CNN Covering 9/11 Discrepancies - really!

Open discussion about any topic, as long as you abide by the rules of course!
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

CNN Covering 9/11 Discrepancies - really!

Post by R00k »

I was flipping through the channels last night at home and came across something on CNN that made me do a double-take. They were interviewing Alex Jones, with legitimate questions!

The show was apparently aired in response to Charlie Sheen's remarks about details of 9/11 being whitewashed and covered up. I am a little put off by their choice of Alex Jones to represent the 9/11 truth community, but he was the one who interviewed Charlie Sheen when he made his statements, so I guess it was fair play.

At any rate, it seems that they've had a surprisingly (to them) large influx of responses from the public about the issue and their show:
http://www.wanttoknow.info/060324cnnquestions911

Will they go further and do any more in-depth shows? Will CNN actually help increase the public's awareness of how obviously erroneous the official story is on very important events?

I hope so. Stay tuned, there may be something worth watching on CNN in the near future. :o!
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

U CAN THANK ALEX JONES FOR THAT...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

Post by R00k »

As much as I hate to say it, you're right.
[xeno]Julios
Posts: 6216
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am

Post by [xeno]Julios »

showbiz tonight interview with alex jones

http://www.911podcasts.com/files/video/ ... 060323.wmv

i'm glad this is happening, but i really can't stand alex jones (and i didn't know who he was until watching this clip)

look for the comment about him bragging about dating girls in highschool... :icon27:
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

alex jones is the man...a deluded christian, but he is still the man...now fuck off...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
4days
Posts: 5465
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2002 7:00 am

Post by 4days »

whether the two big towers were pulled or not - tower 7 was, right? i've seen footage of the tower manager (or someone of equal stature and relevance) saying that they decided to pull it. how come that's being questioned? was blowing it up the right thing to do in terms of safety?

fair play to charlie sheen for putting a famous face on the conspiracy theory - whether or not it's true isn't all that matters. there's way, way too much about 9/11 that could be made public and hasn't been.
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

did u see the squibs on wtc7? so fucking obvious...i'll go find em...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
Pext
Posts: 4257
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 7:00 am

Post by Pext »

how long does it usually take to install these charges? about 2 weeks?
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

Post by R00k »

4days wrote:whether the two big towers were pulled or not - tower 7 was, right? i've seen footage of the tower manager (or someone of equal stature and relevance) saying that they decided to pull it. how come that's being questioned? was blowing it up the right thing to do in terms of safety?

fair play to charlie sheen for putting a famous face on the conspiracy theory - whether or not it's true isn't all that matters. there's way, way too much about 9/11 that could be made public and hasn't been.
The question about WTC7, to me, is twofold. First, if the owner of the building went on national television to say they had demolished it, then why does the official story claim the complete opposite? Second, if WTC7 was demolished, then why in the world is it so impossible to imagine that other buildings were as well?

The whole point is to bring attention to the questions which cannot be answered by the official story, and therefore are being completely ignored, much to the chagrin of the victims' families as well as that of anyone else wanting real information about what happened that day and finding no answers despite a million dollar effort by the government which culminated in what they claimed was the complete description of the events that occurred to allow the attacks to happen.

Which will inevitably bring people to question things like: Why were military and intelligence officials who had information pertinent to the attacks and terrorists, censored out of the Commission's final report, even though they gave testimony; and, Why are there valid accounts in newspapers and media in the world, that several of the supposed hijackers involved are still alive today?

Those being only two questions in a long list of what has not been explained - and therefore by logic, has been either covered up or hidden, since omitting very pertinent testimony from government officials does not lend any credence to the idea that they were just overlooked.
User avatar
Transient
Posts: 11357
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Transient »

Don't forget your tinfoil hat!
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

Transient wrote:Don't forget your tinfoil hat!
thoroughly brainwashed...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
4days
Posts: 5465
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2002 7:00 am

Post by 4days »

The Ground Zero Grassy Knoll

another 9/11 story, maybe old or already posted - but worth at least a scan through, seems like pretty level-headed stuff. goes on for quite a few pages, introducing key facts with nice anecdotes and breaking down the major conspiracy theories.
In the 9/11 Truth cosmology, the destruction of 7 World Trade Center is akin to Jack Ruby’s shooting Lee Harvey Oswald. Seven WTC was the home of secrets. It had to go. Central to the scenario is a comment made by Silverstein in a 2002 PBS documentary.

“We’ve had such a terrible loss of life,” he quotes himself as saying on 9/11. “Maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.”

“Pull it,” as Truth people never tire of repeating, is the term usually used for controlled demolition.
that was the bit i was wondering about, he does just say 'pull it' - but in the context, it's hard to imagine what else he might have meant.

(A) The Official Story (a.k.a. “The Official Conspiracy Theory”). The received Bushian line: Osama, nineteen freedom-haters with box cutters, etc. As White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said, there was “no warning.”

(B) The Incompetence Theory (also the Stupidity, Arrogance, “Reno Wall” Theory). Accepts the Official Story, adds failure by the White House, FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. to heed ample warnings. This line was advanced, with much ass-covering compensation, in The 9/11 Commission Report.

(C) LIHOP (or “Let It Happen on Purpose”). Many variations, but primarily that elements of the U.S. government and the private sector were aware of the hijackers’ plans and, recognizing that 9/11 suited their policy goals, did nothing to stop it.

(D) MIHOP (“Made It Happen on Purpose”). The U.S. government or private forces planned and executed the attacks.
9/11 conspiracy theories, from nuts to soup.

Mossad Did It
A common theory, especially in the Arab world, holds that Israel orchestrated the attacks in order to bring the U.S. into conflict with Israel’s enemies. Evidence cited ranges from the arly spurious and deeply anti-Semitic (the oft-heard, oft-refuted canard that Jews were told to leave the towers before the attacks) to the apparently true but unexplainable. (Five men who were seen filming the attacks in Liberty Park were later apprehended and found by the Forward to have ties to Mossad.)

Oilmen Did It
A theory based on the idea that worldwide oil production, having reached its peak, is beginning a long decline, leading to surging energy prices and global economic collapse. The 9/11 attacks, goes this scenario, were orchestrated by Cheney, Bush, and their friends in the oil industry and government, in order to begin a process that would secure further reserves in Iraq and increase the U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf.

Bush and Cheney Did it
The most basic of conspiracy theories. Bush and Cheney orchestrated the attacks, for much the same reason Roosevelt was sometimes said to have orchestrated Pearl Harbor: in order to begin the conflict that would allow them to realize their global ambitions.

The New World Order Did It
After winning a long struggle against the old Kissingerian pragmatists and balance-of-power devotees, neocon idealists centered at the Council on Foreign Relations initiated the conflict in order to establish the United States as the sole global power.

A Rogue Network Did It
A secret government used Bush and Cheney as patsies in carrying out the attacks. Bush was kept on the run in Air Force One (code-named “Angel”) by an anonymous call saying, “Angel is next.” Bin Laden and his henchmen were CIA plants and double agents. Britain’s MI6 intelligence service was involved. The towers were blown up from inside, by teams of secret government assassins. Even Bush and Cheney are in the dark about why the attacks took place.

Shrinks Did It
Scientologists believe that psychiatry (through a mechanism that remains murky) helped give birth to the suicide attackers “through drugs and psycho-political methods.”
Hannibal
Posts: 1853
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2000 8:00 am

Re: CNN Covering 9/11 Discrepancies - really!

Post by Hannibal »

4days wrote: Scientologists believe that psychiatry (through a mechanism that remains murky) helped give birth to the suicide attackers “through drugs and psycho-political methods.”
Image
Nightshade
Posts: 17020
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Nightshade »

R00k wrote: Second, if WTC7 was demolished, then why in the world is it so impossible to imagine that other buildings were as well?
Because, as I've said before, it was completely unnecssesary. The public outrage needed to frame the new Enemy of the Month would be generated by the attacks alone. Also, it would have meant that the charges were in place well before the attacks, which is highly implausible. For WTC7, it's a different story. Building's damaged but relatively stable, get some crews in there, wire up the needed charges and bring it down. As you said, building manager admitted it happened.
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

Post by R00k »

There were hundreds of billions of dollars made by the buildings falling down, which is a clear motive by any definition. The only way to get around that motive without investigating it, is either to ignore it, or to take it on faith that people would never do such a thing.

Also, if WTC7 - which I think is around 50 stories tall - can be rigged for a demo in just a couple of hours, then how would it be highly implausible for the 110-story towers to be rigged before hand?

We're getting sidetracked again though - the main issue here as I've said before, is that there still has never been any kind of real investigation into the attacks.

This is the biggest attack on American soil in history. And all we have is a Bush-appointed team of completely unqualified career politicians with conflicts of interest, who have inexplicably omitted key testimony from witnesses, experts and military and intelligence operatives, whose statements did not corroborate the version of events the Commission wanted to put forward. That much is a matter of public record.

All these crazy theories that are bing put forward are only people trying to explain what has not been explained. Sane people will try to do that from time to time - and if these theories seem to be crazy, it is a symptom of the fact that the official theory cannot live up to the simple decree of explaining the events that led up to the attacks; not a symptom of the theorists' mental instability or subversive personalities.

There was a poll on CNN's website after the shows aired, and 82% of people who responded agreed with Charlie Sheen that information has been covered up and witheld.
Yes it's just an internet poll, but since it was linked to on CNN's front page, then if nothing else it provides a glimpse of how many quote-unquote 'mainstream' CNN readers are going to have to be locked up for being 'tin-foil-hat loonies.'
Nightshade
Posts: 17020
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Nightshade »

Regardless of what happened, there will never be any real investigation, because (I firmly believe) that the government needed the attacks to happen and serve as a pretense for executing a series of planned events.

As for WTC 7, it was already damaged, but there was time for teams of engineers to figure out what exactly needed to be done to drop the building. Pushing over a half-chopped leaning tree doesn't take anywhere near the effort it does to chop one down from scratch.
Nightshade[no u]
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

wtc was gonna have to be destroyed anywyas by 2025...some kind of engineering flaws or something...this was the perfect way for them to do that and start the endless wars and fascism...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
Maiden
Posts: 832
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Maiden »

Nightshade wrote: As for WTC 7, it was already damaged, but there was time for teams of engineers to figure out what exactly needed to be done to drop the building. Pushing over a half-chopped leaning tree doesn't take anywhere near the effort it does to chop one down from scratch.
so damaged or not, you are saying that what would be the tallest building ever imploded could be brought down in less than 7 hrs. and wired up while flames are burning freely inside????

and i would have to argue the point about a damaged building taking less effort. you have to rely on the buildings ingerity to bring it down the way you want it. when the ingerity is all fubar you are taking many more chances of the thing falling over sidways or something.
look at the murrah fed buidling, they brought that down in a big hurry to ease they emotional scar and they didn't do that in a day. and it was only 6-7 stories
Maiden
Posts: 832
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Maiden »

and the biggest question for me about the implosion idea is where was the noise. you have a handfull of explosions going off in a row before the building falls, where are the people that witnessed this?

I watched the kingdome go poof from about two miles away and you could hear the tnt clear as day. There had to be at least 25,000 people closer to #7 then I was to the dome(and prob. more like 100,000) and there are no reports of multiple explosions?
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

as for the towers...those buildings r unique...the core is in the interior of the buildings so the explosions would have been less loud...many reports of explosions from ppl inside and firefighters in basement...with wtc7 there were many reports of explosions as it came down...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

btw...anyone who thinks that 19 arabs with boxcutters brought down two 100+ story towers, a 47 story building, severely damaged the most protected building in the world...got norad to stand down for 1 hour and 20 minutes, turned off the pentagon's missile defense system, crashed a plane into a field...in addition to...ah fuck it...thats enuff...anyone who even entertains moronics like this is too far in the world of retardednessy to by saved...oh well...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
Maiden
Posts: 832
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Maiden »

lol.

and you could never land a cessna on the white house lawn.
Nightshade
Posts: 17020
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Nightshade »

Maiden wrote:
Nightshade wrote: As for WTC 7, it was already damaged, but there was time for teams of engineers to figure out what exactly needed to be done to drop the building. Pushing over a half-chopped leaning tree doesn't take anywhere near the effort it does to chop one down from scratch.
so damaged or not, you are saying that what would be the tallest building ever imploded could be brought down in less than 7 hrs. and wired up while flames are burning freely inside????

and i would have to argue the point about a damaged building taking less effort. you have to rely on the buildings ingerity to bring it down the way you want it. when the ingerity is all fubar you are taking many more chances of the thing falling over sidways or something.
look at the murrah fed buidling, they brought that down in a big hurry to ease they emotional scar and they didn't do that in a day. and it was only 6-7 stories
Ok, apparently you're just tuning in here. I do NOT believe that the towers were brought down by demo charges. The manager of WTC7 admitted on TV that the decision was made to "pull it".
http://killtown.911review.org/wtc7.html

WTC 7 came down 7 hours after the attacks. I think that's enough time to get people in and wire it up. At least it's feasible. Getting demolition charges right at the sites of the damage in BOTH the North and South towers in less than an hour is fucking ludicrous.
[xeno]Julios
Posts: 6216
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am

Post by [xeno]Julios »

ok wtf - it looks like a blackout - i just searched cnn's website for charlie sheen, and can't find anything about the story - wtf?

can someone point me to a link?
Post Reply