Part 2: What really happened ....11 september

I thought a big gripe from CTerz was that FEMA wasn't allowed access to Ground Zero? Why have them there if you're gonna deny them access. Doesn't pass the smell test....

No investigation of what?

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/restrictions.html

 

1) No way in hell can a pristine passport flutter down from a burning wreckage when even concrete was incinerated

2) Publicly available cellphones could not call out from any flight cabins at the time the ever so popular "let's roll" B.S. was put out.

I won't even bother going into rest of the bull shit put out for the benefit of bushbot maggot retards.

 

On 9/11 relatives reported receiving many calls from passengers on Flights 11, 77, 93 and 175, passing on some details of the hijackings and those involved. Others question whether these calls were as they seemed, though, providing a variety of points as support.

The most commonly raised issue is the idea that it would be impossible, or at least very unlikely, for mobile calls to be made at altitude, and at first glance a study by AK Dewdney seems to support this. Trouble is, Dewdney’s analysis seems fundamentally flawed, most calls were made from airfones (seatback phones that would work in flight) and plenty of people say making cellphone calls at altitude is possible, after all. More here.

http://www.911myths.com/html/mobiles_at_altitude.html

 

http://www.911myths.com/html/passport_recovered.html

Our first reaction is why would they bother? What does it add to the story? There was no need to “plant passports”. We’ve never seen anyone say “they must have been on the planes because look, the NYPD found that passport”. It’s completely unnecessary, and is only ever used as evidence of an “inside job”.

But could the passport have escaped destruction? Explosions are unpredictable things, it’s surprising what can survive, and there are accounts of personal effects being retrieved from other passengers.

They even recovered some worms and moss from the Columbia disaster....

The worms and moss were in the same nine-pound locker located in the mid-deck of the space shuttle. The worms were placed in six canisters, each holding eight petri dishes.

The worms, which are about the size of the tip of a pencil, were part of an experiment testing a new synthetic nutrient solution. The worms, which have a life cycle of between seven and 10 days, were four or five generations removed from the original worms placed on Columbia in January.
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/sts107_worms_030501.html

Remarkably, not only were the canisters retrieved, but the worms were still alive (the above link tells you more). Who would have believed that? Not the scientist in charge of the experiment, who said in the same story:

``It's pretty astonishing to get the possibility of data after all that has happened,'' Sack said. ``We never expected it. We expected a molten mass.''

 

Occam's Razor - the probability that there are large numbers of ignorant, stupid conspiracy theorists with too much time on their hands, greatly exceeds the probability that 9/11 was in fact some giant cover-up or conspiracy.

 

BSM:
>2) Publicly available cellphones could not call out
>from any flight cabins at the time the ever so
>popular "let's roll" B.S. was put out.

Bull Sh**. As someone who traveled over 300K domestic miles per year from '97 through '06, I REPEATEDLY made cell phone connections from the air. In the densly populated east coast it was a cinch when flying anything other than +20k altitude routes.

JB

 

I will make more posts on this thread, but for now:

The US via its military and propaganda arms (the military has full time psy-ops departments, this is not an exageration) seeks "total spectrum dominance" (their words, not mine) for any event.

What we get is not news written by a wholesome reporter. No, every story is designed for maximum impact. In fact they even create 'fake ' culture. Culture is simply shared stories and experiences - but in this case they manufacture it.

Example: remember Pvt Jessica Lynch? She was being cared for by doctors in an iraq hospital. But then a team went in trashed the hospital, and "rescued" her. All the stuff in that manufactured story was desgined to move us and give us what we want: a brave "hero" near the start of the invasion (after all, who wants to send their kids to die unless they become "heros in glory" - our version of it - or receive virgins in heaven - their version of it).

But later as the facts came out, she didn't fire a shot, her vehicle simply rolled over and she was being cared for. No glory, no hero battle. etc.

But there are teams of PhDs, marketing specialists, who type up this "news" to scare us. The best minds are at world to manipulate us.

They don't give a flying fk what some people in a 3rd world country think, the WAR and propaganda is used against us.


Every news story is crafted using these new words that we did not hear until a few years ago. Empty, meaninless words:

emboldened
resolve
victory
terrorists
insurgents
foreign fighters
liberty


WTF? Just once I want to hear the turth on the news: we invaded a country, oppressed and occupied the people, they are patriotic and mad as hell so they are attacking us. Duh what a surprise.


So back to the topic at hand, the whole Passport found at WTC is one of those stories. We now invade countries based upon found passports? Apparently so.

The whole bin laden tape and beheading thing is all used and designed to scare US.
We must make [insert group] look like barbarians.
This has occured in EVERY war.
Yet we commit the SAME war crimes.

So the new that we see is not news anymore, it is a part of Total Spectrum Dominace, crafted by the best to shape our mind and culture.

The 9/11 fable was neately wrapped up by "US sources" within days. Swallow it whole,or not at all.

It became part of our culture, but most people know that is doesn't pass the smell test.

And who keeps mentioning it in EVERY speech? Why bush. Who claimed responsibility for it? Why, no one.
So, who gained from it?

The latest "Story" is the blowing up of the Golden Mosque in iraq. Like we really care about some dusty old bulding in some god forsaken country. But now bush uses it in every speech.
It is being used a the Jessica Lynch story was.


So who gained from this?

To wit:

"Mike Whitney: BUSH'S WAR ON PERCEPTION; THE BOMBING OF THE GOLDEN MOSQUE

We’ve heard a lot about the bombing of Samarra’s Golden Mosque lately. Bush has brought it up twice in the last week alone. It’s a critical part of the administration’s rationale for the occupation of Iraq, so we can expect to be reminded of it nearly as often as 9-11.
The destruction of the Golden-dome Mosque took place in February 2005 and has been identified as the "catalyzing event" that plunged the country into sectarian violence. That, at least, is just the official version. No one knows really what happened because the administration refused to conduct an independent investigation and the media excluded any account that didn’t square with the Pentagon’s spin on events.
What we’re left with is mere speculation.

Here's what we know: Less than 4 hours after the explosion, the Bush public relations team cobbled together a statement that the bombing was the work of Sunni extremists or al Qaida terrorists. But, how did they know? They didn’t have witnesses on the ground in Samarra and they’ve never produced a scintilla of evidence to support their claims. It may be that the administration simply saw the bombing as an opportunity to twist the facts to suit their own purposes?

After all, the incident has been a propaganda-bonanza for the Bush team. They’ve used it to support their theory that Iraq is "the central battle in the war on terror" and that "we must fight them there if we don’t want to fight them over here". It’s become one of the main justifications for the occupation; implying that the US military is needed as a referee to keep the warring factions from killing each other. It’s all just nonsense that’s designed to advance the administration’s political agenda.
If there had been an investigation, it would have shown whether the perpetrators were experts or not by the placement of the explosives. There’s a good chance they would’ve found bomb-residue which could have determined the composition of the material used. Forensics experts could have easily ascertained whether the explosives came from Iraqi munitions-dumps (as suggested) or from outside the country (like the USA, perhaps?)
The incident may well have been a "false flag" operation carried out by US intelligence agencies to provoke sectarian violence and, thus, reduce the number of attacks on American troops.
In any event, as soon as the mosque was destroyed the media swung into action focusing all of its attention on sectarian violence and the prospect of civil war. The media’s incessant "cheerleading" for civil war was suspicious, to say the least.

In the first 30 hours after the blast, more than 1,500 articles appeared on Google News providing the government version of events without deviation and without any corroborating evidence; just fluff that reiterated the Pentagon’s account verbatim and without challenge.

1500! Now that’s a well-oiled propaganda system!
Most of the articles were "cookie cutter-type" stories which used the same buzzwords and talking points as all the others; no interviews, no facts, no second opinions; simple, straightforward stenography---nothing more.

The story was repeated for weeks on end never veering from the same speculative theory. Clearly, a great amount of effort was being exerted to convince the American people that this was a significant event that would reshape the whole context of the war in Iraq. In fact, the media blitz that followed was grander than anything since 9-11; a spectacular display of the media’s power to manipulate public opinion.
There were a few articles that didn’t follow the party-line, but they quickly disappeared into a cyber-"black hole" or were dismissed as conspiracy theories. One report in AFP said that the bombing "was the work of specialists" and the "placing of explosives must have taken at least 12 hours". The article continued:

"Construction Minister Mohammed Jaafar said, 'Holes were dug into the mausoleum’s four main pillars and packed with explosives. Then charges were connected together and linked to another charge placed just under the dome. The wires were then linked to another charge placed just under the dome. The wires were then linked to a detonator which was triggered at a distance."

Of course, what does that prove? Perhaps, al Qaida has skilled explosives experts? But why not investigate? After all, if this was the "catalyzing event" which was thrusting the country towards civil war; why not have the FBI come in and have a look-around?
A professional team of investigators could have quickly determined whether highly-trained saboteurs were operating in the area. (which meant that American troops would be at greater risk) Isn't that worth checking out?
Nope. The Pentagon did nothing. There was no effort at all to find out who might have been involved. It was an open and shut case; wrapped up before the dust had even settled in Samarra.
Very strange.


Apparently, there was at least one witness who was interviewed shortly after the bombing. He said that he heard cars running outside the mosque "the whole night until morning" but, he was warned "to stay in your shop and don't leave until morning".
At 6:30 AM the next morning, the vehicles outside the mosque left. 10 minutes later the bombs exploded.

None of the people living in the vicinity of the mosque were ever questioned. Likewise, the Construction Minister Mohammed Jaafar has never resurfaced in the news again. I expect that his comments in the newspaper may have had something to do with his sudden disappearance, but then maybe not.

 

No kidding. I too have used my cell many times from commercial jetliners. These claims about not being able to use a cell from a plane are pure farce.

Regarding the absurd insistence that the discovery of a passport constitutes proof that the American government planned and executed the 9/11 attacks... it is tiresome to have to answer to these fantastic arguments, but what else can we do.

I have never been to the crash site of a commercial jetliner or any other major disaster site, but I just have a sneaking suspicion that those who frequent these sites would say something like this

"You wouldn't believe what we find at these sites. We can have a (plane, train, ship, apartment building) consumed by fire and yet we will find the oddest things intact, like a kids shoe or a light bulb or a picture of the family or..."

The idea that the government planted the passport begs the question - why in the hell would they do something so absurd?? If the idea that a passport could survive a major airliner crash is so ridiculous, wouldn't that just plant the seed of doubt among those reviewing the official story? If the American government did these attacks, they would have no need to plant such a passport - they could simply show the photos of Mohammed Atta passing security and say 'There he is, passing security, and here's his name on the passenger manifest, and here's the cab driver who picked him up from the apartment and dropped him off at the airport'. Why in the hell would they do something as ridiculous as planting his passport??

And by the way, I still don't have an answer to my question about why Laura Bush waited so long in the black helicopter before pressing the red button which brought the buildings down. Why not just press the button a few minutes after faking the 'aircraft impacts'? Why give all those people the chance to escape? Is it because the perps said to themselves "Maybe we should wait a while so that instead of killing 20,000 people, we only kill 3000'?

The reason I haven't had an answer from any of the regular tinfoil-hatters here is that the answer is too embarrassing for them.

 

Anothere 9/11 conspiracy thread?

Definition of crazy:

Doing the same thing over and over and getting the same result...

 

nice sum up.