" />

Charlie Sheen Says 9/11 is a fraud so it must be so

It appears that some in the left are so upset about the war on terror being a Republican issue that instead of making the Dems strong on domestic defense, they would like the entire issue to go just away. What better way to do that than to say that 9/11 never really happened? However the only way for that to be true would be for it to have been the result of a massive Bush conspiracy. And this is exactly what some in the lunatic fringe are charging.

“Red Dawn” star Charlie Sheen is the latest celebrity to question the veracity of the attacks. Sheen questions the “official story” the attack was carried out by Islamic terrorists, who presumably were similarly framed in the two embassy bombings in Africa as well as other attacks around the world.

In one of his more ironic statements, Sheen said:

“We’re not the conspiracy theorists on this particular issue.”

Sheen said that most people’s gut instinct, that the buildings had been deliberately imploded, was washed away by the incessant flood of the official version of events from day one.

Sheen also questioned President Bush’s actions on 9/11 and his location at the Booker Elementary School in Florida. Once Andy Card had whispered to Bush that America was under attack why didn’t the secret service immediately whisk Bush away to a secret location?

This is the evidence of a cover-up of what would be the greatest hoax of all time? Is Bin Laden in on the hoax or is he just going along for the ride? What about all of those folks making cell phone calls from the hijacked planes? Were they in on it too or just dupes as CIA operatives were executing the evil Bush/Cheney secret plan?

What about the attacks in Spain and London? Were those the work of Bush too? Was it because 9/11 worked so well that Bush decided to blow up the New Orleans levees? And who killed Princess Di and Nicole Simpson anyway?

Of course Sheen isn’t alone. There are a whole cadre of otherwise unknowns trying to eek out some fame with their lunatic theories. Steve Jones (not the Sex Pistol) is leading the pack.

Sheen is correct in one thing only. We have a right to question anything and everything in this country. It’s part of our ‘checks and balances.’ But we also have a right to tweak pictures in Photoshop when those doing the questioning makes asses of themselves.

Update: Conspiracy theory roundup at New York magazine here (h/t Hit and Run).

Update 2: With 147 91 comments as of Friday night 3/24 Sunday 3/26, this is our most-commented-upon post EVER!

The Independent Sources Wordpress spamfilter is accidentally treating some comments to this post as spam and putting them in moderation. We are culling them whenever we see them and apologize for the inconvenience. Anyone with a blog knows that without a filter we would have thousands of spam comments overwhelm us within days.

Update: We are going to be turning off comments (at 205!) and ask that the debate be moved over to here: Why do otherwise smart people believe conspiracy theories?

h/t: Ace of Spades


Share this post!
  • del.icio.us
  • digg
  • Fark
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • Spurl
  • YahooMyWeb
  • SphereIt
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • FriendFeed
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter

Similar Independent Sources posts:

Comments are below the ad.

223 Responses to “Charlie Sheen Says 9/11 is a fraud so it must be so”

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 » Show All

  1. 51
    chad Says:


    I am going to address a few of your issues:

    1. White Phosphorous as a chemical weapon: White Phosphorus as used by the US is used either as a screening / camoflague agent or as an incediary agent. Both of these uses are legal under the conventions covering the use od chemical weapons. The US is not a signatory of the convention that would outlaw the use of incediary weapons such as WP or flamethrowers. To be classified under the chemical weapons conventions WP would have to be used for the toxic effects of its smoke. That was not the case.

    2. Pilots giving up the plane: Prior to 9/11 it was the policy of all US Airlines to cooperate with hijackers. The thinking was this was the best protection for the passengers and crew. Of course prior to that time no one had killed the pilots and rammed the plane into buildings. It is not unthinkable that a pilot would allow hijackers armed with box cutters into the cockpit. Also remember the cockpit doors were not locking / reinforced until after 9/11.

    3. ATC Radar unable to track the plane: They turned off the transponders . ATC radar uses the transponder to plot the location of aircraft.

    4. Amateurs armed with box cutters able to saize the planes and fly them into buildings: They weren’t amateurs. They were trained terrorists and they had received Flight training. In addition I remember at least one report about them using MS Flight Simulator to practice.
    [for an example of how effective Flight Simulator can be as a training tool
    the Navy decided to see if using Flight Simulator would help other students. It found that trainees who used the program did better in their training, prompting the Navy to issue customized versions of Flight Simulator to all of its flight students.]

    from the 9/11 commission report:

    FAA records show that four of the 19 hijackers—one aboard each flight—possessed FAA certificates as qualified pilots. FAA certification required that a candidate complete a requisite amount of flight training and pass both a written exam and practical skills test. Each of the four pilots received flight training in the United States, which is recognized
    as having one of the world’s most advanced pilot training education and certification system in the world, and trains many pilots from many nations.

    The staff would note the existence of computer-based software programs that provides cockpit simulation available on the open market to the general public. According to experts at the FAA such computer-based training packages, including products that simulate cockpit controls of the Boeing 757 and 767, provided effective training opportunities. The terrorists were known to use computers, and there is no reason to believe they did not have the computer literacy necessary to take advantage of computerbased training aids.

    So they were hardly amatuers.

    5. Able to find the buildings: It appears that among other things the hijackers used GPS to pinpoint the locations of the WTC.


    6. No windows in the plane: Maybe the hijackers had the passengers pull the shades so they couldnt look out and see what was happening. Among other things isolation is an efficient complaince tool.

    In closing Charlie Sheen is more than welcome to believe what he wants. That doesn’t mean it is particularly well informed or knowledgable. For the record I like Charlie I think his shows are funny and hell he was tapping Denise Richards who is smoking hot, but that doesn’t mean I am buying into this BS.

  2. 52
    chad Says:

    I’m sorry Insider and SAO I really am, but I just noticed that the article that spawned all this is written by Alex Jones, who has been repeatedly referenced by others to back up the article. So what we have here in effect is Mr. Jones being to validate the veracity of Mr. Jones. This is just too good.

  3. 53
    Joe Says:

    Well done Michael you are fighting the good fight.

    As for you Chad let me quote you on an earlier post

    “So when critics make the claim that no other buildings have collapsed as the result of a fire they are a) not correct, b) comparing apples and oranges. To my knowledge the WTC was a steel framed building and not steel reinforced concrete or steel encased in concrete”. End of quote.

    What about the 7 WTC? I worked in the construction of the 7 WTC back in 1985 and ‘86. That was a concrete steel reinforced building built on a Q deck. The Q decks and steel beams and columns were thoroughly fire proofed. One quarter of the seventh floor (maybe it was the fifth floor) of that building had six feet dept of concrete, not the regular four or five inches, with tons of steel reinforcement. The building covered one complete block with each floor comprising of 40,000 sq. ft. How did this building collapse in a matter of hours with only a few small fires burning and don’t give me that theory of the oil tank, most buildings has one? I watched the 7 WTC collapse live on television and I knew right there and then that it was a controlled demolition. I know more that my fairs share of construction and controlled demolition.

    Insider, how about giving us all the name of the company that allows to make cell phone call from an air borne jet. I guess you also believe the fictional movie “Flight 93″.

  4. 54
    Rick B Says:

    Sheen hasn’t said anything that hasn’t been said before. You can bash the guy all you like, even I don’t agree with the guys morals. But this is not about his morals it about the peoples rights as citizens to know the truth. Facts are that the official 911 sounds fishy and even the the far right must agree not all they read in the 911 commission report are truly factual. I been reading stories on this subject from both ends of the social views. And have heard it all. Here’s the basic facts if it isn’t a cover in any way all the gov has to do is release the pentagon videos which most right winger will deny they exist. As yourself this why would you not release evidence of the truth if you had it. And don’t hide behind the nation security excuse because a plane hitting the pentagon has nothing to hinder national security unless the truth hasn’t been told.
    People question the whole 911 issue because news outlets refuse it investigate anything that my change the outlook of the reasons why we are at war. Even the right winger can’t deny the impact 911 had on the US and Civil Rights. Count the amount of times the president used 911 as a reference to terrorism and the war effort within the last year and you question the fact why people want the truth. And if the truth isn’t clearly defined then these questions will always persist.
    As for Charlie Sheen he’s just a tool. There has been many highly respected people speak out about this topic all get shot down immediately as been a leftist and a president basher. Personally I never really cared for Charlie Sheen as a actor but I do respect him as being honest and real as a human and a citizen. I applaud him for risking his reputation for what the common people have wondered for years but are afraid of being ostracized for there opinions. The people aren’t telling you they have been abducted by aliens their just asking for the truth no matter if proves them right or wrong. I also give him credit for standing up and being a man to ask questions others fear to mention out loud.
    If the right wing really wanted to they could get people like O’ Reilly,Hannity, and other far right people to defend the story on the same show people like Sheen and Alex Jones but that would never happen because it seems like cable media does not want to be shown up and people would realise how far and balanced they really are. O’reilly and all the far rightist know all Alex Jones is just a news reader(Fact Reader) and not too much more he veiws are mainly based on really stories and articles written all alround the world. Truly is would be great to see O’Reilly VS Jones in a pay for veiw event it make millions.

  5. 55
    Joe Says:

    Chad, how could Silverstein’s quote” we decided to pull the building” be mistaken for getting the firefighters out of the building? That is grasping at straws. I have heard the complete recording and he definitely meant demolish the building, a feat that cannot be done within a month not alone a few hours. Now I hear he has bought the Sears Tower, hope he does not need the insurance money.

  6. 56
    Mark Sanz Says:

    Anyone who thinks the buildings were imploded does not understand the physics of a collapse. When something very heavy like a building loses structural integrity, it is instantly moved by gravity. Gravity pulls everything straight down. When the towers started to collapse, each floor was squashed from the weight of the floors above it. It’s known as a progressive collapse. When a building is demolished, it does the same thing. There is no force to make it go sideways. It has no choice but to drop straight down and pancake itself into the ground. Which is exactly what happened.

    It is no co-incidence that Charlie, a son of the famous lefty, Martin Sheen, would promote a theory that George Bush made that building collapse. What is odd however, is that he would promote such a theory predicated on nothing more than a preconception as to how buildings are supposed to look when they collapse.

  7. 57
    chad Says:


    Silverstein says he meant the firefighters, the people around him say he mean the firefighters, I wasn’t there so I have to rely on what the guy who actually made the statement says he meant. Since you have brought up the insurance money I am interested in knowing how the 1.5 billion he recouped in insurance is offsetting the 8 billion it is costing him to rebuild. I’m sure there is some special Illuminanti math involved, but since I am not a member of that august organization I am not privy to it.

    Silverstein’s spokesperson, Mr. McQuillan, later clarified:

    “In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building.”

    Mr. McQuillan has commented that by “it,” Mr. Silverstein meant the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building.

    The National Institute of Standards and Technology has stated unequivocally, “NIST has seen so evidence that the collapse of WTC 7 was caused by bombs, missiles, or controlled demolition,” in its Collapse of WTC 7 report (p. 6). NIST’s working hypothesis for the collapse of WTC 7 is that it was caused by the collapse of a critical column due to “fire and/or debris induced structural damage.” There was substantial damage to WTC 7 when the nearby WTC 1 tower collapsed and fires began shortly afterwards. Also, WTC 7 was a very unusual building because it was built over an existing Con-Edison power generation substation, which contained two large 6,000 gallon fuel tanks for the emergency generation of power. The fuel from these tanks could have contributed to the intense heat that apparently weakened the supporting columns in WTC 7.

  8. 58
    Joe Says:

    On the contrary, the second plane hit the tower to one side of the building, law of physics dictates that the building topples to that side, the weakest point. There would be no point of controlled demolitions which can last months to install if your theory is correct. AH! Sure we’ll put a few explosives anywhere and down she will come straight as a die. You are all afraid of the truth.

    As regarding Silverstein, I’m going by the recording, not hearsay. I need documented proof on everything before I believe.

    If the so called highjackers were on the planes why have the powers that be not shown us video evidence of them boarding the planes, there are several cameras at all airports? What about the plane going into the Pentagon, probably the most secure building in the world? All those cameras still no proof and absolutely no proof that the conspiracy theory that the government gave us is true, not one shred of evidence.

    Guys, lets start by giving us the concrete evidence, and don’t bother starting with the 911 Commission, fox minding the hen house if I ever saw one nor the fake bin Laden tapes. OH! I got it, they hate us because of our freedoms. Last time I looked we don’t have many left.

  9. 59
    chad Says:


    Where were you for the last three years when they have shown the hijackers passing thru airport security on tape. I dont even know where to start with you, it has been pointed out that structural engineers have stated that in order for 1 WTC and 2 WTC not to fall staright down they would have had to be more than 100 feet off center. You’re counter to that seems to be at some time in the past explosives were secretly planted in the buildings in order to them down just in case a plane should ever run into them. Were these explosives planted before or after the 93 WTC bombing. If they were there then why weren’t they used. Did the owner only need a little insurance money that time. Maybe he was only paying off the kids car. I guse the videos of the planes flying into the buildings doesn’t really count as proof, because we all know that isn’t as accurate as an out of context audio tape. Especially when you can just ignore the material that would put the audio tape in context (i.e. the speaker of the words saying what he meant).

    As for the plane flying into the Penatgon, lets assume for a minute that a chain link fence will stop a 100 ton airplane traveling at 300+ miles per hour (even though it won’t stop a car tarveling at 60) show me where the plane hit one. Or are you talking about the fact that the doors were locked? I mean it isn’t like cops dont bust thru them all the time with a battering ram, but by god the sure will stop that plane it will just crumple like tin foil. Or are you talking about those fictious anti-aircarft guns and missles? I challenge you to show me anywhere besides the White House that prior to 9/11 had routinely manned antiaircraft defense in the continental United States.

    Just out of curiosity what would you consider concrete evidence. Nothing I bet. You will accept any far fetched thing that will fit your preconcieved notion that the US is evil and means you harm but any reasonable explaination regarding a theory you hold will be instantly discarded. Do you believe Apollo was faked, and the Earth is flat too?

  10. 60
    lhampton Says:

    once again: all doubters, please explain why norad stood down and why the feds were running the exercises of planes crashing into buildings as it was happening i have yet to hear this explained away. what are the chances of them running those excercises mirroring the very events as they took place???????? also why is govt responsibility so hard to believe? it has been admitted that chemicals have been sprayed over u.s. cities for experimental purposes, also look athe the govt testing in the TKUSKEEGEE SYPHILIS STUDY, troops have also been tested on for many years. the point is that pure evil is the standard m.o. they push through and agenda at any cost and 911 has been quite fruitful for many in the govt no one could argue that!!

    if this is true

    1994 Senator John D. Rockefeller issues a report revealing that for at least 50 years the Department of Defense has used hundreds of thousands of military personnel in human experiments and for intentional exposure to dangerous substances. Materials included mustard and nerve gas, ionizing radiation, psychochemicals, hallucinogens, and drugs used during the Gulf War .

    then them blowing up some buildings and sacrificing the lives of innocent americans to get nice fat oil war going and to set fire to the bill of rights and constituion is not so far fetched. and after a hard years work dont they deserve to get away from it all and kick back in the lush forests of bohemian grove in california with the world’s elite and simply worship their pagan god and engage in some good ol human sacrifice be it real or symbolic. well on second thought it should be no surprise if it is real seeing as how we peasants are so expendable.
    for more on how much the govt has experimentally expressed their love for us throughout the years to attain their goals please see and research


  11. 61
    Lee Says:

    I have been researching 911 since early 2003 (a researcher by training and trade) and I must say, I am unbelievably heartened by the amount of well-informed comments on this blog. Two years ago, heck one year ago, there would have been little but partisan rant. Now, even on a blog that appears to be a “scales still on the eyes” type, at least half if not more of the comments are fully 911 awake.

    To those skeptics who still believe the official conspiracy theory (the term “conspiracy” being nothing more than a well-recognized legal concept denoting a crime carried out by two or more – so don’t get your knickers in a twist), you must realize this 911 debate has nothing to do with partisan politics. Rather, it is about a small elite to which both Bush and Clinton belong (aren’t they cozy these days!) and an agenda being justified for the use of unrestrained military force abroad and unrestrained militarism at home. It’s not about left and right. It’s about top and bottom. It’s about absolute control = absolute power wealth = absolute power.

    Don’t believe me about the false left/right thing? Take a look at the mounds of evidence that the first WTC hit, Oklahoma City and Waco were perversions carried out by the Clinton administration. 911 is simply a continuation of the exact same practices. Indeed, false flag operations (or in other words perpetrating terror to blame it on your opponents) is an historically proven tried and true method (conducted for decades through intelligence agencies – CIA, MI6, Mossad, etc. – check out Operation Gladio for example). The goal is simple: tell the people they are being attacked by an external enemy and they, in their fear, will give up their domestic liberties and, at the same time, agree with the perpetration of resource grabs (or anything else) around the world. According to Himmler at the Nuremburg trials, the strategy works the same way in any country and with any kind of polity. You may also recall Oceania and Eurasia from Orwell’s 1984 (or Machiavelli, or Hegel, or Strauss). It’s not a new concept.

    The evidence on 911 being an inside job is fully available (as long as the internet and some independent printing houses still are) and it is overwhelming. In fact, you have to be almost wilfully blind not to see it. I know that it is difficult to overcome that first knee-jerk reaction that this is “nuts” because one must relinquish the assumption that the American government would not do this to “its own people”. But that is what any true and valid analysis requires. No assumptions. You have to look at the evidence (some of which is discussed above) and see what theory fits best with that evidence. Then it’s no longer a theory. It’s proven fact.

    And as to the assumption that the American government would never do this to “their own people”: “We the people” are not Clinton’s or George Bush’s (I or II) “people”. I’m no fan of Moore (I figure he’s a shill), but I found the footage of Bush speaking at what I recall to be his first inaugaural address illuminating. Addressing the crowd of unbelievably wealthy he stated, “People call you the elite. I call you my base”.

    Neither George Bush nor Bill Clinton gives a damn about you. Nor likely do many members of Congress.

    Only one specific comment to Senior Administration dude:

    Do you really consider Four Star General and then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff L.L.Lemetzer, who signed the Operation Northwoods plan / policy, a mid-level officer? Come on man.

  12. 62
    A Senior Administration Official Says:

    Chad, thanks for fighting the good fight! Some comment on the comments:

    “Second, the air traffic was not able to track the plane. That means that there was no communication between the plane and the towers. How did they guide the plane from above the clouds? Did they use a compass?”

    Contrary to popular belief, air traffic control does not use ‘real’ radar to track aircraft. Instead, they are located via a transponder in the plane. The hijackers turned them off. At that point the planes would be invisible to commercial air traffic control.

    A week prior to 9/11 I played with a new GPS I had on a flight from Boston to LA (something you can’t do now). It tracked our location to the middle of the runway at LAX.

    “how about giving us all the name of the company that allows to make cell phone call from an air borne jet.”

    Almost any of them. You get a signal on your phone if you leave it on. People call from planes all the time. Don’t believe me? Go here: “researchers at Carnegie Mellon University rode 37 passenger flights on three airlines with a device that measured radio-frequency emissions from personal electronic devices, like cellphones, BlackBerries and laptop computers. The study found emissions from cellphones that could interfere with GPS systems. It also revealed that some fliers are already making phone calls in defiance of an industrywide ban: Indeed, one to four cell calls were surreptitiously made on each flight studied.”

    Re 7 WTC:

    Look at the pictures here to see the fires that raged all day, and the chunk — 25% of the bottom 10 floors of the building — taken out of the side of the building from the collapse of WTC 1. Of course, these are ‘government photos,’ so I’m sure they’ll be discounted. Could pressurized fuel lines for emergency generators have made the fires worse? Sounds like. But more importantly, under the conspiracy hypothesis, exactly what benefit is there to demolishing an empty building eight hours after the collapse of the twin towers? Wouldn’t that have been enough for the conspirators?

    More broadly, the government can’t even keep NSA survellience programs and hypersonic spy planes secret. How’s it going to keep this quiet?

    “Chad, how could Silverstein’s quote” we decided to pull the building” be mistaken for getting the firefighters out of the building? That is grasping at straws.”

    No, hanging your hat on hearsay and easily misinterpreted quotes is grasping at straws.

    “On the contrary, the second plane hit the tower to one side of the building, law of physics dictates that the building topples to that side, the weakest point.”

    Not if the jet fuel created a fire that raged across several floors. “The weakest point” was actually where the fire had weakened the structure the most, not where the plane hit.

    “it is about a small elite to which both Bush and Clinton belong (aren’t they cozy these days!) and an agenda being justified for the use of unrestrained military force abroad and unrestrained militarism at home.”

    If that was the plan, what was the goal? Access to oil? It was cheaper in 2000. This seems to be a particularly bad conspiracy — the “unrestrained military force abroad” has been notably tied up in just Iraq. Iran doesn’t seem to have the same fear of the US that they might have had four years ago, do they? If world domination was the plan, it has backfired.

    PS “Do you really consider Four Star General and then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff L.L.Lemetzer, who signed the Operation Northwoods plan / policy, a mid-level officer? Come on man.”

    It wasn’t a plan, it wasn’t a policy, it was a request from the “Chief of Operations, Cuba Project” who asked the Joint Chiefs speculate on what pretexts could be used to justify US military intervention in Cuba. The cover letter from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is just that — a cover letter for a document drafted by more junior officers. Cuba was at the top of the political – military agenda in 1962. So some general said “tell me what it would take to justify an invasion of Cuba” and some majors and colonels spent a week writing up some ideas. Hasn’t anyone ever wasted time on a bizzaro plan the boss has dreamed up?

  13. 63
    kenj Says:

    I can’t prove to the cynics that George Bush did 9/11 because the only proof they will accept is a signed confession – and that won’t be forthcoming.

    So I tell people they can believe that the sun goes down in the east or water flows uphill if it makes them feel happy. Or that hijacked airliners can fly around unattended over the US eastern seaboard for an hour, yet those same planes would be intercepted by jet fighters in 10 minutes over London, Frankfurt or Tokyo. But, hey – this is the American version of the Twilight Zone where Dear Leader tells people what to think – and they do.

    So believe the sun gets up in the west and goes down in the east.

    Now got to the Internet and find the ‘confession’ video of Osama Bin Laden put out by CNN on 12 Dec 2001. Watch all of it. Notice how the guy is recognizably, incontrovertibility, undeniably NOT Osama Bin Laden?

    No, you didn’t notice that? Then put your head in the oven because even your senses are wasted on you.

  14. 64
    kenj Says:

    Please accept my apologies , dear readers, for my earlier lapse in good manners. But 911 critics are somewhat tired of wading across abuse and cheap putdowns when all they are trying to do is get at the truth. Remember, the 911 Commission said that the WTC towers had a “hollow core” – denying the presence of 47 massive steel columns in their centre. That same Commission didn’t even mention WTC 7. That’s pretty disrespectful, don’t you think, of the rights of the American people to have a full and accurate account of the events of 911? That’s why 911 critics have had it up to their eyeballs with the cheap dismissals and putdowns.

    Want some more?

    NIST did NOT study the collapse of the WTC towers. They computer modelled the impact of a plane and the effects of fire up to the point where they claim a collapse sequence commenced. At that point they stopped modelling. They did no examination of the subsequent 10 or so seconds of collapse (nor the possible use of explosives in that time).

    Don’t believe me? NIST makes the startling admission in a footnote on page 80 of their Final Report:

    The focus of the Investigation was on the sequence of events from the instant of aircraft impact to the initiation of collapse for each tower. For brevity in this report, this sequence is referred to as the “probable collapse sequence,” although it does not actually include the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached…(NIST, 2005, p. 80, fn. 12; emphasis added.)

    Again, on page 142, NIST admits that their computer simulation only proceeds until the building is “poised for collapse”, thus ignoring any data from that time on.

    The results were a simulation of the structural deterioration of each tower from the time of aircraft impact to the time at which the building became unstable, i.e., was poised for collapse. …(NIST, 2005, p. 142; emphasis added.)

    That’s their words, not mine!

    To Senior Administration Official (no rudeness intended, SAO of what?) – you said: “researchers at Carnegie Mellon University rode 37 passenger flights on three airlines with a device that measured radio-frequency emissions from personal electronic devices, like cellphones, BlackBerries and laptop computers. The study found emissions from cellphones that could interfere with GPS systems. It also revealed that some fliers are already making phone calls in defiance of an industrywide ban: Indeed, one to four cell calls were surreptitiously made on each flight studied.”

    I’ve looked at the study. First, while their claim that electronic devices do make emissions is probably accuarte, at no stage in their article is it claimed that sustained (or even intermittent) phone calls connections have been made from planes at any appreciable altitude (say over 5,000 feet) or at the normal cruising speeds of 500+ mph. While it alleges that one to four calls were made on each flight studied we have no evidence in support of this. I could comfortably accept that cell calls might be made from low altitudes near landing or takeoff. But there is no evidence in the article you refer to supporting claims that cell calls can be made from high altitude and at normal cruising speed which is at the core of 911 critics’ claims about calls from the hijacked flights on 911.

    A.K. Dewdney has conducted a scientific study which appears to specifically refute this possibility.

    Now let’s turn to the politics. How many people are aware that Sen. Bob Graham has admitted in an interview on the Lehrer Hour specifically that a foreign nation was involved in 911? Do you think democracy would be helped if that verifiable fact became mainstream? No, the country is not Iraq, it is almost certainly Pakistan.

    And there is further evidence for this. Recently the Pakistan Public Accounts Committee has admitted that the Pakistan foreign office had paid tens of thousands of dollars to lobbyists in the US to get anti-Pakistan references dropped from the 9/11 inquiry commission report. Do you think that’s something people should know? And, by the way, if Pakistan Military Intelligence knew that 911 was going down, then I’ve got bad news for you – so did some of the people in the CIA!

    I could give you twenty other serious objections to the official account of 9/11. Whatever happened that day the American people have never had the kind of independant investigation they deserved.

    Charlie Sheen should be congratulated as a man of principles standing up for accountability in democracy. Do you have a problem with that?

    Despite their occasional errors of judgement on specific matters, the 911 critics are the only ones calling for genuinely independant inquiries to let the chips fall where they may. Their integrity on this will be vindicated.

  15. 65
    chad Says:


    Of course the computer simulated the effect of the building fires. What were they supposed to do rebuild the WTC and burn it down again.

    Here is what will convince me it was a conspiracy.

    a. A confession from a credible participant.
    b. A piece of scientifically verifiable evidence.

    There you go. I have laid out my criteria, so far you can’t meet either one. What you have is a bunch of well it didn’t look quite right and I heard someone say to someone else while I was taking a pee stories.

    While I have some attention I am going to admit something I was wrong on. Back in 2002 the Army Chief of Staff Eric Shineski predicted that forces levels in Iraq were going to be inadeqaute for occupation. I thought he was wrong, but I it turned out I was. If we had had a much higher force level after the initial invasion the current insurgency may not have been able to develop.

  16. 66
    kenj Says:

    Chad: “Of course the computer simulated the effect of the building fires. What were they supposed to do rebuild the WTC and burn it down again.”

    Those sort of cheap replies are exactly why 911 critics don’t waste their time on people like you. Read the article again, moron, and then comment on what I actually said.

    You’re going to wait a long time for (a) (do the cops only arrest when they’ve got confessions?). And (b) – like NIST you only want scientific evidence of a particular kind.

    Now as to why you would set up these idiot criteria I can only guess, but I guess it’s because you’re an idiot? Ya think?

    You’re been provided with detailed and considered reasons why the 911 investigative process was unsatisfactory and you engage in a shirt-fronting and superficial pile of bullshit that pays no attention to what people actually say to you.

    Running through your brief nonsense piece is an overarching and completely unjustified sense that other people owe you an explanation.

    I’ve got news for you fratboy – you’re just not that important.

    Try using your brain – and get a few manners while you’re at it.

    Oh, by the way? I’m guessing you still have no idea what Head of the 911 Commission Bob Graham said on the Lehrer Hour about a foreign nation being involved, do you?

    Stick with American Idol, loser.

  17. 67
    lhampton Says:

    look if the certain elements of the govt can push years of testing on citizens
    and troops, why is it so hard to believe that they would sacrifice some buildings and a lot of innocent people in order to get a big fat oil campaign going and to set ablaze the constitution and bill of rights??
    i mean if this is true:
    1932  The Tuskegee Syphilis Study begins. 200 black men diagnosed with syphilis are never told of their illness, are denied treatment, and instead are used as human guinea pigs in order to follow the progression and symptoms of the disease. They all subsequently die from syphilis, their families never told that they could have been treated.

    1966  U.S. Army dispenses Bacillus subtilis variant niger throughout the New York City subway system. More than a million civilians are exposed when army scientists drop lightbulbs filled with the bacteria onto ventilation grates.

    1990  More than 1500 six-month old black and hispanic babies in Los Angeles are given an “experimental” measles vaccine that had never been licensed for use in the United States. CDC later admits that parents were never informed that the vaccine being injected to their children was experimental.

    1994  Senator John D. Rockefeller issues a report revealing that for at least 50 years the Department of Defense has used hundreds of thousands of military personnel in human experiments and for intentional exposure to dangerous substances. Materials included mustard and nerve gas, ionizing radiation, psychochemicals, hallucinogens, and drugs used during the Gulf War .
    it just goes to show that they will stop at NOTHING to push and agenda through
    for more on how the govt has experimentally shown its love for us throughout the years please see the following link.


  18. 68
    Michael Says:

    Kenj – it’s good to have you and so many other people coming to my aid and putting forth so much more credible evidence, but please don’t put anyone down (I know that it is frustrating). It only makes us look worse. Everyone has their own opinion and information. It would be good if we can all be friends and just disagree I suppose. Just a thought. I am doing my best to not get upset myself.

  19. 69
    Michael Says:

    I just don’t want these people to seem credible when they call us all crazy because we are not. I’m sure that the supporters of Hitler that didn’t know the truth when he was burning down the reichstag and then justifying taking away people’s rights. I’m sure that there were people labeled conspiracy therists in those days too. Now we all see the truth in the matter. They really weren’t nuts after all.

  20. 70
    kenj Says:

    Michael, I understand and appreciate your concern. If you look two posts up you will see that I made it clear that I was not keen on rudeness. Like you, I am more than happy to be concede on matters of fact and to be corrected by others. I have published articles on the Internet calling for 911 critics to avoid wild conjectures and to promote 911 as an issue in accountability to the American people. I make it my business to deal with people respectfully and I expect them to do the same.

    When I quote from the NIST documents themselves and the Head of the 911 Commission I don’t expect someone to say “What you have is a bunch of well it didn’t look quite right and I heard someone say to someone else while I was taking a pee stories”

    If people shirtfront me, occasionally I will shirtfront them back. You’ve just seen an example of that here, but I usually restrict myself to one rude outburst a week. So Chad (and this blog) is probably safe for now.

    Reasoned and sincere 911 critics deserve better than the usual cheap putdowns. It’s not necessary that everyone agree, but the days of accepting ‘tinfoil’ derision are over as far as I’m concerned. And they should be for everybody else. Cheers.

  21. 71
    Michael Says:

    I agree with you Kenj. A quote from the 911 Commision report and NIST is not something that you made up. It is thier own words. That should be sufficient enough information. That is why Cynthia McKinney agrees with Alex Jones’ films because he uses raw footage and uses the source’s own words and that’s why he is credible.

  22. 72
    Amy Says:

    as the day progressed, The talk of explosions and seeing the way the buildings came down I knew it was a planned event by some on other than terrorists. Then when they came on and said 19 hijackers I jumped up out of my chair screaming. No freaking way. I know what they have done in the past.
    then the repetion over and over and over again of the plane slamming into the building , and no more talk of the explosions, I got caught up in their lies and started to think how they told me to think. Perfect phyops. CNN had a team of Army phyops in place in 2000, I found out later.
    It took me a while to recover from their staged propaganda. What I felt and what I thought that day all came back to me. Damn they are good at their phyops. Ever since then I turned off the TV.
    TV is part of their brain washing mechanism, and boy they do it well.

  23. 73
    The Stevo in H-Town Says:

    I can straghten all dis crap out inna DAY…

    Jack Bauer

  24. 74
    Adam Says:

    This comment, with the lead “Biggest Conspiracy: Do you really know who owns the Federal Reserve bank?!” is off topic and cut-and-pasted from here (3d comment, by “Avalon”). I view that as essentially spam and have deleted it.

    - A Senior Administration Official

  25. 75
    The Stevo in H-Town Says:


    Noticed ya wiped out Eduardo Bernal’s cheap-ass commercial…guess “delete” is as close as a blogger can get to eliminatin’ dat aggravatin’ crap…carry-on mate….


  26. 76
    Michael Says:

    Check out the story on infowars.com. This is promissing.

    No Longer The Minority: 82% Plus Support Charlie Sheen

    Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones/Prison Planet.com | March 24 2006

    Despite the best efforts of the now whimpering attack poodles of the mainstream media, an online CNN poll shows that over four-fifths, or 82 per cent, agree with actor Charlie Sheen that the U.S. government covered up the real events of the 9/11 attacks.

    Every establishment media mouthpiece aside from CNN tried to hang Sheen on his own words but it simply didn’t work because those same questions are firing the synapses in the heads of millions upon millions of other taxpaying American citizens.

    We are now in the majority and the cynics are beginning to feel the breeze of fear as they desperately cling to ignorant dogmas spoon fed to them by an empire in descent, while in the back of their mind and in their soul knowing that they have sided with the wrong team and the wrong side of history.

    As of Friday morning you can still vote in the poll and I encourage you to do so by clicking here. A.J. Hammer and CNN Showbiz Tonight need to be given their due as the only mainstream television news show to give balanced coverage of serious 9/11 questions.

    This is a watershed moment in the struggle to create a powerful, educated and active contingent of individuals with no hierarchical structure but with a unified cause.

  27. 77
    chad Says:

    Holy Crap, Is there anything you people won’t believe?


    You are wrong on almsot every count regarding the Federal Reserve System. Unfortunately this is another one of those areas that no matter what I say it won’t be sufficient, because it is all a trick to deceive us and only the knowledgable few really know the truth. Of course all their evidence is anecdoctal and not subject to scrutiny because it is hidden away by vast secret societies beholden to the devil or Xenu or whoever whereas I can point to the federal reserve act and find out the duties and responsibilities of the Federal Reserve, Federal Reserve banks and member banks.

  28. 78
    A Senior Administration Official Says:

    “An online CNN poll”

    Now that’s scientific.

  29. 79
    Michael Says:

    When the bandwagon starts to leave…. maybe it won’t be to late for you unbelievers. It’s now boarding!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  30. 80
    H. David Tattershall Says:

    I get really tired of reading the right wing response anything that asks a simple question about their motives. You are all just tools in the hands of those who have money and thus power in this country. The end of the cold war meant that we simply did not need to spend another few trillion on systems, to counter systems, that were actually dreamed up by none other than Paul Wolfowitz and never existed.

    If you don’t believe that 9/11 was an inside job then demand that Rumsfeld release the 84 vidoes shot at the Pentagon that day and wave them in the face of the so-called activists: guess what – you aren’t going to get anywhere near them!

  31. 81
    Charlie Sheen thinks US government is responsible for 9/11 Says:

    [...] orrifically, that day and forever.

    “We owe it to them to uncover what happened.”

    http://independentsources.com/2006/03/21/9-11-conspiracy-char [...]

  32. 82
    Andy White Says:

    Please take the time to listen to the questions Charlie poses. You will see that they are very legitimate and remain unanswered. Namely the collapse of WORLD TRADE CENTER BUILDING 7. The FEMA report had this to say about the collapse of WTC 7.

    “The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 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.” (FEMA, 2002, chapter 5)


    http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/ htm7.html

    The owner of WTC 7 admitted in a PBS documentary to “pulling” the building. “Pull it” is a demolition term for bringing down a building.

    “I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, “We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.”
    Larry Silverstein – owner of WTC 7

    Putting explosives in a building takes weeks and could not have been placed between the time of the first two tower collapses and the collapse of WTC 7.

    WTC7 shares all the characteristics of a controlled demolition and has yet to be explained by the government. Heres a video of the collapse.

    Video Of WTC 7 collapse

    Millions of people all over the world question the official US government story of 9/11 for very good reasons, and namely the collapse of WTC Building 7. Don’t be so quick to proclaim Charlie Sheen is stupid and wrong if you have not done any research regarding the subject. Look at what he is asking instead of just attacking Charlie Sheen’s character over the internet.

    If Charlie Sheen is so wrong just present evidence that prooves him wrong. It shouldn’t be hard right?

  33. 83
    chad Says:

    Andy White,

    Here is why what you are asking is impossible. I have already talked about everything that you adress in your latest post, but you keep coming back and saying well what about this. Specifically:

    “I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, “We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.”
    Larry Silverstein – owner of WTC 7

    to which my reply is both the audio quote is out of context and he later clarified what he meant:

    Silverstein’s spokesperson, Mr. McQuillan, later clarified:

    “In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building.”

    Mr. McQuillan has commented that by “it,” Mr. Silverstein meant the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building.

    Too which your reply is, “but Silverstein said pull it” and we are right back where we started.

    This is akin to playing the guess a number game, and then arguing when I tell you that you guessed wrong. I will never convince you.

    I have laid out my requirements to be convinced that you are right, do the same. Mine are reasonable have someone confess that they were involved in the conspiracy or provide some irrefutable scientific evidence.

  34. 84
    Michael Says:

    The insurmountable problem with this explanation of Silverstein’s statement is that there were no firefighters inside WTC 7.

    The information below if from a site that tries to debunk the conspiracy, but it also contradicts Silverstein’s lie.

    Dr. Shyam Sunder, of the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST), which investigated the collapse of WTC 7, is quoted in Popular Mechanics (9/11: Debunking the Myths, March, 2005) as saying: “There was no firefighting in WTC 7.” Link http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=5&c=y

  35. 85
    Mr. Realist Says:

    I will sum it up for everyone right now. I have one piece of evidence that is so strong, it cannot be ignored. Anyone who doesn’t believe the gov’t didn’t plan 9/11, this is for you. You ready. THEY HAVEN’T CAUGHT BIN LADEN. That’s it. The most horrible, wanted person in the world, and he is still hiding in a cave? It’s so silly. That is the only word I can think of to use, silly. They can’t find him? They found Hussein down a hole in Iraq. But they can’t catch Bin Laden? How has he been survivng all this time? Where does he get his food, water and medical supplies from? It’s been almost 5 years. That’s a long time. No way they could be stocked up for that long. Think about it. The gov’t tells us, he is in a region where we can’t really get into because of Pakistans unruly tribes and blah, blah, bullcrap. That’s garbage. They haven’t caught him. Ask that question. Why haven’t they caught him?

  36. 86
    Michael Says:

    This is part of a story that someone posted on Alex’s My Space site. It shows how compassionate our government is (and how FEMA Sagotaged the rescue effort during Katrina).

    Case Against Sheriff Who Seized FEMA Trucks in Doubt
    After Waiting Days for Katrina Aid, Official Comandeered Ice for Survivors
    Associated Press | March 24, 2006

    JACKSON, Miss. (March 24) – Randy Walker swears he would have died from his diabetes after Hurricane Katrina had a sheriff not seized two FEMA trucks filled with ice and distributed it to residents, many of whom had to keep their insulin cold.

    Now, that sheriff could be prosecuted on charges of interfering with a federal operation.

  37. 87
    Robert Says:

    They haven’t caught Bin Ladin because they can’t; he’s been dead for some time. Those recent videos of “him” aren’t him. The person looks different, has a different voice from the older recorded messages, and most importantly, this latest tape doesn’t have any of the watermarks of a Bin Ladin tape (e.g., the tape is much too short, there is an utter lack of Quranic references, which were on all of the previous recordings). And I’m absolutely sure that a 6′6” Arab on a dialysis machine is perfectly capable of living in filthy caves along the Afghani-Pakistani border, and able to transport that heavy, massive medical necessity with him in such conditions while evading U.S. army and special forces. But the truth is that Bush and his enablers need a boogey-man with which to scare the populace into submission, even if it’s a dead horse they’re beating.

    And I am completely sure that the fact that several of the 9/11 hijackers are still alive can be explained.

    Or that the Secret Service didn’t consider President Bush to be in imminent danger after the second tower was hit (he simply was left to sit in that Florida elementary school classroom, prostrate to any and all terrorist attacks, for too long in such a dire, purportedly unexpected situation). There are only two things which can explain this last point. Either Bush and his administration were directly involved with 9/11, or they were aware of the attacks sufficiently beforehand (thus seeing an opportunity to scare the American people into submission to Executive authority) and allowed the events to take place. Actually, there is a third explanation, which is that the entire Federal government, at all levels (from the mid-level CIA researchers to the Chiefs of Staff) is the most inept which has ever [dis]graced a once-proud America. In any of these cases, impeachment is in order (along with treason indictments if the either of the first two explanations were to apply).

    At least Reagan, a man with many faults but whom I still ultimately hold in great respect, knew what he was doing when he was staving off the advance of communism. He didn’t make horrible strategic blunders in South America as Bush has in Iraq. The world did not hate us, as it has come to in a short 5 years. Reagan gave the final death blow to the Soviet Union (the “War on Terror” has supplanted the Cold War) not by threats and warfare, but by allowing it to totter and collapse under its own weight. He was firm with Gorbachev, but he did not provoke him. Instead of thoughtful pragmatism as Regan had, we now get Bush with his Messianic complex who believes God has set it out for him to single-handedly quash world-wide terrorism. I’m amazed at how Bush so wantonly throws around his faux-belief in Christ, yet at the same time wages unwarranted warfare on a nation because he had a personal vendetta against its despotic leader.

  38. 88
    A Senior Administration Official Says:

    re Firefighting in Tower 7:

    Sunder seems to mean that there was no effective firefighting going on in WTC 7. However, there were firefighters in the building, but they were pulled back. From firsthand accounts:

    Battalion Seven: “This is Battalion Seven on Floor 40 of Tower 7, We’ve got one elevator working up to the 40th floor, staffed by a member of Ladder 15″
    Transmission: “Alright, but I got no units yet, there’s no units here yet”
    Battalion Seven: “Yeah, we’re just starting them up, 10-4″


    There was an engine company there, right at the corner. It was right underneath building 7 and it was still burning at the time. They had a hose in operation, but you could tell there was no pressure. It was barely making it across the street. Building 6 was fully involved and it was hitting the sidewalk across the street. I told the guys to wait up.

    … We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what’s going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

    But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see.

    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.



    Firehouse: Were you watching 7 World Trade Center?
    ?Pfiefer: Yes, I watched 7. At one point, we were standing on the west side of West Street and Vesey. And I remember Chief Nigro coming back at that point saying I don’t want anybody else killed and to take everybody two blocks up virtually to North End and Vesey, which is a good ways up. And we stood there and we watched 7 collapse.

    … Dennis Tardio was coming down the C stairs in building 7. At about the 9th or 10th floor, he met my brother Kevin, who told Dennis, you can’t get down these stairs, there was all sorts of debris. He directed him to the B stairs and, according to Captain Tardio, they got out of the building and 30 seconds later it started collapsing. If they would have continued in the same stairs, there was no way they would have been out. I’m not too sure if my brother stayed there a little longer and directed more companies along with his guys or he was doing what firemen do, make sure all the brothers get out.

    Firehouse: Did they all get killed?
    ?Pfiefer: Yes.



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


    —– end of quotes —–

    The collapse of the towers caused widespread damage. From wikipedia:

    “Numerous other buildings in the World Trade Center and surrounding it were damaged or destroyed as the Towers fell. 5 World Trade Center suffered a large fire and a partial collapse of its steel structure. Other buildings destroyed include St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, Marriott Hotel (3 WTC), South Plaza (4 WTC), U.S. Customs (6 WTC), and the Winter Garden at the World Financial Center. World Financial Center buildings 4, 5, 6, and 7, 90 West Street, and 130 Cedar Street suffered fires. The Bankers Trust Building, Verizon, and World Financial Center 3 suffered impact damage from the Towers collapse, as did 90 West Street. 30 West Broadway was damaged by the collapse of 7 WTC.”

    Left unanswered is why the ‘conspiracy’ would have needed to destro 7 WTC at all. If the plan was to create an excuse to attack Afghanistan / Iraq / Iran / wherever, even the partial destruction of the WTC and Pentagon would have elicited the national anger necessary to support that objective. Why complicate the plot by spending weeks wiring heavily used buildings for demolition? Discovery would have put the entire plot at risk. And why destroy WTC 7? The symbolism was all vested in the twin towers; destroying the third building would not have advanced the plot.

    Along w/ Chad’s “show me a conspirator or verifiable evidence” hurdle, 7 WTC doesn’t even satisfy the classic motive / means / opportunity test.

  39. 89
    chad Says:

    Along with Senior Admininstration Official’s excellent response, let me add one other rebuttal to Michael’s last post.

    It doesn’t really matter whether or not firefighters were in the building, Silverstein had been told that there were and that they were in danger. The Battalion Chief who told him they were in there says he told them there were firefighters in the building. Was Silverstein supposed to magically know whether or not he was correct?

    This is what I am talking about with impossible standards of proof. It is the same type of thinking that leads to the George Bush did nothing while the building were attacked complaint. When the first plane hit they didn’t know if it was delebirate or an accident, when the second plane hit he had his staff gathering facts. What was he supposed to do hop into Air Force 1 and rush off to intercept the next plane.

  40. 90
    Michael Says:

    According to a May, 2002 FEMA report (from Chapter 5):
    WTC 7 collapsed on September 11, 2001, at 5:20 p.m. There were no known casualties due to this collapse. The performance of WTC 7 is of significant interest because it appears the collapse was due primarily to fire, rather than any impact damage from the collapsing towers. Prior to September 11, 2001, there was little, if any, record of fire-induced collapse of large fire-protected steel buildings.
    As can be seen in the photo below (from Knoxville News Sentinel Sept. 11 photo gallery, this particular photo reportedly from the New York City Office of Emergency Management), WTC 6, which was immediately adjacent to WTC 1, has a large hole in the middle from falling debris, yet did not collapse. In contrast, WTC 7 (which had the US Secret Service and IRS as tenants) is neatly collapsed between the unscathed Federal Building and the NY Telephone building (see the map below, which is from the Seattle Post Intelligencer, which credits the New York Times).

    Here is a link to the actual GOVERNMENT FEMA report. This is what FEMA put in their report. If this was not the truth then they lied.

  41. 91
    Robert Says:

    No, he wasn’t expected to revert to his National Guard days and board an F-16. However, after the second plane was hit, and it was obvious there was a massive terrorist attack on the nation (and thus, implicitly, the President is assumed to be an intended target), Bush should have immediately been taken away to a safe location by the Secret Service. That is, unless they knew for a fact that he was not a target.

  42. 92
    Andy White Says:

    Are you serious Chad? He was refferring to a group of human beings as “it”?

  43. 93
    Watch this Says:


  44. 94
    O-man Says:

    “3. ATC Radar unable to track the plane: They turned off the transponders . ATC radar uses the transponder to plot the location of aircraft. ” POSTED BY CHAD (SMART MAN)

    So if a foreign country desides to attack us all they need to do is turn there ATC devices off when they fly there planes over our soil? Hmmm….NORAD must have been a big waist of time then. Then why did we bother building the high tech stealth planes when all we had to do was just not put ATC devices in our planes now?? Our government is now far more worse off then i ever thought.


  45. 95



  46. 96
    chad Says:


    Nice job trying to change the subject, but sorry you’re busted. The problem with your, I hestitate to say it “theory”, is so simple I can’t believe you didn’t catch it. Foriegn countries are just that foriegn, as in external, as in the radars point out. ATC radar for the most part is for internal regulation of air traffic, it points in. [ Yes I know that is greatly oversimplified, but it serves the purpose] Additionally the northern tier of Norad radar stations is actually in Canada to detect threats coming over the pole. On the southern tier it tracks small planes used to smuggle drugs.

    Thanks for playing though.


    If you recall he was taken to a number of secure locations, and was criticized for not immediately returning to Washington DC.


    That’s it. That’s the basis for your belief that the US government was behind the biggest crime of the since the Holocaust? You don’t like the way a guy uses the word it? His usage is correct incidentally. A contingent is, in itself, an inanimate object and therefore is an it.

    OK guys I vote we end this thread now. You aren’;t making any headway and I don’t have a life so I have nothing better to do than sit around all weekend and poke holes in your theory and make fun of you. Well except try and finish my collection of Kafka short stories and this is even preferable to that. If you are really jonesing for conspiracy theory action read “American Tabloid” by James Ellroy.

  47. 97
    carl Says:

    It is hard to believe that you call yourselves indepedent. After reading your very biased articled against Charlie Sheen and his comments, I feel that your writers are not independent nor objective.

    I used to be a die-hard Republican but switched to the Indepedent party several years ago. I did it after observing that the two party system is really one party with two heads.

    The fact is, there are many questions about 9/11 unanswered by our government and the Bush appointed 911 Commisioners. For example, the FBI confiscated video clips, of whatever it was that hit the Pentagon, from a gas station, a hotel, and highway cams. These cameras were in the Public domain but yet the government will not release the footage.

    What is our government hiding and why? That is what your newspaper should be writing about and not bashing truly independent thinkers.



  48. 98
    Mr. Realist Says:

    Go to the library or the video store and rent CNN’s America Remembers. This is a memorial video about 9/11. This is straight news footage from CNN. Look at the Pentagon footage. Just watch it. There is no plane debris anywhere near the Pentagon. The lawn is perfect. It should be burned, with huge craters and skid marks. Watch for yourself. There are plenty of documentries that already took all of this footage and put it together(Loose Change, In Plane Site, 9/11 Eyewitness). But people are so scared of the truth, they think it’s altered or faked. Watch for yourself. Watch the segment on flight 93. There is no evidence of a plane crash there either. And their explanation to what happened to the plane is the “dumbest” statement I’ve ever heard. The reporter said, the plane hit ground so hard, that it literally crumpled into itself. WHAT?!!! I am not making this up. Go watch the video. Watch how the towers came down. You can see the explosions blowing out the sides of the building. A collapsing building does not project pulverized concrete and steel 300 ft. And do you know that the WTC were built in three sections. So how did it fall so fast. No hesitation, no pausing, one clean swoop. And the documentry 9/11, by the Naudet bros., this also is disturbing. Watch this again. Really watch it. There is so much evidence in this documentry, that I can’t believe they even released it. Watch the firefighters interviews. There is a whole section with just the firefighters talking. They all talk about explosins going off in the towers. Not floors collapsing, explosions going off. Heck, throughout the entire video, you can hear the explosions going off. At one point, the commentator says that its the bodies of the people that were jumping. God Bless their Souls, but bodies do not explode when they hit the ground. One scene you can actually see the firefighters jump, as one of the bombs goes off. And still in another scene, an explosion is heard, and two of the fireman quickly look towards the elevators, because that is where the sound came from. The firefighters talk about how the lobby was trashed, all of the glass window blown out, marble slabs from the walls blown apart. One of them said it looked as if the plane hit the lobby. And this was supposely done by a fireball that traveled down the elevator shaft. Firs of all, if that was the case, the lobby would be covered in black soot. Not white dusty powder. More like pulverized concrete. Second of all, fireballs do not create a shockwave. If you don’t believe me, maybe you will believe FEMA. This is right out their report, Chapter “Although dramatic, these fireballs did not explode or generate a shock wave. If an an explosion or detonation had occured, the expansion of the burning gasses would have taken plave in microseconds, not the 2 seconds observed. Therefore, although there were some overpressures, it is unlikely that the fireballs, being external to the buildings, would have resulted in significant structural damage.” That is FEMA. So even if a “fireball” made it to the lobby, it would have done no damage. I’ve been to Universal Studios. They had a Waterworld stunt attraction. At the end of the show they blew something up, and they let out this huge fireball. I could feel the heat against my face. But there was no shockwave. Besides, basically all 6 levels of the basement were demolished. How did that happen? And this fireball traveled almost a quarter of a mile down the elevator shaft to the lobby. Well the elevators in the WTC don’t go directly from the lobby to the top. They only go up a certain amount of floors, then you have to get out, and go into another elevator to get to the top. And also the elevator shafts are air tight. They were designed that way so a fire couldn’t spread. If you haven’t ever been in the WTC, you can’t appreciate the size of them. I had the privelage of visiting them several times. These buildings were massive. And a plane crashing into them brought them down? No way. Next time you see a big skyscraper, stop and look at it. Go inside it. You’ll see. Next, on this 9/11 documentry at one point a firefighter is getting dressed at the firhouse. He is talking to another firefighter. He asks him if the WTC partially collapsed. The other firefighter said no, the whole building came down. Then he goes on to say, as a matter of fact the FBI just came by and told us that a second plane hit the south tower, and that is what made it collapse. What?! This was after both planes struck both towers. A second plane?! A second plane?! Now I know it was confusing on 9/11. But the whole entire world was watching after flight 11 hit the first tower. And we all know a second plane was no where near NYC. So there you have the FBI starting the cover up. And that is not the first time I heard that either. I heard another news report stating a second plane hit the south tower. My point is, don’t watch the “conspiracy theory videos”, watch these other ones. The evidence is the same. Now even these Naudet bros. Who are these guys? How come they had full access to ground zero? They were supposed to be making a documentry on a rookie firefighter, then all of a sudden they have the clout to be allowed into ground zero? Wouldn’t that be a matter of national security? It’s crazy. The whole documentry is crazy. You realy need to watch the whole thing again. This firefighter who is commentating, he was supposely friends with the brothers. They, together chose the rookie firefighter that they wanted to film. Somehow this guy got him transfered to his fire station. How did he do that? Why did the fire chief let one of the brothers follow him into the WTC after it was struck? And what are the odds of them capturing that first plane hitting? It was all too perfect. I can go on all day about this documentry. Watch this again real close. I think more people knew this was coming than we think. Maybe not a the level that it happened, but maybe they were told it was going to be some sort of an exercise or real life drill. They had drill exercises planned for that day anyway. FEMA was in NYC a couple days before 9/11 preparing for these drills. I wish I could believe the official story. But I believe what my eyes see. And the gov’t isn’t doing anything to back up their story. Oh wait, they can. Release the Pentagon footage. I’ll hold my breath.

  49. 99
    Olatunde Aroloye Says:

    I live in Nigeria, and I have been following the 9/11 scam on and off from the beginning. People here lack awareness to understand the peril they are in. But I understand everything.

    There is no evidence that any airliner hit the Pentagon, there was no proven connection between Al-Qaeda and Saddam, Osama bin Laden is a known CIA asset, the bin Laden family are George Bush senior and junior’s business associates.

    This rubbish goes on and on and on, and the American people just sit there and sit there.

    I think white sugar does not only rot your teeth- it must also cause brain damage and testosterone/androgen dilution. Oh, and lay off the aspartame and MSG, Americans.

  50. 100
    chad Says:

    Mr. Realist,

    You obviously are not grounded in reality. have you ever seen a car crash? Cars crumple into themselves when they hit something at 3 miles per hor why wouldn’t a plane. Part of the problem with you guys is you dont really have an idea of what you are talking about. When a building is rigged for implosion small charges are placed at key structural points to sever them the building, bridge whatever then collapses. If you want to see a good example look at the King dome destruction back in 2000. The dust cloud that spread all over downtown Seattle wasn’t caused by the explosives it was caused by the over pressure of the dome collapsing. As reagrds over pressure in the world trade center. take a full glass beer bottle open it. smack your hand down on top of the neck and see what happens. The bottom shoots out. Multiply that by about a million. Finally grey powdery ash = complete combustion, black sooty ash = incomplete combustion. Ask any Engineering officer on a Navy ship.

    That is all.

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 » Show All