View Full Version : 9/11 Paper
QuEsTiOn AuThOrItY
2008-12-03, 21:22
Here's my compilation
http://listep.wordpress.com/
I've convinced almost everybody whose read this.
vazilizaitsev89
2008-12-04, 12:55
footnotes? Endnotes? Where are they??
QuEsTiOn AuThOrItY
2008-12-04, 21:35
footnotes? Endnotes? Where are they??
They're all in the paper.
It wasn't for a school project it was for people who just wanted to read it.
But did you actually read it?
vazilizaitsev89
2008-12-04, 23:01
I skimmed it. I've been researching your "Movement" (I use that term lightly) and I still dont believe it fits together. I know it wasnt for school, but you still need to cite work that isnt yours, I only asked b/c I didnt see any
QuEsTiOn AuThOrItY
2008-12-05, 23:20
I skimmed it. I've been researching your "Movement" (I use that term lightly) and I still dont believe it fits together. I know it wasnt for school, but you still need to cite work that isnt yours, I only asked b/c I didnt see any
For me actually the pieces fit together perfectly, it explains everything from why there were so many War-games and NORAD stood down, all the firsts (steel structures collapsing, grounded travel, terrorists getting past our fail safe trillion dollar defense system), why we're in the Middle East (what makes more sense, to fight for "freedom", or to gain money, power, and destroy rights of our people?)
All the work that wasn't mine was cited, and you can find all of the information on the sites or movies.
Ask me any question about the Truth movement and I'll try and answer it.
vazilizaitsev89
2008-12-06, 03:22
or here's another idea.
osama bin laden attacks the United States to provoke it into a financially disatrous war in Afghanistan (he did fight the soviets so he knows the area quite well). So, we went in after 9/11. Realizing the debt that China began to finance, Bush looks for a way to control China's growth. So we hit Iraq. By invading Iraq we can control Iraqs oil flow to China, which in turn would control China's growth, which by extension allows us to renegotiate the term of our debt, making it easier to pay it back. However, the plan backfired and made us even more bankrupt. The lack of available fighter cover? defense spending cuts a la the Clinton administration. The seizing of rights? just a matter of convience for the power elites.
EDIT: Terrorists HAD gotten past our system before, remember the '93 WTC attack? Remember oklahoma city? both terrorist attacks. The United States actually faces the most terrorist attacks, but we just describe them as crimes. Furthermore, all previous plane hijackings had resulted in negotiated landings and paying a terrorist ransom, NOT using them as cruise missiles.
(PS if you refer to that shit fest known as Loose change, what Donnie Rumsfeld meant by "missile" was an airborne projectile. Other missiles would include arrows, stones, bullets, those kinds of things)
QuEsTiOn AuThOrItY
2008-12-06, 04:11
or here's another idea.
osama bin laden attacks the United States to provoke it into a financially disatrous war in Afghanistan (he did fight the soviets so he knows the area quite well). So, we went in after 9/11. Realizing the debt that China began to finance, Bush looks for a way to control China's growth. So we hit Iraq. By invading Iraq we can control Iraqs oil flow to China, which in turn would control China's growth, which by extension allows us to renegotiate the term of our debt, making it easier to pay it back. However, the plan backfired and made us even more bankrupt. The lack of available fighter cover? defense spending cuts a la the Clinton administration. The seizing of rights? just a matter of convience for the power elites.
EDIT: Terrorists HAD gotten past our system before, remember the '93 WTC attack? Remember oklahoma city? both terrorist attacks. The United States actually faces the most terrorist attacks, but we just describe them as crimes. Furthermore, all previous plane hijackings had resulted in negotiated landings and paying a terrorist ransom, NOT using them as cruise missiles.
(PS if you refer to that shit fest known as Loose change, what Donnie Rumsfeld meant by "missile" was an airborne projectile. Other missiles would include arrows, stones, bullets, those kinds of things)
We (large corporations) already control the world's oil, first of all. Second the Saudi's have the most oil, and power over it, plus almost all of the "hijackers" were from there which would have given us a better excuse to attack than "those Mooslims were from the Middle East, so let's just attack a random Middle Eastern country that has two of the biggest terrorist organizations that were coincidentally created by us!". Iraq was not a plan to control the oil (sure that was a huge plus, but not the big picture), it was a plan to establish hegemony in the Middle East, give an excuse to drastically increase defense and National Security spending, and slowly implement drastic measures inside our own country in order to exercise even greater control over our, and the world's, peoples under the guise of the threat of "terrorism". Oil and keeping China in check are small parts of the broader spectrum. The U.S. and China may act like we hate each other, but really we're all friends with the same goal (I hate to say it) world domination.
Second, the war was not a "mistake", as many may think, but a precise plan to implement the measures above. Already Obama has doubled the time he promised that he would get our troops out (18 months to 2011), all we have to do is find an excuse to stay there, a war, to protect against "political unrest" or otherwise, mark my words it will happen. If you look at some quotes from troops in Iraq they'll tell you that the bases there are permanent (quick link http://middleeast.about.com/od/iraq/a/me080613.htm, not to mention our palace there, the embassy), and we're not going anywhere.
Those terrorist attacks were much easier to pull off. Parking a car in a garage or in front of a building is much much much much easier than getting past the world's largest, most well funded, and most sophisticated defense system, not once, not twice, not three times, but four times (May I remind you that the military has a 100% interception rate, and the four times it did "fail" were in the very same day), one maybe, but four times?!?! NEVER in this world.
P.S. I hate to say this but look up the Oklahoma bombing conspiracy, all may not be what it seems....
Loose Change is the beginner's conspiracy film, 9/11 Mysteries is much better and 9/11: Road to Tyranny is also very good.
vazilizaitsev89
2008-12-06, 04:34
We (large corporations) already control the world's oil, first of all. The Largest Oil Companies are Saudi State RunSecond the Saudi's have the most oil, and power over it, plus almost all of the "hijackers" were from there which would have given us a better excuse to attack than "those Mooslims were from the Middle East, so let's just attack a random Middle Eastern country that has two of the biggest terrorist organizations that were coincidentally created by us!"Invading Saudi Arabia would have been total suicide. Every muslim man woman and child would have mobilized against us. Iraq was not a plan to control the oil (sure that was a huge plus, but not the big picture), it was a plan to establish hegemony in the Middle East, give an excuse to drastically increase defense and National Security spending, and slowly implement drastic measures inside our own country in order to exercise even greater control over our, and the world's, peoples under the guise of the threat of "terrorism". If hegemony was the key, Iraq, Iran and Syria would have to have been conquered simultaneouslyOil and keeping China in check are small parts of the broader spectrum. The U.S. and China may act like we hate each other, but really we're all friends with the same goal (I hate to say it) world domination.If that's the case, then why are the chinese supporting the russian vote in the UNSC and not ours? The Chinese are financing the Russian Bear, that's why your seeing a spread of Russian influence throughout the world
Second, the war was not a "mistake", as many may think, but a precise plan to implement the measures above. Already Obama has doubled the time he promised that he would get our troops out (18 months to 2011), all we have to do is find an excuse to stay there, a war, to protect against "political unrest" or otherwise, mark my words it will happen.Obama has no choice...for now. He is not the president and the SoFA agreement was done under Bush, it can be altered later If you look at some quotes from troops in Iraq they'll tell you that the bases there are permanent (quick link http://middleeast.about.com/od/iraq/a/me080613.htm, not to mention our palace there, the embassy), and we're not going anywhere.
Those terrorist attacks were much easier to pull off. Parking a car in a garage or in front of a building is much much much much easier than getting past the world's largest, most well funded, and most sophisticated defense system, not once, not twice, not three times, but four times (May I remind you that the military has a 100% interception rate, and the four times it did "fail" were in the very same day), one maybe, but four times?!?! NEVER in this world. The Titanic was the worlds most advanced, well-built steam-liner, yet a series of accidents (and a rather large chunk of ice) brought her down
P.S. I hate to say this but look up the Oklahoma bombing conspiracy, all may not be what it seems....
Loose Change is the beginner's conspiracy film, 9/11 Mysteries is much better and 9/11: Road to Tyranny is also very good.
sorry for the bold letters, its a matter of convience I'm not sure of an easier way to break up quotes
QuEsTiOn AuThOrItY
2008-12-07, 16:59
sorry for the bold letters, its a matter of convience I'm not sure of an easier way to break up quotes
Is that true? I would think that the Saudi's control the oil, but the corporations of other countries are larger. Like Shell, BP, and Exxon.
That's why we didn't do it.Sometimes you have to start slow. If we would have invaded multiple countries there would be a global outcry.
Because we all have the same goal.
I seriously doubt that the troops will be pulled out within 18 months as he promised, or even by 2011 as is the new plan.
Contrary to popular belief the Titanic was not labeled as unsinkable until after it sunk. The White Star Line never labeled the Titanic as unsinkable before the accident. Also it sank in what? Three hours? The Towers collapsed in an hour and a half. The Titanic sank slowly, the towers fell fast.
But I don't think that a boat is an apt comparison....
lostmyface
2008-12-07, 19:09
OP, if you really are the author of that piece then job well done.
QuEsTiOn AuThOrItY
2008-12-07, 19:24
OP, if you really are the author of that piece then job well done.
Thank you very much appreciated, and yes I am.
Here's my compilation
http://listep.wordpress.com/
I've convinced almost everybody whose read this.
Now I'll admit I've read only the timeline at the start of the document, but whereas every one of those claims needs a legitimate citation to be taken seriously, it appears that none of them do...
See, I personally don't believe that 9/11 went down the way the government says it did, but when all the "exposes" and "revelations" don't have seem to have serious sources, it makes you wonder what the deal is... However, the "official" version of events certainly doesn't add up, and no-one appears to have made the attempt to answer the very valid questions levelled.
All in all - it's hard to make a decision without proper evidence...
QuEsTiOn AuThOrItY
2008-12-17, 01:43
Now I'll admit I've read only the timeline at the start of the document, but whereas every one of those claims needs a legitimate citation to be taken seriously, it appears that none of them do...
See, I personally don't believe that 9/11 went down the way the government says it did, but when all the "exposes" and "revelations" don't have seem to have serious sources, it makes you wonder what the deal is... However, the "official" version of events certainly doesn't add up, and no-one appears to have made the attempt to answer the very valid questions levelled.
All in all - it's hard to make a decision without proper evidence...
Yes the government story is complete hogwash.
About the time line. I got most of it from Journal Of 911 Studies, I'm pretty sure they cite it, the rest I got from 9/11 Press For Truth and they certainly cite.
But read the whole paper, I do not post my opinions, I just present you with the evidence and let you decide.
Green Lantern
2008-12-22, 01:53
I was convinced after only the first few paragraphs. Convinced you're full of shit.
The Duvalls are Obama's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandparents, and Cheney's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandparents, the paper said.
George W. Bush and Obama, meanwhile, are 10th cousins once removed
Ever heard of the idea of "six degrees of separation"? You've linked politicians together by 18 degrees. I'm not impressed.
I don't know about you, but personally, I don't have a close relationship to my 18th cousins. I bet at least a couple of them were serial killers and child molesters. It doesn't mean shit to me.
If later on in your rant you actually have a point, then please accept my sincerest apologies for not reading further, and please write a better opening.
Mackdaddy818
2008-12-27, 23:53
"This thereby means that Barack Obama is related to George W. Bush, and his father (and grandfather, Prescott Bush, a Nazi) likewise."
Prescott Bush wasnt a nazi, people like you pull shit out of your ass. you are a disgrace to the American culture. have a little respect
redjoker
2008-12-30, 01:53
"This thereby means that Barack Obama is related to George W. Bush, and his father (and grandfather, Prescott Bush, a Nazi) likewise."
Prescott Bush wasnt a nazi, people like you pull shit out of your ass. you are a disgrace to the American culture. have a little respect
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100474,00.html
Close enough.
TruthWielder
2008-12-30, 04:38
"This thereby means that Barack Obama is related to George W. Bush, and his father (and grandfather, Prescott Bush, a Nazi) likewise."
Prescott Bush wasnt a nazi, people like you pull shit out of your ass. you are a disgrace to the American culture. have a little respect
Why are you defending Prescott Bush? His family was clearly affiliated with the third reich my friend, sorry to say.
A question OP, are there underground organizations trying to stop all this or am I just looking in the wrong places?
QuEsTiOn AuThOrItY
2008-12-30, 20:04
Why are you defending Prescott Bush? His family was clearly affiliated with the third reich my friend, sorry to say.
A question OP, are there underground organizations trying to stop all this or am I just looking in the wrong places?
He was at that.
Well there is the massive 9/11 Truth movement, which is certainly trying to stop the lies and disinformation.
But if you are inquiring to if there are any paramilitary groups, I would say the closest thing would be Anarchists...
TruthWielder
2009-01-02, 02:49
He was at that.
Well there is the massive 9/11 Truth movement, which is certainly trying to stop the lies and disinformation.
But if you are inquiring to if there are any paramilitary groups, I would say the closest thing would be Anarchists...
I don't mean terrorist fucktards, I mean an organization that looks into what the government does and tries to connect the dots on a macrocosmic scale.
QuEsTiOn AuThOrItY
2009-01-02, 18:09
I don't mean terrorist fucktards, I mean an organization that looks into what the government does and tries to connect the dots on a macrocosmic scale.
Well that's no way to ask for information :rolleyes:
Well I would guess the closet thing would be say Alex Jones.
prisonplanet.com
infowars.com
I'm sure you could find other websites.
droppinds
2009-01-03, 20:14
Terrorists HAD gotten past our system before, remember the '93 WTC attack? Remember oklahoma city? both terrorist attacks. The United States actually faces the most terrorist attacks, but we just describe them as crimes. Furthermore, all previous plane hijackings had resulted in negotiated landings and paying a terrorist ransom, NOT using them as cruise missiles
in the 93' WTC attack the FBI gave the terrorists the materials they needed its known. And don't even try talking about OKC. First of all Terry Nichols has said he is willing to speak out about the FBI's involvment in the bombing and he was going to. However the govnernment issued a gag order against him so he can't for now. Its well known there was a second bomb that went off, contrary to the official story. THeres even a national geographic documentary proving it. Also the FBI claimed there was a period of a few months where they didn't know where timothy mcveigh was (prior to the bombing) but it turns out timothy mcveigh was training on a US MILITARY BASE this was after his stint in the military but before the bombing. Now how can the FBI say they didnt know where he was but it turns out he was on a US military base after his service was over? And theres a video proving it. None of this is secret info its publicly out there.
And about the Iraqi oil thing. No one talks about OPEC. The idea that we went into Iraq to control their oil is idiotic we have no power over that. Iraq is an OPEC country. So OPEC controls and sets quotas for its member countries on how much oil they can pump. Iraq was pumping 1.3 million barrels before, during, and after the war (after "Mission Accomplished"). The US would be silly to challenge OPEC. That is what Hugo CHavez's predecessor tried to do, he tried to pump above his OPEC quota. In turn OPEC flooded venezuala with cheap Saudia Arabian oil and this led to Venezuela losing money and his presidency falling apart. Hence why Hugo Chavez loves OPEC and high oil prices.
And to the moron defending Prescott Bush. Prescott Bush was one of the leaders of a coup against FDR in the 30's. They wanted a Fscist Nazi style government to get us out of the Great Depression. Which ultimately failed because the ex-military guy they asked to lead hundreds of thousands of Vets against the govn't double crossed them and reported the coup to the authorities. And there were congressional hearings on the plot that are publicly available. Ofcourse obviously there were no arrests. This has even received coverage in the mainstream news. And Prescott Bush along with the Rockefellars and many others tycoons was shipping and selling much needed supplies to Germany mostly through subsidies in Latin American countries. The government knew about this but didn't stop it.