Time Mag: Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won't Go Away

[RamboLiberal]

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

Take a look, if you can stand it, at video footage of the World Trade Center collapsing. Your eye will naturally jump to the top of the screen, where huge fountains of dark debris erupt out of the falling towers. But fight your natural instincts. Look farther down, at the stories that haven't collapsed yet.

In almost every clip you'll see little puffs of dust spurting out from the sides of the towers. There are two competing explanations for these puffs of dust: 1) the force of the collapsing upper floors raised the air pressure in the lower ones so dramatically that it actually blew out the windows. And 2) the towers did not collapse from the impact of two Boeing 767s and the ensuing fires. They were destroyed in a planned, controlled demolition. The dust puffs you see on film are the detonations of explosives planted there before the attacks.

People who believe the second explanation live in a very different world from those who believe the first. In world No. 2, al-Qaeda is not responsible for the destruction of the World Trade Center. The U.S. government is. The Pentagon was not hit by a commercial jet; it was hit by a cruise missile. United Flight 93 did not crash after its occupants rushed the cockpit; it was deliberately taken down by a U.S. Air Force fighter. The entire catastrophe was planned and executed by federal officials in order to provide the U.S. with a pretext for going to war in the Middle East and, by extension, as a means of consolidating and extending the power of the Bush Administration.

The population of world No. 2 is larger than you might think. A Scripps-Howard poll of 1,010 adults last month found that 36% of Americans consider it "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that government officials either allowed the attacks to be carried out or carried out the attacks themselves. Thirty-six percent adds up to a lot of people. This is not a fringe phenomenon. It is a mainstream political reality.

Web Guide: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1531250,00.html

[liberal N proud]

1. Finally someone in the media questioning the official tale

[scarletwoman]

21. If you actually read the whole article you'll see that they're NOT

"questioning the official tale". They are enforcing it by playing up the most absurd fringe elements of "official tale" skeptics.

Time magazine is one of the premier purveyors of the Establishment's "conventional wisdom" -- don't be fooled into thinking otherwise.

sw

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

91. First they ignore, and when that doesn't work...

...they move on to ridicule.

Here's a Penn & Teller video where they're doing the exact same thing (perhaps with less subtlety):

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7501020220921158523&q=penn+and+teller+9-11&hl=en

I used to respect these guys and considered them credible.

[MissWaverly]

2. good start then seques into CT as moonbat crazies

Of course, the government has given us a factual report, of course, that is why the head of the
9-11 commission were considering criminal charges against the Pentagon for obstruction, of course, the federal government had minders present whenever any of any its witnesses testify
to the commission, of course, George Bush never testified under oath and of course, the FAA
not NORAD is accused of lying and blamed for everything, of course. And of course, you must
believe me, I am George Bush, 43rd President, the Decider, Of Course.

[eleny]

6. I bet most people won't read it to the end

I was disappointed with the ending, also. But here's my take. I'm sitting in the doctor's office and there's Time magazine. I grab it and start reading this enticing article. But I rarely get to the end of any article before they call me in. And I would bet that the majority of folks who read Time, read it in some waiting room.

The trouble with the beginning of the article for the administration is that it's convincing in its simplicity and its details. They do detail out some of the big flaws. So I think there's a decent chance that most people will be sitting in the dentist chair and thinking to themselves - "Why wasn't there a bigger damned hole in the Pentagon?"

[MissWaverly]

18. yes, I am hope you are right

[tridim]

9. That's how almost every 9/11 thread on DU plays out too..

They start out great and then, as if on cue the "I believe everything the government tells me even with no evidence" crowd shows up and ruins them.

I'll happily change my mind if the Government ever shows us any shred of evidence that backs up the official story. Until then I'm firmly in World #2.

[MissWaverly]

17. hey, I am with you

:-)
Two different worlds, we live in 2 two different worlds...

[ConcernedCanuk]

3. I guess I'm in "In world No. 2"

.
.
.

"In world No. 2, al-Qaeda is not responsible for the destruction of the World Trade Center. The U.S. government is. "
_____________________________________________________

At the moment I saw (on CNN) the first bombs drop on Baghdad from the US

I decided to never ever visit the USA again, despite the fact that I loved the country and the people I met

Y'all are mostly nice people, but you let your government bully you.

You need some major balls to fight them PNACers . .

GET SOME!!!

[Sinti]

4. Is the Pentagon thing really a tent-pole issue for 9/11 Truth????

I must be in group number three or four or something here.


Follow The Money - it will lead you directly to the truth. Find out where the hijackers got their cash to stuff in those stripper's g-strings and all the loose ends seem to fit together nicely.

[INDIA]

5. For all the tin foil hatters, answer me this...

First of all, I think that Al Qaeda carried out the attacks, you can tell me to drink koolaid, I'm a sheep, whatever.

One of the cornerstones of your arguments is the collapse of WTC 7, implying that it was brought down by explosives. Just for argument purposes, I'll pretend that there IS some ridiculous conspiracy.

So why demolish WTC 7? What would the advantage be to the MIHOP government of doing so?

1. Was another plane supposed to somehow hit the building even though it's relatively smaller size compared to surrounding skyscrapers would make that almost impossible? What phantom plane was supposed to do this since 93 was heading for DC?

2. Was the "controlled demolition" of WTC 1 and 2 supposed to fall onto 7 and knock it over with help of explosives? That would contradict the conspiracy that the towers were purposely brought down in their own footprint to avoid further damage. That the collapse of 1 and 2 somehow went "too well" and failed to hit 7 is also far fetched.

The MIHOP government would have zero reason to demolish WTC7, so why would they go out of their way to do so in an admittedly suspicious looking (to a layman) collapse?

Oh yeah, and the main reason I will never believe this BS; if the government was evil enough and slick enough to carry out attacks on our own soil to set up the Iraq war, planting WMD's in the Iraqi desert would have been cake.

There was no conspiracy, only incompetence.

[eleny]

7. This might be an even better place to crosspost your question here at DU

The DU 9/11 forum http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=125

[Demeter]

11. Al-Qaida Was the Tool--But Whose Hand Wielded It?

That's the $64 billion question.

And based on how BushCo handles truths, data, facts, and the Constitution, they have NO credibilty on anything.

[INDIA]

13. I agree with eleny actually

maybe my post here was inappropriate on a thread discussing the article, but I'll answer briefly.

So your theory (I'm guessing) is that the MIHOP govt. used Al Qaeda to carry out the attacks. Thats another one new to me. The fact that there are so many, often far-fetched and conflicting, theories on the attacks tells me that this is a lot of smoke and no fire. If there was one universal theory from the MIHOPers on what probably happened, I would pay it more attention.
Unfortunately, since all the theories are so easily debunked, that's impossible.
Kinda like throwing em all up on the wall and seeing what sticks. None do for long.

[scarletwoman]

19. The "far-fetched theories" are either disinfo or the product of paranoid

delusions.

There are plenty of intellectually honest questions that can be asked, of which I give a partial outline in my post #12 in this thread.

Time magazine, as an organ of the Establishment, performs its function admirably -- to wit: it correlates ANY questioning of the Official Story with the most far-fetched and unsupportable speculations (and possible purposeful disinformation) that infest the internet. Thus it walls off ALL of us who raise legitimate and eminently logical questions about how the 9/11 attacks were accomplished with the most absurd and illogical CTers -- effectively banishing ALL questioning to the outer darkness.

sw

[Kailassa]

23. If all conspiracy theories on 9/11 are easily debunked,

and the official story has been proved to be a lie,
I guess nothing happened that day after all.

I'm sure the grieving relatives will be glad to hear that.

[flyarm]

39. no..they are not!!..please read 9/11 COVERUP by PETER LANCE

BEST I HAVE SEEN TO DATE!

the official story is bullshit!!

from a now retired flight crew of one of the airlines involved based in NYC (jfk,lga,ewr) when 9/11 occured ..2001 flt attend of the year in 2001 for my airline NY base

fly

[INDIA]

71. I'm not even sure you know what you're arguing about.

Very confusing post. When has the official story "been proved to be a lie"???

If I beleive anything, it's that there was some sort of coverup to save the asses of the incompetent. Not a LIHOP and certainly not a MIHOP fantasy.

[petgoat]

58. Your demand for consistency is facile and futile.

To expect that a group united only by the skepticism of its members
will adopt a universal theory is absurd.

To use the lack of a unified theory as proof that all of them are
untenable is logically fallacuous.

Your claim that all theories are easily debunked is not true.

[Kailassa]

20. The same hand that brought it into being, perhaps?

[Bushwick Bill]

29. Moles, patsies, and professional killers.

http://tinyurl.com/apel5

[NOLADEM]

14. Amen n/t

[Ammonium]

15. Tin foil hat for you...

Watch this short, 4 minute video and see what you think. It's probably a waste considering your already stated closemindedness on the issue. Justifying the war was never an issue and it certainly won't stop us from being involved in Iraq for 10 years down the road. Not finding WMD's will just be a footnote.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1643313543353229958

It's all about who and what was inside that building.

[INDIA]

25. "Not finding WMD's will just be a footnote."

Not finding WMD's is what will define/ruin Bush's legacy. It will also be the main reason that we are going to gain seats in the House and Senate this November.

If we did indeed find WMDs in Iraq, either by faking it or legitimately, there would still be support for this war IMO and the Bush agenda would still be on track. It has been almost completely derailed because of the non-existant WMDs.

A theoretical government that would MIHOP would easily be able to fake WMD's in Iraq, either before the fall of Saddam or after.

Also, the TIME reporter is dead on when he says that the conspiracy would literally take hundreds, if not thousands of government, military and civilian personel to carry out. Not a single one of those people would step forward? To blow the cover of a plan that killed 3,000 of their fellow Americans? Fellow govt. personel? Fellow military?

No friggin way. NO FRIGGIN WAY.

There has never been, nor will there ever be, a conspiracy of the magnitude that constitutes MIHOP.

Hell, the govt couldn't sell weapons to the contras, burglarize a political office, get a bj from an intern without it being blown wide open.

[Ammonium]

38. Bush's legacy would be a nightmare with or without. Katrina ruined it mor

Do you believe JFK was assassinated by a lone nut with a gun that could not fire straight?

Remember the Anthrax attacks back right after 9/11? They traced that anthrax, because of the purity, back to the DoD. Yet no one was arrested and you don't see anyone talking any kind of shit about it. Nuclear enrichment carries tracers and you can ID where the enriched Uranium originated from. You can determin the origin of biological and chemical agents origin by their purity. The US government could not simply throw some anthrax over there and not have it come back to them. The same for enriched uranium or anything else. The fact that we did not find WMD's is a side issue. We will still be in Iraq and the military industrial complex and the new world order will continue to have their war and reap the benefits. JFK wanted to end the war in vietnam and they killed him, and his brother, and his son. The people who go against the grain of what they want end up dead, end of story.

The Time reporter is only scratching on the surface. If you can kill the president and his brother and get away with you, you can certainly figure out how to knock down some buildings. The Local and state governments don't have a clue. It's the black ops, the CIA that have the inside. And if you know that these people can kill the president and get away with it, what's to stop them from killing you?

[JAbuchan08]

88. DING DING DING

"The fact that we did not find WMD's is a side issue. We will still be in Iraq and the military industrial complex and the new world order will continue to have their war and reap the benefits."

nice summation

[INDIA]

97. Side issue my ass

It has ruined all support for the war and will hurt the Republicans BAD this November. Any govt that could pull of the largest and most deadly conspiracy in history could easily set Iraq up with WMD's to continue support, both at home and abroad. They also easily could have linked Iraq to 9/11 with some bogus documents, confessions.

Your fantasy world doesn't exist. That's why the vast vast vast majority of people with brains tend to believe that MIHOP is unbelievable. I saw that poll saying that 30% believe in a conspiracy. I wonder what the education levels of that 30% is. Show me ONE elected Dem who has even raised the possibility of MIHOP. And McKinney's unstable ass doesn't count. She actually balked at MIHOP when her primary neared.

[JAbuchan08]

108. For my own part

I just meant a side issue for the neo-cons.

[Bhaisahab]

109. The vast majority with brains

also re-elected a president who lied his nation to war. dont talk to me about brains dude. brains are out of fashion, its 'gut feeling' that's guiding you and other believers of the official story. you BELIEVE a govt of the people is incapable of such acts. anybody who punctures that belief is a conspiracy theorist. think about it.

[CJCRANE]

54. Sibel Edmonds stepped forward.

Look what happened to her.

Even if someone stepped forward the MSM would never listen to them.

[petgoat]

62. The "Conspiracy of Thousands" meme is baloney.

The war games disrupted the air defense. Nobody's allowed to talk about
classified war games.

Dr. Van Romero said a few charges planted in key locations could have
broght the towers down. How much of a crew does that take--especially
if they can work in the elevator shafts, using the roofs of the cars
as movable staging?

I once, like you, made assumptions beneficial to the official story and
was extremely hostile to the Truthists. Inform yourself and examine the
facts and your complacency will vanish.

A good place to start is Dr. Benejamin DeMott's article in Harpers about
the 9/11 Commission Report "Whitewash as Public Service".

http://www.harpers.org/WhitewashAsPublicService.html

[MissWaverly]

24. here's a few hints, check out the facts and the link

WTC Building 7 – on its 23rd floor – housed an Emergency Command Center for the City of New York that Mayor Rudolph Giuliani had built in the mid-1990’s. On the morning of September 11th, Mayor Giuliani did not go “to his Command Center – with its clear view of the Twin Towers – but to a makeshift, street-level headquarters at 75 Barkley Street.” WTC 7 also held the offices of numerous government agencies, including the Department of Defense, the CIA, the Secret Service, the IRS, and the Security and Exchange Commission.1. 5 Late 2001 was the time of “the height of the investigation into Enron, so the majority of Enron’s SEC filings were likely destroyed when World Trade Center 7 came down.”

On September 16th, NASA flew an airplane over the World Trade Center site, recorded infrared radiation coming from the ground, and created a thermal map. The U.S. Geological Survey analyzed this data, and determined the actual temperature of the rubble. This map shows that five days after the collapse of Building 7, the surface temperature of a section of its rubble was 1,341º F.8 This high a temperature is indicative of the use of explosives.
“WTC 7’s rubble pile continued to smolder for months.”

http://www.wtc7.net/articles/kimball/thirdskyscraper.html

Of course, we know it didn't really smoulder since there will be 10 minders show up here to
state that the the above couldn't possibly be true, and this is just another delusion from
the moonbat crazies. :-)

[flyarm]

40. you have that right 100%!! and the minders are everywhere! n/t

[MissWaverly]

61. thanks, only by standing up and telling it like it is, can we stop it

:-)

[CJCRANE]

45. Planting WMD in Iraq

would not have been a piece of cake because there are agencies both American and international that track WMD movements. Plus they do not have full control of Iraq, their agents could easily be killed by insurgents or even US troops.

[rman]

46. If it was not by controlled demolition, what did bring down WTC7?

There are claims of severe damage to the south face of the building, claims even that the NYPD has photos of it - which are not made public.
There's one piece of video apparently showing some damage to the top of the south face, but it's very questionable if it's enough to bring down the building. It certainly does not show the often claimed huge hole in the south face.
And if there was so much damage to the south face that it caused collapse, then why did the building collapse straight down in almost perfect symmetry, starting at ground level (as can clearly be seen in all the video footage of the collapse).
Certainly the few localized fires were not enough to cause complete collapse of the building, as FEMA acknowledges in its report:

FEMA
World Trade Center Building Performance Study
WTC7
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."
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf
http://www.fema.gov/library/wtcstudy.shtm

--

One doesn't need to know what did cause the collapse of WTC7 in order to conclude that the official story doesn't add up.

[petgoat]

56. "I'll pretend that there IS some ridiculous conspiracy."

That's not approaching the issue objectively, Indi.

If there was a conspiracy to bring down WTC7, it wasn't a "ridiculous conspiracy,"
it was a pretty scary and effective one that may still get away with it. So you're
going to have to do your pretending with a different attitude.

So why demolish WTC 7?

One can only speculate, but the fact that the CIA, the Secret Service, the OEM, the
IRS, and the SEC had offices there suggests some possible movivations. The Los
Angeles Times reported that "substantial files were destroyed" for 3000 to 4000 of
the SEC's cases. The EEOC reported that documents for 45 active cases were destroyed.
Before the attack, SEC investigations of corporate fraud by companies such as Enron
and Worldcom were the subject of many news reports -- reports that virtually vanished
in the wake of the attack.

http://www.911review.com/attack/wtc/b7.html

Without 9/11, the "collapse" of Enron and the coincident Wall Street scandals would
have caused a crisis in confidence in the very concept of corporate capitalism.
With 9/11, Wall Street had its correction already, and shrugged off the scandals.
There was anthrax, we were at war, we'd seen the WTC collapse.

Your claim that WTC7 was not vulnerable to a plane strike is not reasonable. If an
inept Hani Hanjour could fly a 757 feet off the ground into a Pentagon wall just 80
feet high, why couldn't someone hit this one (the black one is WTC7)?



(Don't be fooled by the proximity of the white building, Fiterman Hall. It was 17
stories. WTC7 was 47 stories, the tallest building in 33 states.)

If WTC7 was wired to be demolished by explosives after a plane strike, then perhaps
if the plane was disrupted by delays or failure to take off, the explosives planted
in the building would remain to be discovered.

if the government was evil enough and slick enough to carry out attacks on our
own soil to set up the Iraq war, planting WMD's in the Iraqi desert would have been
cake.

Not necessarily so. Explosives can easily be traced. The anthrax was traced back
to Fort Detrick. According to some threads I scanned here on DU, the CIA's Brewster
Jennings team caught a team of US agents on the Turkish border trying to smuggle WMDs
into Iraq. WMDs would have been an international matter subject to international
investigation. There has been no international investigation of 9/11.

There was no conspiracy, only incompetence. Q.E.D.... NOT.

You can, as I once did, protect your complacency only by making assumptions beneficial
to the official story and failing to investigate the facts.

[INDIA]

72. Your claim that WTC7 was not vulnerable to a plane strike is not reasonable

Then what jet was supposed to crash into it? There were no more jets headed for NY!

There are two sides to the argument
1. A jet was supposed to hit WTC7, it never did, they blew it up anyway. Then what jet was supposed to hit it? And a 47 story building in downtown Manhattan would be about 1000 times more difficult to hit than towers 1 and 2. Even coming in from the Jersey side, it is hidden behind other buildings. I have a picture of me in Jersey City before 9-11 to prove it.

2. The other argument is that the towers were supposed to fall into WTC7 to damage it, and then it would be brought down with explosives if it didn't go by itself. Then why would the MIHOP gov. bring the towers down so cleanly. From what I've heard, it's extremely difficult to bring a building down in its own footprint. Why not let them topple over and actually hit WTC7, a lot easier to do.

Lastly, tens of thousands of people worked in those towers every day, nobody saw anything suspicious involving explosives. Security guards don't remember "repair men" coming in late at night? It would take months of labor, in plain sight, to plant enough explosives to bring those down. Somebody could do that in secret w/o anyone seeing them? BS.

And I dare anyone to present a reputable source that links the Anthrax directly to the US military, although an action like that could be done with less than a dozen people, MIHOP would take hundreds. Hundreds of people with families, friends, phone records, senses of guilt. There would have been a whistleblower. People in the govt are split pretty evenly Republican/Democrat. Do you really think a good Dem would allow Bush to kill 3,000 people without going public. I don't even think the most brainwashed repuke could do that.

[petgoat]

79. How do you know where flight 93 was headed for?

There was at least one other plane that was suspected of being
a potential hijacking but never left the ground.

a 47 story building in downtown Manhattan would be about 1000 times more difficult to hit than
towers 1 and 2.

From the N you'd have a straight shot 300 feet higher than the neighbors, 300 feet wide.
How high was the Pentagon--80 feet?

Why not let {th towers} topple over and actually hit WTC7, a lot easier to do.

It would seem like a pretty major coincidence, wouldn't it? And you'd have to twist it
toward the E to avoid the Verizon building. A topple hinged on the N wall would hit
both WTC and Verizon. Then you risk incomplete collapse in WTC7. Also, you might get
another insurance company involved. The more insurers, the more chance of an investigation.
(WTC7's insurers paid off before the FEMA report was even released. Man! What was their
hurry?)

tens of thousands of people worked in those towers every day, nobody saw anything suspicious involving explosives.

Buildings are less populated after midnight. Few people inspect the elevator shafts. There were
lots of vacant floors.

Security guards don't remember "repair men" coming in late at night?

Bomb-sniffing dogs were inexplicably removed from the Twin Towers five days before 9-11

The Twin Towers had been evacuated a number of times in the weeks preceding 9/11

There was a power down in the Twin Towers on the weekend before 9/11, security cameras were shut down, and many workers ran around busily doing things unobserved.

And -- as an interesting coincidence -- a Bush-linked company ran security at the trade centers, thus giving it free reign to the buildings.


http://911blogger.com/node/2487

MIHOP would take hundreds.

There you go again. Hundreds for what? War games spoiled the air defence.

Guess what, the illegal drug industry takes millions of customers, distributors,
pilots, retailers, security people, growers, crooked cops, and moneylaunderers.

But in any town in this country you can get crack and smack. So you're going to tell me
"There is no illegal drug industry because some one of those junkies would have talked."

[LiberalUprising]

90. So now we come to the crux of your arguement

"Do you really think a good Dem would allow Bush to kill 3,000 people without going public. I don't even think the most brainwashed repuke could do that."


The Dems are more than likely in this up to their necks as well but no, the Dems would NEVER do anything like this against the people.

That is about as lame as it gets as a defense, reminds me of the good repubs that say the same about bushco, they would never do this becuase they are not like that. This system of goverment is rotten to the core.

It's all about money and power, if you think anyone is above doing the worst in pursuit of those goals, then I don't know what else to say, except you need to read some world history.

You just can't argue with reasoning like yours so I'll leave you with your head stuck firmly in the sand.

[INDIA]

96. And I'll stick to reality...

It's way better over here with the rational people. Do any of the people you vote for agree with you? Do any Dems think Bush MIHOP or LIHOP? Didn't think so. Maybe you should form your own party.

[LiberalUprising]

100. Exactly my point

Rational people?!? lol

Both parties have been bought by corporations, have sold the people down the river for a few shiny trinkits and do their masters bidding and is the reason why I don't vote Dem anymore.

They have nothing to offer me, they don't favor the interest of the people or share my beliefs on any but the smallest and most insignificant issues.

Good luck with that denial thing.

[petgoat]

102. India, I believed like you that the Dems were a real opposition

and that NPR would tell me if anything important happened.

I was reluctant to go see Fahrenheit 9/11 because I heard it was
mean-spirited and it lied. I went anyway because I figured it
was my duty to give anything so widely despised a fair hearing.

I was shaken by the movie--even more so when I saw that fact-checking
had been done by a respected Chicago law firm. It's not lies. NPR
never told me that shit. The Dems never told me that shit.

The Dems and NPR never told me about media suppression, about crooked
elections, about crooked voting machines, about the essential dishonesty
of the official reports on 9/11.

Wake up!

[ixion]

66. my argument centers on physics and chemistry, not abstract events

the chemistry and physics of the 'official story' do not make sense, unless you suspend reality and allow for a series of anomalies.

1) Jet fuel cannot melt commercial grade steel. If you don't believe me, get some jet fuel and pour it on steel, light it, and see how the steel DOES NOT melt away, or turn molten.


2) Mile high skyscrapers don't collapse straight down into their own footprint at near free-fall speed, unless they're helped to do so.


That, among some other things, are why I have questions.

[PATRICK]

8. TIME scratches its head

and other areas.

Secrecy, cover-up.
No one in government held accountable for anything.
System "changes" just as blurry.

Massive traumatic event given comic book treatment, the news networks(hey, we ain't historians, we don't do investigations no more) try to package a mild assuring picture, furrowing their brows and scowling only at how weak this makes their future TV movie possibilities.

Real people are left in the dark, some archiving and analyzing, some theorizing, some clamoring for the real investigation.

The freedom to speculate creates pressure of a type that has not succeeded before, hence the ease with which it is dealt in practical terms. The call for accountability etc from OUR current government? The uphill struggle gets steeper.

TIME revisits the poison broth, its "curiosity" piqued why no one believes the corporate storybook version complete with the accepted and desirable public reactions. Continuing to aid the secrecy and the ploys of cover-up it dumps all who are "dissatisfied" with the lies and cover-up into "them".

Particular theories are ONLY useful as spurs to the only issue. A REAL and thorough investigation that will not only earn trust but in be in fact, true. I see an attempt here to find some weird detail to hang the whole thing on, something more easily disproved than the "magic bullet" and "lone assassin" fairy tales of the past. However, that hook must be a real hook and then be debunked. It probably cannot be done considering the wall of secrecy is absolute, built on a huge network of connected lies by cowards and liable scoundrels.

TIME is still performing its function, where even doing it badly gets the job done, suppressing, deviating, soothing, pontificating and yes, abetting any cover-up that is PC in their 1st world.

The debate is not about MIHOP or detonations, drones hitting the Pentagon. It is about the Cloud of Unknowing, a mystical Nirvana of fantasy ignorance that spread over this nation while the dust from the Towers settled down forever. What we do know, by pulling teeth and gleaning discarded facts, leaks and courageous whistleblowers is that there is enough malfeasance and redirection of national concerns to alone make the irrefutable case that Bush/Cheney "let things happen", made the nation unsecure, did not care, and only planned extremist actions to merely exploit such an event... all... before during and forever after 9/11. Katrina and other events though the years have cemented that particular proof in repeated offenses. That tip of the iceberg is very well proved and should have led to criminal investigation and severe accountability all the way down the rusted, rotted chain.



That wasn't enough????? Do we need an alien spaceman with inviolate video footage of himself being paid by Cheney to take down the Towers? Has TIME set the bar, the wall built on single conspiracy theories which are assaults of imagination against the cover-up? Are all questioning citizens now placed behind that wall, a concentration camp of dissent, dehumanized, debased and branded as disturbers of the peace of the damned.

[pretzel4gore]

10. is it possible

the only entity able to successfully engineer a wtc disaster and also the only entity to clearly benefit from 911 is also the only entity able to get away with it and blame someone else? ie: not a buncha islamic extremists, or mafia hitmen, or hippie anarchists, or bored computer nerd teenagers. Could this possibly be the 'military industrial complex' president eisenhower warned the american people about just before jfk became president?
is it possible?
could even one mainstream media outfit consider the possibility? Just ONE? NOPE NOPE NO FUKKING WAY!
btw time magazine is part of a criminal run organization....

[petgoat]

65. MIC seems a likely suspect.

Of course it's always possible that al Qaeda brought down the towers
with explosives, and the officials are covering this up to protect
Marvin Bush's security company (owned by Kuwait-American Corporation)
from embarrassment and potential liability.

[scarletwoman]

12. Okay, I've read the whole thing and it just pisses me off.

The article starts with the teaser about "the puffs of smoke" as the Twin Towers collapse, then heads straight for the most unsupportable CT of all -- that it wasn't a plane that hit the Pentagon -- and stays focused on that.

As someone who has believed from the very beginning that the bush cabal had a hand in facilitating the 9/11 attacks one way or another -- whether through arrogant or ignorant heedlessness in ignoring the voluminous prior warnings, or a malign purposeful strategic decision to allow a terrorist attack to occur in order to pursue the larger neocon agenda ("a new Pearl Harbor"), to the most cynical hypothesis: that elements within the government actually aided and abetted the attacks (a stand-down of Norad and air defense, and/or impeding active investigations of Al Qaeda activities) -- I have NEVER bought into the red herring/disinfo of theorizing that no plane hit the Pentagon.

This Time article is just another piece of establishment misdirection. Instead of posing any serious questions about why our airspace was so unprotected on that morning, instead of analyzing why the Hart-Rudman report was immediately shelved by the incoming (mal)administration, instead of noting that upon Cheney being appointed to head a "terrorism task force", such a group was never convened, instead of asking why the Gore Commission Report recommendations on airline security was ignored, or why the August 6 PDB ("Al Qaeda determined to attack in the U.S.") resulted in the bush cabal taking absolutely NO action whatsoever; instead of bringing ANY of these eminently relevant questions to light, the whole purpose the exercise is obviously to reinforce the Official Story.

This Time article is worse than useless, it's a deliberate act of sabotage designed to discourage and deter any intellectually honest questioning of the Officially Story by associating ALL questioning with the most absurd and unsupportable speculations of the outer fringes of CT.

sw

[flashsmith]

16. Anyone who took high school physics knows the official explanation

is crap. Look at the debris coming off the building. See any falling faster than the building? You don't see that because the building fell at the same rate as a bowling bowl thrown off the top. e.g. free fall. I don't care how weak the steel was, the energy needed to pulverize the concrete and deform the steel HAD to slow down the descent, and yet the building defied the laws of physics and collapsed in free-fall. The only explanation is that it was a controlled demolition. Now, I don't necessarily buy that it was a Bush Administration conspiracy. If you told me that Osama Bin Laden used his wealth to rent every tenth floor so he had the necessary access to plant the explosives, that I might believe, though I would wonder why he made a special effort to have it collapse on it's own footprint instead of toppling over which would have been much easier. Who? How? Why? are open questions with only speculation for answers. When, Where and What happened are not. The NIST explanation of what happened is bogus. Go to this link to see what scientists think of the NIST conclusions. http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/

[Kailassa]

22. Perhaps Bin Laden was so fond of America that he didn't want

to do any more damage than he could help to your fine country.

So incredibly fond of it that he arranged for each of the trainee-pilot-hijackers to hit a tower in its "sweet-spot" so it would collapse neatly. And he even arranged that debris hitting building 7 would hit it just right so it fell neatly too.

I bet that guy could make a fortune working for a demolition company.

[StrictlyRockers]

26. Absurd. They take the most wingnut theories and put them out front..

...as though it is impossible for people to see one lie in the government's story, without also believing in all of the unproven theories.

Ludicrous. It is the CM flapping it's gums and playing lip service to the 9/11 truth movement, while doing no serious journalistic investigation, not presenting thing in an even-handed manner, doing all it can to reassure the public and prop up the government's CT.

Hey, Time Magazine!
...............................
................................
....................../´¯/)....
....................,/¯../.....
.................../..../........
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`•¸........
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯\.....
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')......
.........\.................'.../.......
..........''...\.......... _.•..........
............\..............(.............
..............\.............\............
...............\.............\...........

[Bushwick Bill]

27. Funny, they never address...

These hit pieces always talk about demolition and the Pentagon. They never address why Sibel Edmonds is being gagged if she says she knows how the 9/11 attacks were financed (and that high-profile Americans are tied to the crimes); why the 9/11 Commission didn't address the fact that the head of Pakistani intelligence wired $100,000 to Mohammed Atta when the same guy was meeting with our congressional intelligence leaders on the morning of 9/11; why the 9/11 Commission bothered publishing a report based on NORAD testimony when they now admit in a new book that NORAD lied to them so badly they were going to recommend a Justice Department investigation; and who scheduled and coordinated the wargames that miraculously occurred at the time of the attack. I wonder why that is. :eyes: I guess I am just a tinfoily fool.

[flyarm]

41. the FAA also lied to the 9/11 commission! & commission knew they did!! n/t

[populistdriven]

28. I thought Able Danger was a fact

[Hailtothechimp]

30. If you've ever SEEN a controlled demolition with your own eyes...

it's obvious that's what happened with WTC on 9/11.

There were 4 abandonded high rises brought down in Chicago by controlled demolitions in 1999. I watched them come down, and I was struck by two things:

1. How loud it was. The charges set off in advance were very loud and very sharp. And after that the buildings just came right down. So ask yourself this: Where is the audio from 9/11 in NYC? We all know what the images are, but why are were never allowed to HEAR any of it? Maybe because the explosions would tip us off to what was going on. I know that 9/11: the First 24 hours, which was a documentary shot in New York on 9/11, was the first indication I had of all the car alarms going off in Manhattan. It makes sense, with the loud noises and explosions and all, but hearing them reminded me of it. The pictures were horrible, but the sounds would be useful, too. But those have been kept from us, and deliberately so.

2. How much dust there was. There was this huge cloud of dust that was kicked up after the demolitions, and it blew across Lake Shore Drive and right into the crowd who thought they were a safe distance away. I'm not sure why the dust happened, but there was quite a bit of it. And there was also a huge amount of dust in Manhattan on 9/11. I don't know what the reason is, but I saw the dust when it happened and I just knew those buildings came down on purpose.

[RamboLiberal]

34. One of the documentaries I watched recently

had the sounds of the collapse. I didn't hear any sharp cracks. And your dust theory - any building collapse whether by explosives or natural are going to raise a massive cloud of dust commiserate with the size of the building. What do you think happens to all that pulverized concrete, sheetrock, ceiling tiles, etc when a building collapses?

Yeah, I'm one of those who doesn't buy the explosives in the buildings theories. I find that this would be too massive a plot to engineer and carry off. I think the damage down to the towers and to WTC 7 were severe enough to cause building collapse. I've read the fire reports from the firemen the scene that day that tell of the massive damage done to WTC7.

I'd love to know why the firemen are not questioning the collapse - they suffered some of the greatest losses that day?

[flyarm]

42. they have from the very beginning questioned it ..in their own magazine!

please if you do not know the facts do some reading first before making inaccurate comments!

fly

[petgoat]

76. Granted, collapsing buildings raise dust when they hit the ground.

But the WTC turned to dust 800 feet in the air!

[RamboLiberal]

94. Yeah cause there's a helluva lot of concrete, sheetrock

plaster board, ceiling tiles, 30+ years of dust, etc that's getting pulverized as the floors fall. This is the first time a skyscraper of this size has come down. What the heck do you think produces the dust in an implosion? It's this stuff not the explosives in the implosion.

[petgoat]

101. Sure, sheetrock and concrete can produce dust. But there's

no mechanism for expelling it.

Think about the collapsing floors. Your left hand is the steel floor,
a cracker in your palm is the concrete. Your right hand is the
upper floor collapsing on it. Clap! Does the cracker fly all over
the room? No, the dust stays in your hand,

[NGC_6822]

103. Nonsense

I don't know where you dream up all this nonsense. I had a two floor apartment, and in 1994 there was a fire in a lower bedroom while I was on business travel. It was not an explosion, but most likely started from an electrical short. The heat apparently built up very rapidly and the ceiling of the room collapsed. The glass window doors blew out in the room, and all kinds of crap blew out of the corridor door. The stairs were burnt out and four windows on the top floor were blown out. You need to talk to a fireman to find out what really happens when ceilings and floors collapse. Tragically, my wife did not survive the fire; she was at the top of the stairs.

[petgoat]

104. I'm sorry about your wife. As to the expulsion, you are

describing the expulsion of air and "all kinds of crap" and the breaking of glass.

The situation you describe has nothing to do with the complete pulverization of
concrete floors 800 feet in the air, and their explosive ejection. There is
no mechanism for the explosive ejection.

Clap your hands together on a cracker and see if it produces an explosive cloud
of dust.

[rman]

53. 9-11 explosions can be heard in

"9-11 Eyewitness"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3498980438587461603

Calculations show the dust on 9-11 (inches thick spread over all of lower Manhattan) contains most of the concrete that was in the floors of the towers. The concrete slabs one would expect from the collapse of a building with 110 concrete floors were notably absent in the rubble pile at ground zero.

[pretzel4gore]

55. one day they'll reveal that ALL buildings are prewired...

somehoww, though this doesn't excuse anything, it is almost certain that in 1972, when the complex was put up, we did like the soviets used to do: prewired the structures for their demolition in 50 or 100 years. such a process would be top secret, of course (the russians prewired their dams and complexes etc cuz of fear of invasion, whereas we did it for economy - but secrecy would have been a necessity in both cases; if only for public confidence. imagine being in a place that could be demo's by ONE CRAZY BASTARD whose old lady skipped out on!)
what time mag and the rest of pigmedia does is maintain puublic faith in the national institutions. they leave out the grim, awful parts, cuz, well the people are too easily misled, stampeded and outraged etc....
the buildings were demo's, and most people watching knew it on the morning of 911-denial has been in full bore since then, but the pig knows eventuallt they must fess up that wtc 7 was demo'd (for public safety) using prewired explosives; they will never admit the 2 towers were wired though, but, like the 'gulf of tonkin' scam, or the 'lone gunman' idea, they will pretty well allow popular perceptions to make the truths mainstream (while pooh poohing them!)...thus, they get to have their kaka and eat it too, sort of.....

[INDIA]

99. ALL buildings are prewired to explode?

AAAAAAAHHHH! I gotta get out of my apartment! It's prewired to explode! :crazy:

[DemInDistress]

67. listen to this video but do use earphones ..

eyewitness to 911..rick seigel. blue star media

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3498980438587461603

prior to all 3 collapses massive explosions are caught on tape. WT2 had 9 hugh blasts within 90 seconds of ots demise. WT1 had 5-6 hugh blasts 30 seconds before its demise and WT7 had several hugh blasts before it fell into its footprint.

For over 4 years I heard and read reports about explosions going off then earlier this year I watched this video with earphones and switched my opinion from LIHOP to MIHOP.

Watch it...

[DemInDistress]

68. duplicate post.

[INDIA]

73. So if terrorists did indeed bring down the towers

There wouldn't be as much dust????:crazy:

[StrictlyRockers]

82. Absolutely correct. But you have to do your own research to understd why.

We are not here to change everyone's diapers for them.

SR

[INDIA]

84. Burden of proof is on the accuser. n/t

[StrictlyRockers]

89. "Terrorists" of the ilk that the gov't claims did this fell deed would not

have access to the buildings to place the charges. They would have great difficulty in obtaining the type of thermite charges that have been shown to have been used to bring down the towers.

A band of "islamic terrorist" could not have caused these buildings to collapse in this manner without inside help. "Terrorist" would likely be able to pull off only something on the scale of the 1993 WTC bombing, wherein a delivery truck laden with bombs was driven into the parking garage. Attributing this act to a rag-tag bunch of 19 "Al Qaida" terrorists is ridiculous. It doesn't fit. They couldn't do it. No possible way.

Bin Laden had never done anything but deny that he had any involvement in these attacks. "Terrorists" did do this, but not the kind of terrorists that you're talking about.

SR

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

92. Burden of proof is on the 9-11 Commission...

...their explanation for the collapse is a joke, and you seem to be deliberately obtuse.

Look at the videos, the buildings were demolished---couldn't be more obvious.

[European Socialist]

31. WTC#7--nobody has come close to explaining why it came down in...

its own footprint--But surprisingly a lot of people don't find the collapse strange. The fact that Mcpravda won't investigate is incredibly suspicious.

[RamboLiberal]

35. Try the firemen at the scene that day

We saw only the undamaged side of WTC7.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody?s going into 7, there?s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.

Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we?ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/norman.html Battalion Chief John Norman

I started to go down Vesey toward West, but there was a lot of debris blocking the way and they were telling me no, you don?t want to go down there ? they?re worried about that building collapsing. I looked at 7 World Trade Center. There was smoke showing, but not a lot and I?m saying that isn?t going to fall. So I went up Church Street two more blocks and went across to West and went right down behind 7 and got a good look at three sides. Again, there were a lot of fires on the ground, some crushed mail trucks, some burned-up engines. It was a scene out of a war zone. I continued around to West and Vesey and reported into the command post. They were very concerned about fire extending into the telephone company building. They gave me a couple of companies and said get into the telephone company building and check on extension there. We had extension on the first and second floors, so we took some standpipe lines, put them in operation and knocked that down. From there, we looked out at 7 World Trade Center again. You could see smoke, but no visible fire, and some damage to the south face. You couldn?t really see from where we were on the west face of the building, but at the edge of the south face you could see that it was very heavily damaged.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/claes.html Firefighter Marcel Claes

We were kept away from building 7 because of the potential of collapse.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html

Hayden: Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o?clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o?clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that?s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn?t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.

[European Socialist]

60. Good post--- But I still think the WTC#7 collapse needs an investigation.

[petgoat]

77. So let's see

Captain Boyle says there's a gash 20 stories high.

There's no indication that Deputy Chief Hayden was actually there,
but he claims someone put a transit on the corner and measured a
bulge from 10-13--but doesn't mention that the corner was broken
off between 10-13. Nor does he mention any gash in the building.

Chief Frank Fellini said: “When fell, it ripped
steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade
on Vesey Street."

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=GRI20060129&articleId=1846

FEMA didn't believe any of them. They left the reports of structural
damage out of their report and said fire brought WTC7 down. They
didn't say how.

[RamboLiberal]

95. And you believe FEMA controlled by the Bush Cronies?

The same bunch who screwed the pooch with Katrina?

[petgoat]

105. Is it possible the FEMA fiasco in NOLA was created with

the specific purpose of discrediting FEMA? No, I'm not saying
Bush made the hurricane happen. I'm suggesting FEMA was set up
to fail.

The FEMA investigation was done by volunteer engineers from ASCE,
the American Society of Civil Engineers. They were hampered by
being excluded from the collapse site, by difficulty getting
access to the blueprints, and by a budget of only $650 thousand.
(NIST got $20 million.)

The FEMA/ASCE report basically threw up its hands, saying it
believed fire must have brought down the building but it could
not explain how.

I believe the FEMA/ASCE report over the Bush Science of NIST,
which is blatantly reverse-engineered to get the "right" answers.

[flyarm]

43. the 9/11 commission did not even touch building 7 in their report!

that speaks volumns!!

fly

[w4rma]

32. This "planned demolitions" crap is dumb. These neo-cons aren't

technologically competent enough to pull off something like that which would require so much coordination. I doubt anyone in the world would be able to do this undetected.

The only thing they are good at is PR.

[CantGetFooledAgain]

33. Then what is your explanation of the collapse of WTC7?

If not controlled demolition, how did it happen?

[w4rma]

48. There is no motive for bringing down the WTC7, also. They got what

they wanted with the other two buildings. I'm not an architect but I am pretty good at basic physics and mathematics. Probably the contractors building the building cut corners when they built it so they could make a larger profit.

[CantGetFooledAgain]

64. So the reason it fell down is...

That there was no motive for anyone to blow it up?

Or that the contractors "cut corners" when building it to the extent that a couple of small fires would cause it to completely collapse to the ground?

I don't want to be rude, but the first of these two explanations does not even address the question at all, and the second is completely ludicrous. So we're still left with the question:

"Why did WTC7 come down?"

Would you like to take another shot at it?

[dailykoff]

37. Third time's the charm.

They had eight years and two botched "terrorist" strikes (NYC '93, OKC '95) to get it right.

[w4rma]

49. Yes. "They" did. (nt)

[dailykoff]

69. "They" have an annual budget of $439 billion

in "nonmilitary discretionary spending," otherwise known as dirty tricks, so I should hope so.



pie chart link: ?link

source: http://www.warresisters.org/piechart.htm

[petgoat]

78. And a good chunk of a $500 billion a year illegal drug trade. nt

[flyarm]

44. ahhh they are very good at compartmentalizing ..and placing gag orders

so people can not come forward!

fly

[rman]

47. You think the claim is Rummy and Cheney planted the demo charges?

Or do you think anyone associated with these neocons automatically becomes stupid? Or that simply believing neocon doctrine makes one stupid?

[w4rma]

50. If someone planted demo charges, then I think that they would be told

about those charges ahead of time so that they could have their PR ready. But they were running around like chickens with their heads cut off (except for that long period where Bush was reading "My Pet Goat" while the buildings were falling) on 911 and Bush didn't even show up in NY for 4 days.

It was pretty obvious that they hadn't given this scenario much thought.

[rman]

51. If they did know, wouldn't they pretend they did not know?

If they were involved in a 9-11 conspiracy, what makes you think anything about it would be obvious?

Besides, this argument of yours about them "not giving it much thought" is entire different than your initial argument about their being "not technologically competent enough to pull off something like that".

Makes it look like you're just making up arguments to fit the official story.

[w4rma]

52. Not to the extent that they embarrass themselves.

And it's the same argument. "not giving it much thought" and "not technologically competent enough" both are boiled down to incompetence.

[rman]

59. right...

[MissWaverly]

63. did you see my post above

On September 16th, NASA flew an airplane over the World Trade Center site, recorded infrared radiation coming from the ground, and created a thermal map. The U.S. Geological Survey analyzed this data, and determined the actual temperature of the rubble. This map shows that five days after the collapse of Building 7, the surface temperature of a section of its rubble was 1,341º F.8 This high a temperature is indicative of the use of explosives.
“WTC 7’s rubble pile continued to smolder for months.”


this is the US Geological Survey saying explosives were used in WTC 7, it was not even mentioned
in the 9-11 report probably because of the above statement.

Let me add here that I just saw a Bush quote from Blumenthal's latest book:

George Walker Bush's comment on William Clinton's library:

"A submarine could take this place out."

[petgoat]

80. What makes you think their incompetent? Evert one of

Bush's "mistakes" serves his interests or those of his cronies.

Ooops! I invaded the wrong country and took the Iraqi oil off the market
and drove the price to record levels and enriched my cronies and bankrupted
the public treasury. Oh silly me!

Oops! I let Afghanistan become warlord heaven so now opium production is
at record levels after Taliban banned it in 2000. That my money laundering
friends (ever hear of Riggs bank? BCCI? Khalid bin Mahfouz?) really
needed the cash has nothing to do with it.

Even the destruction of New Orleans serves to benefit the Port of Houston.

[pretzel4gore]

57. they got away with it! what the hell you talking about?

the proof is they got away with it. if al ciada did it, they beczme hunted men (iow, they got nailed)...just like in the jfk murder case, or the october surprise case, the pig got away with it. time proves that. And that proves who was behind those acts....
5 years have passed since 2001. bush wasn't even elected in 2000. See a connection? the anthrax scam was part of the same 'pr' that barb olsen ph call was.....most of humanity knows the busheviks were involved (if only covering it up) in 911. So it's only the 'democratic' west that is being played for fools, cuz it's WE who can (and still might) hang bush and his greased whores....

[Raster]

36. I don't have to read the article to see its slant. This is another "point

the finger at the conspiracy nuts" hatchet job. The real reason 36% of Americans believe the bush* misadministration may have had something to do with 9/11 is because they can smell the stink in the room. There are WAY TOO FUCKING MANY QUESTIONS about 9/11 that have never been answered, and if answered, shoddily so. The bush* misadministration has spent more time and money trying to quell and quash investigation into 9/11 than actually investigating it. And remember, the innocent have nothing to hide. And if 36% of Americans think bushco* was involved, a whole hell of a lot more Americans are not comfortable with the official explanations. There are very few of us anymore that don't have at least some nagging little questions in the back of our minds.

For one thing, people are starting to get real suspicious about bush*, bushco*, 9/11, elections, and a host of other astounding coincidences. Coincidences and more coincidences. What a coincidence that just a year or so before 9/11, the Project for the New American Century Fascists wished for another Pearl Harbor-type event to galvanize their neocon position and frighten the citizens of the United States into submission. Well they sure got their new Pearl Harbor, what a coincidence. If not for 9/11, bush*II was destined to be a one-term presidency and a place in history books noting its "controversial" (s)election and its general ineffectiveness. bush*'s numbers were way down and falling just before 9/11. And then 9/11 changed everything. Most of us really have no ideal how profound the changes to our society really are, because most of the rules that changed did so in secret.

on edit: And the thoughts of conspiracy theory and fact won't go away. bushco* will never be able to wash 9/11 off their collective hands. No fucking way.

[DemInDistress]

70. lets not forget NIST is sitting on 7,000 photo's and hundreds of

hours of videotapes as well as thousands of documents that they wont release for public inspection. Why I ask?

that answer is obvious ,....

[ryanus]

74. "It is a mainstream political reality"

Yay, I'm mainstream

[toymachines]

75. It is a mainstream political reality.

"This is not a fringe phenomenon." This is the point that needs to be made clear. We are not going away.

[JohnyCanuck]

81. They got away with the Operation Gladio false flag terrorism

for 30 years or so with no one leaking or spilling the beans, and even after it became known that NATO, The CIA, MI6 and other allied intelligence and military agencies had co-operated with underground fascist and far right groups to stage deadly terror attacks in Europe for the purpose of blaming the attacks on the leftists and communists, the mainstream media whores still refuse to talk about it at all.

Sword Play: Attacking Civilians to Justify "Greater Security"
by Chris Floyd

"You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force ... the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security."

This was the essence of Operation Gladio, a decades-long covert campaign of terrorism and deceit directed by the intelligence services of the West -- against their own populations. Hundreds of innocent people were killed or maimed in terrorist attacks -- on train stations, supermarkets, cafes and offices -- which were then blamed on "leftist subversives" or other political opponents. The purpose, as stated above in sworn testimony by Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra, was to demonize designated enemies and frighten the public into supporting ever-increasing powers for government leaders -- and their elitist cronies.

First revealed by Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti in 1991, Gladio (from the Latin for "sword") is still protected to this day by its founding patrons, the CIA and MI6. Yet parliamentary investigations in Italy, Switzerland and Belgium have shaken out a few fragments of the truth over the years. These have been gathered in a new book, "NATO's Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe," by Daniele Ganser, as Lila Rajiva reports on CommonDreams.org.

Originally set up as a network of clandestine cells to be activated behind the lines in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe, Gladio quickly expanded into a tool for political repression and manipulation, directed by NATO and Washington. Using right-wing militias, underworld figures, government provocateurs and secret military units, Gladio not only carried out widespread terrorism, assassinations and electoral subversion in democratic states such as Italy, France and West Germany, but also bolstered fascist tyrannies in Spain and Portugal, abetted the military coup in Greece and aided Turkey's repression of the Kurds.

SNIP

Indeed, it would not do for the families of the 85 people ripped apart by the Aug. 2, 1980 bombing of the Bologna train station to know that their loved ones had been murdered by "men inside Italian state institutions and ... men linked to the structures of United States intelligence," as the Italian Senate concluded after its investigation in 2000.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/FLO502B.html

[petgoat]

85. Operation Northwoods was kept a secret, the false nature

of the Tonkin Gulf incident was kept a secret.

There is no illegal drug trade. It would require a conspiracy of
several million people, and one of those junkies would have talked.

[NGC_6822]

83. Black helicopters

Has anyone considered the possibility that 9/11 was all organized by the black helicopter gang? The right wingers were completely paranoid about them, but I have photos that clearly show George Bush during those few months he was missing from military service working at a secret base with black helicopters as far as you could see. The right wingers thought it was a communist plot, but the reality was that the neo-cons were going to subvert both the right and left in America to take the whole thing for themselves. Furthermore, I don't believe Nixon ever died. If you look closely at the photos of the vehicle carrying the casket, you will see that the tire pressure doesn't match the total weight of the van and all the visible people in it. IT'S TOO LIGHT! I'm gathering evidence now to show that he is at the black helicopter base as we speak. I will present all of this in a book early next year.

[petgoat]

86. Don't quit your day job. nt

[NGC_6822]

93. Good advice

I'll take your advice. There's far too much competition out there with rich imaginative minds. I couldn't possibly dream up the stuff they do.

[JAbuchan08]

87. I have no idea what happened on 9-11

but I'm a conspiracy theorist, because what I am TOLD happened does not add up correctly, particularly in the area of the tracking of hijacked planes. I also doubt that this administration that treats Iraqi lives as expendable really cares THAT much about American lives.

[petgoat]

98. An important point. The Bushcists' conduct AFTER 9/11

supports the conspiracists' view of 9/11.

Contempt for American lives in NOLA and in the Nat'l Guard and other branches
of military service.

Suppression of evidence.

Obstruction of investigations.

Few know what happened 9/11, though many claim to. We need a new investigation,
that's clear.

[depakid]

106. Why would anyone believe Slime Magazine

or the 9-11 commission?

Therein lies the problem- a complete lack of credibility and legitimacy.

When conditions like that flourish- so will conspiracy theories.

I take very little that comes out of the corporate media- or their sponsers at the Republican party- or their captured agencies at face value anymore.

Unless I can confirm certain kinds of information through responsible sources- my inclination is to disbelieve it.

[applegrove]

107. Actually - it is the one of two theories that match the pain that is the

conspiracy. In my view..it is easier to accept a few crooks at home messing stuff up ...than to accept an attack on the USA and a war on terror.

Somehow a little pip-squeek killing Kennedy hurts just like admitting Bush (pip-squeek) had reason to go to war in Afghanistan. Both painfull hugely painful events looking for hugely painful explanations. For some people the pain of the event would be too painful if the reality reason were true. or not painful enough. And conspiracy is a way to stop the pain. It can be bigger or smaller than the actual reality.

Your feelings try and match the reasoning with an explanation. Depending if you are paranoid or polyannaish.. your psychi will choose a conspiracy either greater than the event or lesser. So your psychi can balance out.

To say that all people reaction in one way.. is not fair. We are all different inside. And some will go big to stop the pain..some will go smaller. Polyannas the day of 9/11 all said... we've done something wrong to the ME. We have to seek to understand the middle east. And they were not wrong on the whole - but wrong that al Qaeda could be handled with a big feeling of love for mankind. Some kooks simply cannot be handled that way. The reality was that al Qaeda needed to be ferreted out in Afghanistan.

Then Bush dropped the ball and went to Iraq and into empire mode.