9/11 Coincidences

[TMK9973]

ok - Here is the Truth - If you must know.

I wasn't going to tell anyone, because it could get me killed - But here you go.

Sept 9, 2001 - The Redskins Start off the Marty Schotty Era with a emberssing 30-3 loss against a San Diego team that had only won 1 game the year before.

This was after a emberssing 2000 season, where a Redskins team predicted to win the super bowl, never made the playoffs.

All was lost.

Dan Synder needed a distraction. Need to get the media off his team and focused on something else... ANYTHING else....

I can't say much more... but look at the Staidum... EVERYTHING is Danny's fault.....

[commyderm2]

This always cracks me up.. I have one question for everybody.. IF 9/11 was proven to be an inside job, what do you plan on doing about it??

I ask because there seems to be a lot of people who buy into this, but they are not doing anything at all about it besides complaining... I mean the Government kills thousands and thousands of its own citizens and people know this but they do nothing about it.. hmmm.. I have a pretty open mind, but I have a lot of trouble believing in a conspiracy theory that people who contrive it and buy it don't truly believe in it.. If they did believe in it, there would be an underground revolution beginning as we speak..

[GibbsFactor]

OK, so the conspiracy goes well beyond the Bush administration and involves the Clinton admin as well? Wow, first I've heard that.

That doesn't answer my question at all. al Qaeda has claimed responsibility for numerous attacks around the world. As for Madrid, it's pretty well known that the attack was intended to influence their elections, which it certainly did. But let's put Madrid aside for the moment, even though I firmly believe that al Qaeda (or al Qaeda sympathizers) were behind it.

Back to my question...What about other al Qaeda attacks around the world--are they not responsible for those as well, despite their claims of responsibility? Are they just a bunch of kooks who keep claiming responsibility for doing a bunch of horrible things that they aren't actually responsible for?

You are missing the point of the BIG conspiracy theory. It isn't administration based at all. It's the CFR and the TC! They are the illuminati, those that rule the central banks and soon the world! Da da da!.

OBL is on their pay role. In order to bring the entire world together, these events need to be carried out. First the implementation of central banks, then wars to make money and modify borders, instilling fear into the citizens. Then, Unions such as the EU and the NAU, all based in fiat money systems. Then world economy, then one world government. It's the wave of the future! If anyone gets in the way, they are shot, i.e. Kennedy for stopping WWIII and trying to end the Fed. When a spark is needed, things like 9/11 and antrax happen to "unite" the people.

It's all quite fascinating. I hope one day I can be in the CFR or the TC. It's kinda like wanting to be an auto salesman just to get the real scoop as to what goes on when buying a car. If I can get into the CFR, maybe I too can have access to area 51!

[Koolblue13]

This always cracks me up.. I have one question for everybody.. IF 9/11 was proven to be an inside job, what do you plan on doing about it??

I ask because there seems to be a lot of people who buy into this, but they are not doing anything at all about it besides complaining... I mean the Government kills thousands and thousands of its own citizens and people know this but they do nothing about it.. hmmm.. I have a pretty open mind, but I have a lot of trouble believing in a conspiracy theory that people who contrive it and buy it don't truly believe in it.. If they did believe in it, there would be an underground revolution beginning as we speak..

There is an underground movement going on.

http://www.wearechange.org/

and several others as well.

My problem is, it hasn't been proven to me, that building 7 fell because of anything other than what folks like Steven Jones say. Everybody who would have been responsable for allowing it to happen, were promoted, instaed of being fired and there are to many holes on each side to have certainty in either direction.

[helptheSKINS]

And there you go.

If only everything was as obvious as conspiracy nuts. I would be a rich man.

[Corcaigh]

I can only wonder at the human mind that would believe the following scenario to be true ...

(1) 9/11 was entirely the work of the US government.

(2) The WTC attacks were staged in order to justify an invasion of Iraq to disarm Saddam of WMDs

(3) Having staged the 9/11 attacks and successfully invaded Iraq, they were unable to 'find' a single WMD.

[TMK9973]

It's all quite fascinating. I hope one day I can be in the CFR or the TC. It's kinda like wanting to be an auto salesman just to get the real scoop as to what goes on when buying a car. If I can get into the CFR, maybe I too can have access to area 51!

I've been there. Your going to freak, but it's now a storage place for all the Pro Ron Paul media and Ron Paul Ballots that have been hidden.....

You always suspected as much, didn't you....

[Baculus]

I have said this before - we can throw out theories surrounding the Pentagon attack as well as issues surrounding the collapse of the World Trade Center and still have viable questions, inconsistencies, and reasons for further investigation.

Often, the collapse of the WTC becomes a red herring and provides a method to distract away from other avenues of questioning.

For example, I'd rather focus on why it took the Bush administration such a lengthy amount of time to event investigate 9-11 and were further reluctant to even fund the 9-11 commission. Originally, President Bush promised $3 million dollars to fund the commission. Isn't that a tiny amount of money to cover an investigation into the deadliest attack on US soil? Even the Challenger accident and the Lewinsky investigation received tens of millions of dollars.

I'd like to pose the question to some folks on this board: If we were really interested in the truth of the matter, why would the administration want to avoid an investigation? Why the secrecy? Why did President Bush and Vice-President Cheney only agree to jointly testify? Why did they attempt to block the creation of an investigation committee, and then attempted to undermine it with a lack of funding?

And members of the commission accused both the CIA and the Pentagon of hindering the investigation. Why would these departments hinder such an investigation? It couldn't have been must a matter of national security, because this investigation was supposed to cut into the heart of why national security was compromised.

There are many, many inconsistencies, strange behavior, and odd events surrounding 9-11. Some of these questions are above and beyond any theories which surround the collapse of the WTC and the attack on the Pentagon. As I mentioned at the start of my post, I could accept the NIST findings and the attack on the Pentagon and still have questions left yet unanswered or addressed.

My intention isn't to state that the government was behind 9-11, because obviously that wouldn't be possible. It would take a faction of the government for such an planned, inside attack to occur, and it most certainly would not require thousands, since only a few dozen folks would have been involved in the Al-Qaida attack on the WTC. This unto itself becomes another "rabbit hole" as well as a red herring, but I don't think we should dismiss such a notion, because we do not know how a dedicated faction with their own ulterior motives and aims would operate. Especially above and beyond the US government. All we have to do is look at Operation Northwoods to understand certain people have rather fanatical notions and they are willing to "break a few eggs for the greater good."

But that is besides the point and a further distraction to the issue at hand.

I will add this - I do find it interesting that "Debunking 9-11" has a section on the possible "real conspiracies," which includes the use of the 9-11 attack for the invasion of Iraq. I wonder if folks such as Mad Mike, who support "Debunking 9-11," would, off hand, further dismiss these accusations of "conspiracy."

http://www.debunking911.com/conspiracy.htm

Again, if 9-11 was used for a motivation to invade Iraq, then the actual attack becomes a distraction away from the ultimate conclusion.

[GibbsFactor]

I've been there. Your going to freak, but it's now a storage place for all the Pro Ron Paul media and Ron Paul Ballots that have been hidden.....

You always suspected as much, didn't you....

It's really not funny at all. If it were your candidate you'd be pretty upset. It's democracy man.

[Predicto]

I will add this - I do find it interesting that "Debunking 9-11" has a section on the possible "real conspiracies," which includes the use of the 9-11 attack for the invasion of Iraq. I wonder if folks such as Mad Mike, who support "Debunking 9-11," would, off hand, further dismiss these accusations of "conspiracy."

http://www.debunking911.com/conspiracy.htm

Again, if 9-11 was used for a motivation to invade Iraq, then the actual attack becomes a distraction away from the ultimate conclusion.

I routinely come on here to debunk conspiracy theories, but I have no problem in believing that the Administration was waiting for an opportunity to attack Iraq and 9/11 gave them that opportunity.

I don't think that is really a "conspiracy theory" at all, but just a question of motivation and intent. MadMike will probably disagree with me on that, but so be it. He and I agree on the more obvious question of whether our own government was in on the 9/11 attacks. It wasn't.

[TMK9973]

It's really not funny at all. If it were your candidate you'd be pretty upset. It's democracy man.

Oh come on.... Not to HiJack - but my canididate didn't get the press I wanted him to (Biden). But I accepted the fact that others just didn't like him....

[Mad Mike]

I can only wonder at the human mind that would believe the following scenario to be true ...

(1) 9/11 was entirely the work of the US government.

(2) The WTC attacks were staged in order to justify an invasion of Iraq to disarm Saddam of WMDs

(3) Having staged the 9/11 attacks and successfully invaded Iraq, they were unable to 'find' a single WMD.

Yeah, right.

They staged the largest conspiracy ever, involving thousands of people in front of millions of witnesses, but they couldn't plant some WMD in the middle of a dessert. :laugh:

:applause:

[Mad Mike]

I routinely come on here to debunk conspiracy theories, but I have no problem in believing that the Administration was waiting for an opportunity to attack Iraq and 9/11 gave them that opportunity.

I don't think that is really a "conspiracy theory" at all, but just a question of motivation and intent. MadMike will probably disagree with me on that, but so be it. He and I agree on the more obvious question of whether our own government was in on the 9/11 attacks. It wasn't.

I don't think we are that far off on this. To me WMD was only part of the reason we needed to get rid of Saddam. His general open support of terrorism, his known contacts with al Qaeda, his destabilizing influence in the middle east, his hatred for the US and his desire for revenge, all added up to a dangerous package post 9/11. I always believed that Bush oversold the WMD issue and undersold the other reasons for invading. However I think he did so for legal (UN and international law) reasons which I understand. I also believe he thought they were there or he would not have set himself up for such a backlash.

In short, I don't think Bush used 9/11 so much as he was influenced by it. I think he "used" WMD to make his legal case. Whether he was right or not only history will decide, long after all of the repercussions are clear.

[Ghost of]

Here's the thing and no one has answered me:

1) At what point do you look at the previous WTC attack, the previous terrorist incidents, both 'rogue' and organized, the USS COle, Khobar Towers, and Ahmad Shah Masood's assassination and say, "this is the end of a pattern. Not something incredibly new. They planned to do something like this before?"

2) Do any of you conspiracy idiots know anything about Operation Bojinka and Ramzi Yousef (and his plans for the use of planes?)

3) Are you loons aware that much of the same speculation and theorizing was done in the wake of the OKC bombing, I mean some of the SAME EXACT hypotheses and arguments??

4) At what point do you take the years of propaganda, actual strategy and tactics of ISlamist terrorists for real and why do you continue to demonstrate such ignorance of history, the facts, science, etc?

5) DO you understand the psychological phenomenon of conspiracism (for lack of a better term) be it JFK, alien abductions, Roswell, 9/11, OKC, the sinking of the Lusitania and some of the more off-the-wall ideas about the Rothschilds and Federal Reserve?

6) Do any of you guys think it's EASIER to maintain a conspiracy among a HUGE group of individuals rather than small groups or single actors?

[d0ublestr0ker0ll]

I don't think it's fair to call some of us questioning this "loons" and "idiots". Some of us are new to this, including myself. Earlier I was trying to get answers, since this isn't my specialty.

I'd do my homework on this, but it's a job for a high-ranking legal team, not a job for me. So until or [if] anything develops, I'll keep an interest. Many good arguments are made in this thread. I do ask the question - could it be a cooperative type of terrorist attack? Maybe the terrorists had 90% to do with all the destruction and death, but the U.S. did give a little nudge here and there? Or do most of you throw it completely out the window? (I'm learning here, please don't attack a man)

[thehogs]

It's all here folks.

The guys who make those videos are laughing at you. They are hoping to get you to believe that the moon is made of green cheese next.

Careful, Predicto. I made a similar man in the moon comment earlier and was picked up on for exaggerating examples from outer space to try to debunk 9/11 conspiracies when the man in the moon claim isnt the same as what happened on 9/11. Really? :doh:

[Henry]

Here's what I posted in the last one of these threads. Never got much in the way of a satisfactory answer other than 'darn it, it LOOKS like a demolition to me!'

Quick question -

What is the tallest skyscraper ever destroyed with explosives? (other than the WTC of course)

Quick answer -

Hudsen's Department Store in Detriot.

26 stories.

439 feet tall.

http://www.controlled-demolition.com/default.asp?reqLocId=7&reqItemId=20030225133807

That's the tallest building ever brought down by explosives. It took months of preparation. And yet some of you are suggesting two 1200-foot tall structures were brought down with only two days for several guys in overalls to secretly place explosives?

Wow.

Let me add here that 7 WTC, the building Rosie O'Donnell is all hot-and-bothered about, and the one most theorists are convinced about, is over 700 feet tall and 52 stories high.

So we are to believe that three buildings, 2-3 times higher than the tallest skyscraper ever demolished by explosives, were secretly destroyed in this manner. On the same day. By George Bush.

Yeah ... that's plausible.

[BigMike619]

Man we were wrong about GW all along. He isnt stoopid, hes smrt.

Anyone who can secretly destroy buildings and kill thousands just to teach us a lesson is like the Einstein of our times.

Me loves yoo G Dubya..

*************

get a grip man...

[Dance04]

Of all the things 9/11, the smoking gun is the pentagon. I think everyone can agree that no plane ever flew into the pentagon.

the official story goes like this: "The fires from the crash were so hot that they melted the plane. that's why you can't see it". yet, everyone was identified who was on that plane.

Fires hot enough to melt metal, but not people? :rolleyes:

[vegeta613]

Of all the things 9/11, the smoking gun is the pentagon. I think everyone can agree that no plane ever flew into the pentagon.

the official story goes like this: "The fires from the crash were so hot that they melted the plane. that's why you can't see it". yet, everyone was identified who was on that plane.

Fires hot enough to melt metal, but not people? :rolleyes:

Don't start using logic dude

The Government said it was Osama

Get on board or go to Canada :doh:

[Dance04]

Don't start using logic dude

The Government said it was Osama

Get on board or go to Canada :doh:

I am in Canada.

[vegeta613]

To tell you the truth I think this video has smoking gun evidence as well on flight 93 in Shanksville Pennsylvania

They show a overhead pic of the area of the crash in 1994 and most of those scars that the plane appeared to cause was already there before the crash

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-59kouBgO_s

[JimmyConway]

Here's what I posted in the last one of these threads. Never got much in the way of a satisfactory answer other than 'darn it, it LOOKS like a demolition to me!'

Quick question -

What is the tallest skyscraper ever destroyed with explosives? (other than the WTC of course)

Quick answer -

Hudsen's Department Store in Detriot.

26 stories.

439 feet tall.

http://www.controlled-demolition.com/default.asp?reqLocId=7&reqItemId=20030225133807

That's the tallest building ever brought down by explosives. It took months of preparation. And yet some of you are suggesting two 1200-foot tall structures were brought down with only two days for several guys in overalls to secretly place explosives?

Wasn't the Stardust 32 stories?

[vegeta613]

I am in Canada.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Didn't notice

[Skins24]

Most of this stuff can be debunked by just THINKING and using common sense :laugh:

But people want to believe youtube videos with buzz words and nice music instead. These people SCARE me.

These people want so bad for the government to be responsible that they completely ignore logical thinking. That is the main reason why I've pretty much stop discussing this with people claiming to be "searching for the truth." Biggest buch of BS ever. They're not searching for the truth, they're searching for what they WANT to have happened and any evidence showing otherwise is COMPLETELY ignored. When pressed on that evidence they run away for a while, wait til things die down a bit, then come back posting the same stuff over again.