds of different conflicting stories. Zapruder was standing closer to the grassy knoll than anybody else and he didn't hear any gunfire from behind him. Don't you think he would have jumped while he was filming it, if somebody unexpectedly fired a rifle right behind him?

Watch the Zapruder film. You'll see Kennedy and Connolly react at the exact same frame from being shot. You'll also see on the final head shot, Kennedy's head jerking forward on the frame that shows the initial impact before he moves backward from his backbrace catching him. Kennedy's head exploded on the front, indicating an exit wound. His head jerking forward coupled with the exit wound on the front indicates that he was shot from behind.

 

Yer wet behind the ears.Because we Have Able Danger and it's
existence was covered-up at the insistence of Clinton himself.
Able Danger was not allowed to be Investigated.Clinton went
after anyone who dared to even bring it up.
I heard a Military man explain it on Talk Radio and say it won't
be allowed to see the light of day.TOO demonstable an example of
How President Clinton pooh pooed the al Qaeda threat.

 

There's so many version that one with the most probing or Vincent Bugliosi :
Reclaiming History:The *Assassination of President J.F.K.
About the best I heard on this is a storm drain that was right on/under
the curb that would have been perfect for a front shot and also ability
to not be seen and then easily flee the scene.But exit wounds are easily
determined.


* The most definitive work regarding the Assassination at 1612 pages
plus additional CD-ROM of endnotes and source notes

 

It's rare that I agree with anything that Noam Chomsky says, but I agree with most of this.

 

Yes, I agree. The link you posted is not credible. All it is is a criticism of one issue relating to Flight 93 in Pennsylvania.

The link I posted gives lots of info without drawing definite conclusions. The official version is given in large part, but also the conflicts with that, especially the eyewitness accounts. Really the photographic evidence is the most compelling. It's a hard fit to try and shoehorn the photos with the official version.

As I said, it's a lot to wade through and there is some BS there. That doesn't mean there is nothing there, however. There's certainly enough good evidence to question the official version. But then again, if you don't want to question the official version, there is nothing that will ever change your mind.

 

Perhaps you didn't read the whole article.

Unfortunately for Killtown the record does not put him in good light. At his own forum, 911 movement, he makes a regular habit of attacking individuals in similar ways with or without evidence, whether inside or outside of the self proclaimed Truth movement:

http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showforum=60

By Killtown's own admission his actions have resulted in his banning from several websites and forum's:

911blogger.com
AboveTopSecret.com
DemocraticUnderground
LetsRoll
LooseChange
(NOTE: this seems to have been rescinded at the new LC forum)
PrisonPlanet
Randi Rhodes forum
truthaction.org
TruthNetRadioLive.com

Given Killtown's ample recorded history of falsehoods and representations this comes as no surprise. Nonetheless, Killtown continues to paint himself as a victim of censorship.

Unfortunately the Internet community is not buying it. A group of people have apparently gotten together to produce a blog called "Killtown's Secret Archive" and they are not fans:

http://killtownsecretarchive.blogspot.com/

The blog makes a convincing case that "Killtown" is a resident of Portland, Oregon and has connections to Portland's 911 Truth community. Their position is that because of Killtown's habit of attacking people online he deserves to be exposed.

If you view him as a credible source, well, that's up to you.

A lot of BS. And a lot of amateur "photo analysis".

Who said I didn't want to question the official version? There is something that will change my thinking on it. It's called evidence.

 

Thanks for making my point about your source.

from your post (and 'source'):

"The blog makes a convincing case that "Killtown" is a resident of Portland, Oregon and has connections to Portland's 911 Truth community."

That's soooo incriminating. They found out that he might actually live in Portland!! And he got banned from Alex Jones!!

Got anything else besides this tempest in a teapot?

 

There is a lot of evidence to suggest that 9/11 was an inside job, including the use of death rays.

However, for those evidences to be considered "evidence", you must possess a standard of accepting anything for any reason to boaster your own thought process even if your opinion is incorrect and contradicts reality.

 

Adequately addresssed by DDave.

I would imagine they disintegrated along with most of the rest of the plane, as you would imagine would happen if you ran a plane into a wall at 700 mph.

I'm not suggesting that you have to know everything. I'm suggesting that you're not coming up with the answers necessary to give your claims any validity. You're essentially saying that the people on Flight 77 are either faking their own deaths or the plane was shotdown by the government elsewhere over a remote location that was not detected by anybody. You have no evidence to support either of these claims.

That has nothing to do with the people who claim to have seen a 757 crash into the pentagon.

Could be anything. It in no way is evidence that the government was involved in the attacks.

Where could that have happened without anybody knowing about it?

Your ad hominem is noted.

 

(sigh) You see what you want to see and ignore the rest. So be it.

Got anything else besides the maniacal rantings of a cyber stalker -- like evidence perhaps?

 

Has it ever occurred to you that sometimes "national security" is actually a matter of "national security"?

 

Where do you get your understanding of physics from? Bugs Bunny cartoons? When an object passes through another object, the laws of Merry Melodies state that the passing object must create a puncture equal to the size and shape of itself through said object. Do I have that right?

 

Not necessarily.

Say you have a large vehicle smash into the side of a large building.

The impact can cause a partial structural collapse that effectively reduces the size of the hole the penetrating vehicle made and changes its shape considerably.

 

How bout when NOTHING hits a building and it just falls down in the middle of the afternoon (like WTC7)?

 

there is PLENTY of evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.read the book DEBUNKING THE 9/11 DEBUNKING,AN ANSWER TO POPULAR MECHANICS AND OTHER DEFENDERS OF THE OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORY,nobody has ever been able to debunk that book.Matter of fact the author has challenged congress to debate him and refute his book,none of them will meet him and take him on his challenge.

 

well of course if your listening to shill Noam chomsky your not going to hear the truth about 9/11 or JFK.This guy again is a paid shill that has been paid off especially since its been proven ages ago the warren commission is a fairy tale.

 

thats what cracks me up about the OCTA'S logic,just like JFK,people who served on the commission have said there was a coverup and they did not try and find the truth.lol.

 

forget it,this guy goes around trolling all the time.anytime you post videos or show him links and brings up facts he ignores it and doesnt bother to address it and then comes back and says crap that nobody has posted any evidence without ever even trying to debunk it.Your just wasting your breath on him.but great post anyways.

 

so very true.

 

One ex-FBI agent claiming that the FBI supplied explosives for the first WTC bombing is not proof that the government was directly involved in and covered up its involvement in the 9/11 attacks. I understand that since your username is "9/11 was an inside job" and my thread title is "Zero Evidence that 9/11 Was an Inside Job", I've obviously struck a nerve with you. Despite the fact that you have failed to provide any credible evidence to back up the claim that is your username, you have resorted to calling me a troll.

 

the official conspiracy theory apologists always ignore this and they will again.

 

You nailed it.gives standing ovation.