Charlie Sheen questions 9/11!!!!!

[papasmerf]

first of all , I am not saying anything on my own , I am just refering to articles
of different theories and trying to debate so may be if we can reach to some conclusion and I am being openminded and also trying to understand how these theories can be rejected but so far I havnt seen any concrete evidence which
can outright reject these theories....



Please refer to previous discussion which I posted and Don clarified that these plans are prepared years in advance but ( if i understand correctly) only presented to the Civilian Government before the implemention...

So based on your thoughts this was a Clinton plan to either undermine Bush or boost Gore if he had won.

 

[dreamer]

honestly , you have only one 'rumour' site to present again and again

it does answer your question "where did the plane go"

 

[scroll99]

So based on your thoughts this was a Clinton plan to either undermine Bush or boost Gore if he had won.

Below are the quotes I was refering to , please read it and find out who prepares these types of plans... and we are not talking about 'undermining plans' but about the strategies

U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba

N E W Y O R K, May 1, 2001 In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.


Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.

"These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing," Bamford told ABCNEWS.com.

"The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants."

Gunning for War

The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," writes Bamford.


http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

My experiences temper the implications of your post.
I was once assigned to the JCS back during the Reagan era.
Many, many plans were drawn up on all kinds of operations.
Problems were thought up and responses were investigated.
I'm sure if you got into the JCS library you would find an
operational plan to nuke the Vatican. That's the nature of
a modern military command - plan for every alternative.
They're approval isn't to be interpreted as a judgment the
operation is correct. It's only that the operation is achievable.
Big, big difference.

 

[Rocket Man]

So based on your thoughts this was a Clinton plan to either undermine Bush or boost Gore if he had won.

We don't really know, do we. My guess is, if Clinton planned it, then Bush wouldn't be keeping everything a secret, would he?

 

[Papi Chulo]

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/News/News8-0112.html

When the planes hit the WTC, at a much higher speed, why did we not see the engines go through the building and out the opposite side?

 

[papasmerf]

Below are the quotes I was refering to , please read it and find out who
prepares these types of plans... and we are not talking about 'undermining plans' but about the strategies

Scroll

it is ok for you to have original thought. I realize you tend to only post what others say. But you must agree with the thoughts, otherwise you would be a dupe.

 

[assoholic]

..the only answer if you accept the fact it was a cruise missile is some element in the US military or intelligence agency.

 

[scroll99]

Scroll

it is ok for you to have original thought. I realize you tend to only post what others say. But you must agree with the thoughts, otherwise you would be a dupe.

you are right , initially I used to have my original thoughts on this board but I realized that many here are ready to cut down my throat and the experience here were turning out just about namecalling or people were taking it too personally , too serious and hard hitting when they were loosing there arguments...

 

[papasmerf]

you are right , initially I used to have my original thoughts but I realized that everyone here is ready to cut down my throat and the experience here were turning out just about namecalling or people were getting too personal and hard hitting when they were loosing there arguments...

You might have noticed that the lackof original thought is much like parroting. Makes some seems possessed by others. Makes many look like dupes of the same handiler.

 

[scroll99]

You might have noticed that the lackof original thought is much like parroting. Makes some seems possessed by others. Makes many look like dupes of the same handiler.

Here I dont agree with you, you can see below my original thought , many times in this thread I have presented my thoughts to the dreamer or others

And same applies to many other threads , the condition is the person is not here for the fight or namecalling or too racist ...

even with you I had a decent exchange of thoughts in some other thread

and also whenever I post a link , I do highlight some sentences so there are most of the time representing my thoughts and I believe the same is being done by many of the other frequent visitiors here although many add some of their additional 'shouting' to the post which makes it even more unpopular

scroll,
Of all the conspiracy theories out there, this has to be the silliest. If you believe the Pentagon attack was staged, then you would have to believe the same of all the attacks of that day. Can you imagine the thousands upon thousands of people who would have to be involved in such a deception, let alone the cover-up afterwards? Give us a break.

honestly , I never seriously believed that 9/11 was staged , all I had was a sense that some powers at the goverment level knew about the attack but they let it go so that they have a good case to attack Iraq and Afghanistan....

but all these evidence and facts in the videos must be creating some curiousity in many 'inquiring minds' and don't you think that it was such an important tragedy in the history of the world that it must prompt analysis from all aspects specially when there are lots and lots of unanswered questions...

I have read its more unpatriotic if you dont ask questions or ignore these questions .... but i know many people here think its patriotic to be silent on this topic

 

[Asterix]

What the video/material seems saying is that the real Hijackers hit the real planes at the WTC , but the buildings were blown up by the explosives that cause the collapse and as a result caused most of the deaths...
it does not require thousands of thousands of people to implant the explosives

No, it would take thousands, and by that I mean people in the know, to be aware of the hijackers targets and timeline, make sure they were not confronted or stopped when boarding, coordinate a demolition team inside the WTC, coordinate a false attack of the Pentagon, somehow hide or dispose of the original plane, deal with delivering or faking the remains of those on board to their loved ones, not to mention all the people who would have to plant false evidence, give false eyewitness accounts, and make sure that all of the above people and those with knowledge of all this would keep their mouths shut to this day.

As far as the collapse, the link is to a NOVA interview of an engineering professor from MIT, and how the intense heat from the aircraft fuel burning, caused the beams to fail.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html

 

[scroll99]

it does answer your question "where did the plane go"

I have read your link and below is what it says , it doesnt answer in anyway what happened to the wings , tails and structure except saying it burned and therefore disappear ....before any human or security cameras can take it pictures , if you see the movie that i posted it clearly shows picture how the civilian plans wreckage looks like in past plane crashes

it is comparing the Pentagon crash with WTC crash ....

Give me a break here ... there is no way we can compare both incidents as WTC had 300,000 tons of steel wreckage which is in no way comparable to Pentagon wreckage....




"You'll recall from the discussions above that the hijacked airliner did not "only hit the ground floor of the Pentagon's first ring" — it struck the Pentagon between the first and second floors and blasted all the way through to the third ring. Because the plane disappeared into the building's interior after penetrating the outer ring, it was not visible in photographs taken from outside the Pentagon. Moreover, since the airliner was full of jet fuel and was flown into thick, reinforced concrete walls at high speed, exploding in a fireball, any pieces of wreckage large enough to be identifiable in after-the-fact photographs taken from a few hundred feet away burned up in the intense fire that followed the crash (just as the planes flown into the World Trade Center towers burned up, and the intensity of their jet-fuel fires caused both towers to collapse)."

 

[dreamer]

Iit is comparing the Pentagon crash with WTC crash ....

Give me a break here ... there is no way we can compare both incidents as WTC had 300,000 tons of steel wreckage which is in no way comparable to Pentagon wreckage....

and why not compare it to the WTC incident where the planes "disappear"

it is a much better comparison than the ones in your links, planes that crash in an open field

if you take a look at a plane that crashes into an open field the debris is forward of the initial impact, not behind

The plane that hit the pentagon was airbourne and probably hit the ground just before hitting the building. When it hit the building there was an immediate explosion and fire ball. Most of the plane except a few small pieces carried forward into the buidling where it was destroyed by fire.

 

[Esco!]

If you haven't heard, Charlie Sheen was on a radio show where he questioned 9/11 and said that the U.S. government may have carried out the attacks.

It sparked a CNN poll asking if you agree with Sheen. At the time of this post: 82% said yes, 82%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well.........if its a CNN poll then it must be true

In another related CNN poll, people were asked whether Sheen was set up by government agents on his cocaine charge a few years ago.

99% said yes

 

[Papi Chulo]

The plane that hit the pentagon was airbourne and probably hit the ground just before hitting the building. When it hit the building there was an immediate explosion and fire ball. Most of the plane except a few small pieces carried forward into the buidling where it was destroyed by fire.

There was no marks where the plane hit the ground... and the 2 engines weighing approx 10 tons each cannot simply vanish... if you look at the photos of any plane crash... the engines are often the largest pieces left intact

 

[papasmerf]

ever see what the FAA does after a plane crash?
Toss in the FBI, CIA and the Pentagon and you have a surgicaly clean area withing a very short period of time

 

[Papi Chulo]

Scoll..

What do you think of this??

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html

 

[papasmerf]

Scoll..

What do you think of this??

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html

pop-ups is what you see

 

[dreamer]

There was no marks where the plane hit the ground...

I said probably right in front of the pentagon building, maybe just a few feet. Of course conspiracy proponents exaggerate it and look for skid marks on the lawn

and the 2 engines weighing approx 10 tons each cannot simply vanish... if you look at the photos of any plane crash... the engines are often the largest pieces left intact

Again, you are looking at crashes in open areas where the engines are thrown forward of the fires, which destroy most of the plane. In this case the engines are prevented from escaping the subsequent fires. Even in the WTC crashes you did not see the plane or any significant portion of it emerge from the other side.

 

[Papi Chulo]

pop-ups is what you see

I did not have any popups... but then I am using Firefix with adblock, and noscript extensions