Charlie Sheen questions 9/11!!!!!
- Thread starter Rick123
- Start date
9/11 Pentagon 'Plane' Footage 'Missiles' the Point
By now, you may have heard that the Pentagon released photos and videos purported to show a plane crashing into the Pentagon on September 11th. Critics said it was a missile. Both sides are missing the point.
One might conclude from this exchange is that proof of a plane striking the Pentagon vindicates the entire official 9/11 theory that terrorists hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them into U.S. landmarks, including the Pentagon. Think again.
The Pentagon is the most heavily guarded building in the world. It has detectors that go off when an unauthorized airplane enters its airspace. It also has missiles poised to strike at these planes.
So, if the official theory is true, what was an unauthorized 757 Boeing plane doing in Pentagon space? No missiles were reputed to have gone off. That means the defensive mechanisms were defective on September 11th (what a coincidence!) or someone stood down the Pentagon. Al-Qaeda certainly could not do that. However you slice it, the official theory makes no sense.
And, how did these alleged terrorists learn to fly a plane so low? There is no evidence they ever received that kind of training. Again, the official theory falters.
Lastly, why won't the FBI turn over videotapes created by a gas station across the street and a nearby Sheraton? They confiscated these tapes on 9/11 and have never made them public. Now that the Moussaoui trial is over, they have no excuse to hold on to them.
Instead of focusing upon a picture that speaks a thousand questions, we need to ask the questions of authorities. We need to demand a real investigation of the whole 9/11 event that would answer these questions. Then we can start building a government that tells the truth to its people and would never dream of killing them.
http://www.politicalgateway.com/main/columns/read.html?col=586
By now, you may have heard that the Pentagon released photos and videos purported to show a plane crashing into the Pentagon on September 11th. Critics said it was a missile. Both sides are missing the point.
One might conclude from this exchange is that proof of a plane striking the Pentagon vindicates the entire official 9/11 theory that terrorists hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them into U.S. landmarks, including the Pentagon. Think again.
The Pentagon is the most heavily guarded building in the world. It has detectors that go off when an unauthorized airplane enters its airspace. It also has missiles poised to strike at these planes.
So, if the official theory is true, what was an unauthorized 757 Boeing plane doing in Pentagon space? No missiles were reputed to have gone off. That means the defensive mechanisms were defective on September 11th (what a coincidence!) or someone stood down the Pentagon. Al-Qaeda certainly could not do that. However you slice it, the official theory makes no sense.
And, how did these alleged terrorists learn to fly a plane so low? There is no evidence they ever received that kind of training. Again, the official theory falters.
Lastly, why won't the FBI turn over videotapes created by a gas station across the street and a nearby Sheraton? They confiscated these tapes on 9/11 and have never made them public. Now that the Moussaoui trial is over, they have no excuse to hold on to them.
Instead of focusing upon a picture that speaks a thousand questions, we need to ask the questions of authorities. We need to demand a real investigation of the whole 9/11 event that would answer these questions. Then we can start building a government that tells the truth to its people and would never dream of killing them.
http://www.politicalgateway.com/main/columns/read.html?col=586
Fireman: "bomb in the building start clearing out"
New Video Clip Surfaces: Firefighters Say Bombs in WTC.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4574366633014832928&q=9/11 bomb
New Video Clip Surfaces: Firefighters Say Bombs in WTC.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4574366633014832928&q=9/11 bomb
Who really blew up the twin towers?
As the fifth anniversary of 9/11 nears, Christina Asquith finds academics querying the official version of events
http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/worldwide/story/0,,1864657,00.html
As the fifth anniversary of 9/11 nears, Christina Asquith finds academics querying the official version of events
http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/worldwide/story/0,,1864657,00.html
DonQuixote said:
U should watch this...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586&q=Steven+Jones+BYU
This is like the sniper on the grassy knoll. I do not think we will ever stop arguing about this. I do know that George Bush is not interested in winning the war on terror. He is milking the easily tapped American Paranoia to stay in power. One thing they do to continue to exploit the fear is not to release information under the guise of "National Security". That way an intelligent debate where his assumptions can be challenged, based on substantiated facts, does not form. Into this vacuum all the crackpots come out of the woodwork to put forward their own theories. Not that I am saying that all the theories here on the board are hatched by crackpots. I am saying we will have no means of substantiating the theories.
This is a quote from the CNN article below. That shows that George is not interested in getting Osama. He is just using 9/11 as a means of fullfilling his hidden agenda. (Of course if I wanted to I could say that they are not interested in catching Osama because he has information that would implicate the US administration. But I am not)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14724112/page/2/
This is a quote from the CNN article below. That shows that George is not interested in getting Osama. He is just using 9/11 as a means of fullfilling his hidden agenda. (Of course if I wanted to I could say that they are not interested in catching Osama because he has information that would implicate the US administration. But I am not)
Pakistanis: Bin Laden still alive. On the videotape obtained by the CIA, bin Laden is seen confidently instructing his party how to dig holes in the ground to lie in undetected at night. A bomb dropped by a U.S. aircraft can be seen exploding in the distance. "We were there last night," bin Laden says without much concern in his voice. He was in or headed toward Pakistan, counterterrorism officials believe.
That was December 2001. Only two months later, Bush decided to pull out most of the special operations troops and their CIA counterparts in the paramilitary division that were leading the hunt for bin Laden in Afghanistan to prepare for war in Iraq, said Flynt L. Leverett, then an expert on the Middle East at the National Security Council.
"I was appalled when I learned about it," said Leverett, who has become an outspoken critic of the administration's counterterrorism policy. "I don't know of anyone who thought it was a good idea. It's very likely that bin Laden would be dead or in American custody if we hadn't done that.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14724112/page/2/
9 Keys To 9-11
The following ‘keys’ outline a chronological unfolding of our understanding of major mysteries of the 9/11 event, from 2002 to 2004. This manner of approaching the topic may be helpful and I’ve used it in workshops. We still don’t know who designed the greatest conjuring trick of all time.
But, a group of ‘911 Sceptics’ have been meeting in London to mull over any emerging consensus; one of these attended the first hijackology conference at San Francisco in March 2004, at which seven hundred people were present. President Bush gave evidence to the 9/11 Commission on April 29th 2004 – not under oath, with Cheney beside him, for 2-3 hours, and off the record.
The whole world needs a proper enquiry into this event, with Bush being asked questions on oath and on the record. For example:
* How come his brother Marvin was on the governing board of Securacom, the company in charge of security for the WTC complex when it was hit? (1)
* Why did his brother Jeb visit the Florida training school of the ‘hijackers’ a mere 12 hours after the 9/11 event, and together with FBI agents confiscate all of the archives and records of that flight school (Key No. 7)?
* Why, on the morning of 9/11, did his father George Bush met with Osama bin Laden's brother, Shafig bin Laden, at a conference sponsored by the Carlyle Group in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Washington, DC?
* How come none of these facts were mentioned in the 9/11 Commission report?
US lawyer Stanley Hilton, a senior advisor to Republican Senator Bob Dole who has personally known Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz for decades (2), has stated: ‘This [9/11] was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation.’ (10th September 2004 Alex Jones show) {*}
Was this so, Mr President? Some crucial Keys have now come into existence – every one omitted by the best-selling ‘9/11 Commission Report’. That Report mainly consists of long stories of how people, mainly Muslims, moved around, and allegedly plotted things, with virtually all of its references uncheckable – FBI memos, CIA memos, etc.
It has testimony from ‘interrogations’ – maybe under torture? It tells a gripping yarn, which is not, however, true. It has failed to examine the scientific and factual evidence. As a member of staff at a Science & Technology Studies Dept (UCL),
I reckon that these Keys should focus upon verifiable, scientific-technological issues. They are given in chronological order, with the months when they appeared.
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/archive/9keys.htm
The following ‘keys’ outline a chronological unfolding of our understanding of major mysteries of the 9/11 event, from 2002 to 2004. This manner of approaching the topic may be helpful and I’ve used it in workshops. We still don’t know who designed the greatest conjuring trick of all time.
But, a group of ‘911 Sceptics’ have been meeting in London to mull over any emerging consensus; one of these attended the first hijackology conference at San Francisco in March 2004, at which seven hundred people were present. President Bush gave evidence to the 9/11 Commission on April 29th 2004 – not under oath, with Cheney beside him, for 2-3 hours, and off the record.
The whole world needs a proper enquiry into this event, with Bush being asked questions on oath and on the record. For example:
* How come his brother Marvin was on the governing board of Securacom, the company in charge of security for the WTC complex when it was hit? (1)
* Why did his brother Jeb visit the Florida training school of the ‘hijackers’ a mere 12 hours after the 9/11 event, and together with FBI agents confiscate all of the archives and records of that flight school (Key No. 7)?
* Why, on the morning of 9/11, did his father George Bush met with Osama bin Laden's brother, Shafig bin Laden, at a conference sponsored by the Carlyle Group in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Washington, DC?
* How come none of these facts were mentioned in the 9/11 Commission report?
US lawyer Stanley Hilton, a senior advisor to Republican Senator Bob Dole who has personally known Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz for decades (2), has stated: ‘This [9/11] was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation.’ (10th September 2004 Alex Jones show) {*}
Was this so, Mr President? Some crucial Keys have now come into existence – every one omitted by the best-selling ‘9/11 Commission Report’. That Report mainly consists of long stories of how people, mainly Muslims, moved around, and allegedly plotted things, with virtually all of its references uncheckable – FBI memos, CIA memos, etc.
It has testimony from ‘interrogations’ – maybe under torture? It tells a gripping yarn, which is not, however, true. It has failed to examine the scientific and factual evidence. As a member of staff at a Science & Technology Studies Dept (UCL),
I reckon that these Keys should focus upon verifiable, scientific-technological issues. They are given in chronological order, with the months when they appeared.
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/archive/9keys.htm
Key no. 1 – Silverstein ‘pulls’ WTC7 Sept, 2002
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/archive/9keys.htm
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey signed a deal transferring ownership of the World Trade Centre complex to the Silverstein-led Westfield America, which was finalised and celebrated on the 23rd July 2001 — just seven weeks before almost the entire complex was destroyed. Let’s quote Larry Silverstein’s words here: "This is a dream come true," he had said. "We will be in control of a prized asset, and we will seek to develop its potential, raising it to new heights." {*}
This complex included WTC-7, the 47-storey building used by the CIA, a block away from the Two Towers. It collapsed at 5.20 pm in a perfect implosion, for no discernible reason, taking 6.5 seconds to fall, into its own footprint. No high-rise steel building had ever collapsed due to fire, before that day. The official FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) report had sparks jumping across from the Twin Towers and then smouldering for five hours, igniting oil stored in the ground floor {*}.
Larry Silverstein stated in a September 2002 documentary program a year later, that on that day, ‘… I said to the firemen, we have had such a terrible loss of life, maybe the smart thing to do is to pull it. And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.’ That casual remark has to imply, that the building was wired with explosives some days or weeks before, for a deliberate demolition. {*} A building cannot be thus ‘pulled’ unless it has previously been mined, can it? He received $860m compensation to rebuild – no questions asked - about double what the original building was worth.
Liquid pools of molten steel remained below ground – in common, as we shall see, with the rubble of the Twin Towers. Some bits of this story do strain credulity. Seismic vibrations registered at its instant of collapse (at Columbia University, 21 miles due North), one-tenth the magnitude of those registered for the Twin Towers. Videos of the demolition {*} clearly show a controlled process, with ‘squibs’ going off on a sequence of lower floors, to bring about the collapse. Likewise, a slow-motion video clearly shows controlled demolition moving down through the Two Towers, with sequential detonation (3): {*}.
The 9/11 Commission Report has a whole chapter on the WTC complex with two diagrams both showing WTC7. However, its detailed account of events of that day gives no hint that it collapsed, in an identical manner to the other buildings. That can only be interpreted, as intent to deceive.
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/archive/9keys.htm
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey signed a deal transferring ownership of the World Trade Centre complex to the Silverstein-led Westfield America, which was finalised and celebrated on the 23rd July 2001 — just seven weeks before almost the entire complex was destroyed. Let’s quote Larry Silverstein’s words here: "This is a dream come true," he had said. "We will be in control of a prized asset, and we will seek to develop its potential, raising it to new heights." {*}
This complex included WTC-7, the 47-storey building used by the CIA, a block away from the Two Towers. It collapsed at 5.20 pm in a perfect implosion, for no discernible reason, taking 6.5 seconds to fall, into its own footprint. No high-rise steel building had ever collapsed due to fire, before that day. The official FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) report had sparks jumping across from the Twin Towers and then smouldering for five hours, igniting oil stored in the ground floor {*}.
Larry Silverstein stated in a September 2002 documentary program a year later, that on that day, ‘… I said to the firemen, we have had such a terrible loss of life, maybe the smart thing to do is to pull it. And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.’ That casual remark has to imply, that the building was wired with explosives some days or weeks before, for a deliberate demolition. {*} A building cannot be thus ‘pulled’ unless it has previously been mined, can it? He received $860m compensation to rebuild – no questions asked - about double what the original building was worth.
Liquid pools of molten steel remained below ground – in common, as we shall see, with the rubble of the Twin Towers. Some bits of this story do strain credulity. Seismic vibrations registered at its instant of collapse (at Columbia University, 21 miles due North), one-tenth the magnitude of those registered for the Twin Towers. Videos of the demolition {*} clearly show a controlled process, with ‘squibs’ going off on a sequence of lower floors, to bring about the collapse. Likewise, a slow-motion video clearly shows controlled demolition moving down through the Two Towers, with sequential detonation (3): {*}.
The 9/11 Commission Report has a whole chapter on the WTC complex with two diagrams both showing WTC7. However, its detailed account of events of that day gives no hint that it collapsed, in an identical manner to the other buildings. That can only be interpreted, as intent to deceive.
Key no. 2 – Video analysis report November 2002
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/archive/9keys.htm
The Swiss Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence in Lausanne was commissioned by France-2 television to analyse the ‘Bin Laden’ video that appeared in mid-November 2001, of which the Pentagon produced an ‘English translation’ on Dec 13th. It expressed confidence that the voice heard was not that of Bin Laden: {*}.
As the figure in the video did not greatly resemble Bin Laden that was hardly a surprise. Two weeks after 911, the Taliban were requesting some evidence for Bin Laden’s complicity, as a condition of giving him up, which was not forthcoming: this translation was the only evidence the US produced as to why it believed the engineers of 911 were in Afghanistan. Bin Laden gave a statement to Al-Jazeera on 16th September and another more detailed one to the Pakistani newspaper ‘Ummaut’ on 22nd September, both denying any involvement: {*}
He had had an operation in a US hospital in Dubai for kidney trouble on 4th of July then reappears in a military hospital in Rawalpindi on September 10th again for kidney dialysis (4). The fake bin-Laden video was put out in mid-November 2001 as the real OBL was dying, and in the last month of his life. Radio transmissions of his voice from Tora Bora had been regularly intercepted, and ended on 14th December, 2001: {*}. The funeral of Osama Bin Laden was reported in Pakistani and Egyptian newspapers, as having taken place on 16th December 2001, at an undisclosed location in Pakistan{*}.
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/archive/9keys.htm
The Swiss Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence in Lausanne was commissioned by France-2 television to analyse the ‘Bin Laden’ video that appeared in mid-November 2001, of which the Pentagon produced an ‘English translation’ on Dec 13th. It expressed confidence that the voice heard was not that of Bin Laden: {*}.
As the figure in the video did not greatly resemble Bin Laden that was hardly a surprise. Two weeks after 911, the Taliban were requesting some evidence for Bin Laden’s complicity, as a condition of giving him up, which was not forthcoming: this translation was the only evidence the US produced as to why it believed the engineers of 911 were in Afghanistan. Bin Laden gave a statement to Al-Jazeera on 16th September and another more detailed one to the Pakistani newspaper ‘Ummaut’ on 22nd September, both denying any involvement: {*}
He had had an operation in a US hospital in Dubai for kidney trouble on 4th of July then reappears in a military hospital in Rawalpindi on September 10th again for kidney dialysis (4). The fake bin-Laden video was put out in mid-November 2001 as the real OBL was dying, and in the last month of his life. Radio transmissions of his voice from Tora Bora had been regularly intercepted, and ended on 14th December, 2001: {*}. The funeral of Osama Bin Laden was reported in Pakistani and Egyptian newspapers, as having taken place on 16th December 2001, at an undisclosed location in Pakistan{*}.
Re: Consiracy Theories
If the US government planned the 11 September 2001 attacks, why were four aeroplanes used? Taking out one of the twin towers would have been sufficient to galvanize the population for war. The Pentagon and flight 93 hits were unnecessary.
If the US government planned the 11 September 2001 attacks in order to create a cause for war against Iraq, why would they have staged the attacks as being perpetrated by Saudis rather than Iraqis?
If Israel was behind the attacks, why weren't Palastinians used to make the attacks?
If the US government planned the 11 September 2001 attacks, why were four aeroplanes used? Taking out one of the twin towers would have been sufficient to galvanize the population for war. The Pentagon and flight 93 hits were unnecessary.
If the US government planned the 11 September 2001 attacks in order to create a cause for war against Iraq, why would they have staged the attacks as being perpetrated by Saudis rather than Iraqis?
If Israel was behind the attacks, why weren't Palastinians used to make the attacks?
The only research Charlie has ever done is on which SP's to hire. Then again, that's why we are all here isn't it?MarkJfr said:
Let's have a little more respect for Charlie, please. He's been acclaimed "TERB's International Hobbyist of the Year" for the last 6 years in a row. If ever this board should treasure a true role model, then Charlie Sheen is that man.
Of course, he knows sh*t about politics or anything else which doesn't have to do with coke and pussy. But frankly, who cares.
Of course, he knows sh*t about politics or anything else which doesn't have to do with coke and pussy. But frankly, who cares.
I recall watching the news when they announced that a plane had hit the first Tower ... I was of the impression that this was a terrible accident, as were most people ... it wasn't till the 2nd plane hit that everyone was convinced that this was an attack and not an accident.johnhenrygalt said:
Why more than two? Probably in case something went wrong with one plane.
Of course this assume that the US government planned the attack which is not very likely ... although I could be convinced that they knew about the attack and let it happen.
Because they already had Bin Laden and Al Qaeda (mostly a bunch of Saudis) "on hand" and easy to place blame ... it would have been harder to convince everyone that a new group of Iraqis had just formed and come up with such a plot.
Again, Bin Laden and his Saudi group were more convenient and a "known product".
But as I said, it's still not the likely that the Bush gang or Israel were behind the attack ... it more likely that they knew and let it happen ... and even more likely that they didn't know the details but were more than willing to ignore the warning signs and then use any attack as a jumping board for implementing their PNAC plans.
