Were We Really Attacked By Terrorists On 9/11?

United States
February 12, 2007 9:09am CST
There are plenty of conspiracy theories about how the Twin Towers fell and whatever hit the Pentagon, but I think the most damning evidence is the behavior of the Bush administration: __Osama Bin Laden has been ignored by Bush, saying he's not concerned with him anymore. __Saddam Hussein had no connection with Al-Qaida. In fact, they were enemies, too. __There is a connection between Dubai and 9/11 and Bush fought long and hard to allow them a security contract for 6 major US ports. __The war with Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11. They knew they never had WMD and leaked Valerie Plames' name to the press to silence her husband, a critic of the war- which is treason. It's about oil. How could a president ignore the so called "War on Terror" and start a war with Iraq for corporate profits? __Even though the Taliban allowed Al-Qaida camps to operate in Afghanistan, the Taliban also refused to allow Unocal to build a pipeline through it. Bush appointed a Unocal executive as embassador to Afghanistan. What's the real reason we attacked it?-No one as ever been brought to trial for the crimes on 9/11. __No one as ever been fired for the intelligence "failure" of 9/11. Some key people that should have known, but didn't were even promoted. If it were a "surprise attack" that our intelligence gathering agencies and our allies uncovered, shouldn't they have been FIRED? __No leads in the anthrax deaths. All we know is, the anthrax came from a US army base. __Five years after and the FBI says there is no hard evidence linking Osama or the 19 hijackers to 9/11. The 25 million dollar reward was for the attack on the USS Cole and our embassies. Wasn't there an investigation to find out who for SURE is responsible, beyond any doubt? __The BBC reported that at least 6 of the 19 hijackers were actually alive and well. They have never reprinted a retraction. FBI Director Mueller says there's no legal proof to prove the identities of the hijackers, but insists they correctly identified them- whatever that means. __The 19 Hijackers don't show up on any of the four plane's passenger manifest or autopsy reports. __I don't know what it means, but for some reason all four planes were flying at 1/4 capacity, so that all of the passengers could fit on one plane. __Bush said on two different occasions he watched the first plane hitting the tower on some kind of TV, before going to his photo-opt at the school. But the first plane wasn't on the news until some time on 9/12. Were the towers being filmed live and broadcast directly to his limo on the way to the school?-Bush was told of the second plane hitting the other tower and that America was under attack. Bush just sat there. __The CIA didn't bother to get Bush out of the public school, even though the photo-opt was well publisized and they supposedly didn't know if another plane was headed towards' the school or not. __Bush was not only against the formation of Congressional 9/11 committee, but against a civilian one as well. __Bush blocked, obstructed, delayed, censored, underfunded and gave a short deadline for the 9/11 commission. He would testify, but not under oath, and only with Dick Cheney present and only if no cameras, or tape recorders or stenographers were present. Obviously, he and Cheney are hiding something BIG. __Bush then ignored the recomendation of the 9/11 committee, as if 9/11 wasn't such a big thing. __The FBI showed up at gas stations and hotels "within minutes" to confiscate video tapes that might have caught flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon. Were they waiting outside for the Pentagon to be hit? It's been 5 years and they refuse to release any tape showing a plane hitting or at least flying towards the Pentagon. __The only section of the Pentagon that was hit was the part that was undergoing reconstruction. The reconstruction was to reinforce the building to withstand a hit by an airplane. __Rumsfeld said the Pentagon lost track of $2.3 trillion dollars on 9/10. The know they had it, but not sure what they spent it on. 9/10 was a Monday. Politicians don't release bad news on a Monday- they wait for a Friday in the hopes the story will be buried during the weekend. __Photos of the Pentagon hit shows no large pieces of a 757-200 airplane. No fuselage, no wings, no tail section left of flight 77. __Photos of the Shenksville hit shows no large pieces of a 757-200 airplane. No fuselage, no wings, no tail section left of flight 93. The largest piece was about the size of a phonebook. __Cell phones from flight 93 include one that went, "Hello, Mom? This is Mark Bingham." When was the last time you called your mother and gave your last name? By the way, cell phones don't work at cruising altitude or at 500 miles an hour. . . . . . The theory of a surprise attack by Muslim extremists doesn't fit all the facts. It's more likely 9/11 was America's Reichstag Fire. Neocons and the PNAC'ers, what Bush has surrounded himself in his administration, had been saying they needed "a new Pearl Harbor" for years. I think they made one.
1 response
@MrNiceGuy (4147)
• United States
12 Feb 07
I think thats absurd. I saw the wreckage at the Pentagon and hundreds of people actually saw the plane hit, so don't demean us with your flimsy internet lies. its just preposterous. The logic behind the US creating the attack is exceedingly nonsensical when compared to how much more likely the terrorism scenario. What about Osama claiming responsibility multiple times? Check out these sites if you're really a "truth seeker" ( I know you won't, its more fun to believe you uncovered something isn't it). http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/top-lies-and-deceptions-of-loose.html http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/top-lies-and-deceptions-in-loose.html http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
• United States
12 Feb 07
Yes, I checked out the Loose Change video and the screwloose change website. And I can point to websites debunking the popularmechanics article. And, out of these "hundreds of people" who said they saw the plane, some of them also smelled cordite, some of them said the plane tilted to the right and cartwheeled into the building, some said it hit the lawn and slid into the building, some say it tilted to the left, the air traffic controllers said it manuevered like a military jet, some actually saw a 8-12 seated passenger jet, and the hijacker's instructor said he couldn't fly at all. But, even if you ignore all that and look at the photos, like these from the Department of Defense: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2001/200109114a_hr.jpg http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Sep2001/010914-F-8006R-002.jpg It's absurd to believe a 757 commercial jet plane with 10,000 gallons of fuel crashed there, simply because you were told that. The plane was flying around Washington for a half an hour, how could it possibly be allowed to hit the Pentagon after two other planes hit the Twin Towers early that morning? And BTW, the collapse of the roof happened later on, the original "crash" only caused a 20 foot hole in the building. And Osama Bin Laden did NOT claim responsibility, EVER. He always denied it, except for the film showing a fat, darker-skinned man gloating that he did. The FBI has NO hard evidence linking him with 9/11. So, IF we were attacked by terrorists, why hasn't Bush done ANYTHING about it? Why did he choose to waste so much human life, money and time in Iraq? Saddam and Osama were ENEMIES, they could have been an ally on a real war against Al-Qaida if we were actually attacked by them on 9/11.
@MrNiceGuy (4147)
• United States
12 Feb 07
Ok, I'm going to ignore your internet lies "debunking" the real happenings of that morning (particularly the ignoring the fact that I live outside DC and know countless people who saw the plane wreckage at teh Pentagon) since there is plenty of evidence from more credible sources in the links I gave you and I don't expect that someone that wants to believe conspiracy would also want to read evidence to the contrary, and move on to the point about why Bush didn't do anything about Osama. Are you aware of Afghanistan? And its proximity to Pakistan? And the relationship that area has with Osama and Al Queda? APparently not...
@MrNiceGuy (4147)
• United States
12 Feb 07
As for Osama claiming responsibility: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2004/10/29/binladen_message041029.html http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5325590.stm http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/11/11/wbin11.xml http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2001/11/ukreport.html http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/bin-laden-admits-responsibility-for-9.html