7 Reasons 9/11 Could NOT Have Been An Inside Job

Below, we’ll show that 9/11 could NOT have been an inside job …

I. The 9/11 Commission and Congressional Investigation Into 9/11 All Disproved Any Conspiracy

9/11 was thoroughly and exhaustively investigated by the 9/11 Commission, Congress and U.S. scientific agencies.

This horse has already been beat to death, and anyone who raises questions is a nutjob.

True, the 9/11 Commission didn’t believe that the government told the truth about 9/11,  and said the government obstructed their investigation.

For example:

  • The Commission’s co-chairs said that the CIA (and likely the White House) “obstructed our investigation”
  • The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) – who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry – said “At some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened“. He also said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”

Some examples of obstruction of justice into the 9/11 investigation include:

  • An FBI informant hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000. Specifically, investigators for the Congressional Joint Inquiry discovered that an FBI informant had hosted and even rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House. As the New York Times notes:

Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused the White House on Tuesday of covering up evidence ….The accusation stems from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s refusal to allow investigators for a Congressional inquiry and the independent Sept. 11 commission to interview an informant, Abdussattar Shaikh, who had been the landlord in San Diego of two Sept. 11 hijackers.

  • The chairs of both the 9/11 Commission and the Official Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 said that Soviet-style government “minders” obstructed the investigation into 9/11 by intimidating witnesses (and see this)
  • The 9/11 Commissioners concluded that officials from the Pentagon lied to the Commission, and considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements
  • As reported by ACLU, FireDogLake, RawStory and many others, declassified documents shows that Senior Bush administration officials sternly cautioned the 9/11 Commission against probing too deeply into the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001

The CIA also videotaped the interrogation of 9/11 suspects, falsely told the 9/11 Commission that there were no videotapes or other records of the interrogations, and then illegally destroyed all of the tapes and transcripts of the interrogations.

9/11 Commission co-chairs Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton wrote:

Those who knew about those videotapes — and did not tell us about them — obstructed our investigation.

The chief lawyer for Guantanamo litigation – Vijay Padmanabhan – said that torture of 9/11 suspects was widespread.

And Susan J. Crawford – the senior Pentagon official overseeing the military commissions at Guantánamo told Bob Woodward:

We tortured Qahtani. His treatment met the legal definition of torture.

Indeed, some of the main sources of information were tortured right up to the point of death.

Moreover, the type of torture used by the U.S. on the Guantanamo suspects is of a special type. Senator Levin revealed that the the U.S. used Communist torture techniques specifically aimed at creating false confessions. (and see this, this, this and this).

And according to NBC News:

  • Much of the 9/11 Commission Report was based upon the testimony of people who were tortured
  • At least four of the people whose interrogation figured in the 9/11 Commission Report have claimed that they told interrogators information as a way to stop being “tortured”
  • One of the Commission’s main sources of information was tortured until he agreed to sign a confession that he was NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO READ
  • The 9/11 Commission itself doubted the accuracy of the torture confessions, and yet kept their doubts to themselves

Indeed, the Co-Chair of the congressional investigation into 9/11 (Bob Graham)  and 9/11 Commissioner and former Senator Bob Kerrey are calling for either a “PERMANENT 9/11 commission” or a NEW 9/11 investigation to get to the bottom of it.

But hey … nothing’s perfect.  We should just let bygones be bygones.

II. No One Could Have Foreseen 9/11

No one could have foreseen the diabolical 9/11 plan.    After all, America has not been directly attacked for centuries.

And crashing planes into buildings?  No one could have imagined such an out-of-the-blue attack.

True, overwhelming evidence shows that 9/11 was foreseeable.  And Al Qaeda crashing planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was itself foreseeable. (even the chair of the 9/11 Commission said that the attack was preventable).

And a top NSA whistleblower says that the NSA had all of the information it needed prior to 9/11 to stop the attacks. The only reason NSA didn’t share that information with other agencies is because of corruption … in an effort to consolidate power. And widespread spying by the U.S. government on Americans began before 9/11 (confirmed here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here). And the government tapped the 9/11 hijackers’ phones, and heard the 9/11 hijackers’ plans from their own mouths.

But our government officials were busy at the time … and maybe they just took their eyes of the ball.

Anyway, knowing it could happen doesn’t mean that they let it happen on purpose.

III. They Didn’t Have Time to Stop It

Even when government officials realized what was happening, they didn’t have time to react and stop it.

After all, the hijacked planes were being flown hundreds of miles an hour.  And by the time our government and military men knew what was happening, it was all over.

True, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) – responsible for intercepting errant aircraft over the U.S. – has a standard operating procedure for scrambling planes for interception which takes only a few minutes.

NORAD regularly and successfully scrambled fighter jets in response to suspicious or unidentified aircraft flying in US airspace in the years preceding 9/11.  See this report from the General Accounting Office and this article from AP.  To do this, NORAD keeps a pair of fighters on “alert” at sites around the U.S. These fighters are fueled, armed, and ready to take off within minutes of receiving a scramble order. See these reports from American Defender, Air Force Magazine, Bergen Record, 12/5/2003 and The First 600 Days of Combat (page 14).

For example, NORAD scrambled:

  • Between 1990 and 1994, NORAD scrambled 1,518 fighter jets (page 4)
  • Between 1996 and 1998, NORAD’s Western Air Defense Sector scrambled fighters 129 times to identify unknown aircraft that might be a threat, and 42 times against potential and actual drug smugglers
  • In 1997, NORAD’s Southeast Air Defense Sector tracked 427 unidentified aircraft, and fighters intercepted these “unknowns” 36 times. The same year, NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector handled 65 unidentified tracks and the Western Air Defense Sector handles 104 unidentified tracks
  • In 1998, the Southeast Air Defense Sector logged more than 400 fighter scrambles
  • In 1999, NORAD’s fighters at a single base – Homestead Air Reserve Base in Florida – scrambled 75 times per year, on average
  • In 2000, NORAD’s fighters fly 147 intercept missions
  • And between September 2000 and June 2001, NORAD flew 67 intercepts

Yet, on September 11th, they failed to do their job 4 times in a single day:

You might think that the military couldn’t find the hijacked planes because the hijackers turned off the transponders. However, a former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew “like the back of my hand” and who handled two actual hijackings says that planes can be tracked on radar even when their transponders are turned off (also, listen to this interview).

The Director of the American U.S. “Star Wars” space defense program in both Republican and Democratic administrations, who was a senior air force colonel who flew 101 combat missions (Col. Robert Bowman) said:

If our government had merely [done] nothing, and I say that as an old interceptor pilot—I know the drill, I know what it takes, I know how long it takes, I know what the procedures are, I know what they were, and I know what they’ve changed them to—if our government had merely done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason!

U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director, decorated with the Purple Heart, the Bronze Star and the Soldiers Medal (Capt. Daniel Davis) stated:

There is no way that an aircraft . . . would not be intercepted when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders, or stop communication with Air Traffic Control … Attempts to obscure facts by calling them a ‘conspiracy Theory’ does not change the truth. It seems, ‘Something is rotten in the State.’

NORAD’s actions on 9/11 were so odd that it was forced to give 3 entirely different versions of what happened that day, as each previous version has been exposed as false. When someone repeatedly changes his testimony after being caught in lies, how believable is he?  The falsity of NORAD’s explanations were so severe that even the 9/11 Commission considered recommending criminal charges for the making of false statements.

But hey, they probably just had an off day.

IV. No One Could Keep Such a Big Conspiracy Secret … Someone Would Have Spilled the Beans

If Americans were somehow involved in letting 9/11 occur, someone would have talked.

Some jerk would have had too much to drink, and bragged about his dastardly deed at a bar.

True, military analyst and Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said: “Secrets … can be kept reliably … for decades … even though they are known to THOUSANDS of insiders.”

And many other huge projects involving many thousands of people were kept secret for many years.

But that can’t be true for 9/11  (even though government officials say that 9/11 was state -sponsored terrorism).

V. Our Government Wouldn’t DO Something Like That

Third, there’s no way government officials, military or intelligence personnel – who are sworn to protect and defend America – would do something like that!

True, the U.S. government officials have admitted that they’ve repeatedly carried out false flag attacks.

But 9/11 was obviously different.

VI. Our Free Press Would Have Uncovered and Reported On Any Conspiracy

Reporters compete for scoops, and the free press would have made any conspiracy front-page news … if there was one.

It’s true that American media tends to support the government’s justifications for every war.

And Daniel Ellsberg says that the government has ordered the media not to cover 9/11:

Ellsberg seemed hardly surprised that today’s American mainstream broadcast media has so far failed to take [former FBI translator and 9/11 whistleblower Sibel] Edmonds up on her offer, despite the blockbuster nature of her allegations [which Ellsberg calls “far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers”]. As Edmonds has also alluded, Ellsberg pointed to the New York Times, who “sat on the NSA spying story for over a year” when they “could have put it out before the 2004 election, which might have changed the outcome.”

There will be phone calls going out to the media saying ‘don’t even think of touching it, you will be prosecuted for violating national security,’” he told us.

Similarly, Air Force Colonel and key Pentagon official Karen Kwiatkowski – who blew the whistle on the Bush administration’s efforts to concoct false intelligence about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction – wrote (page 26):

I have been told by reporters that they will not report their own insights or contrary evaluations of the official 9/11 story, because to question the government story about 9/11 is to question the very foundations of our entire modern belief system regarding our government, our country, and our way of life. To be charged with questioning these foundations is far more serious than being labeled a disgruntled conspiracy nut or anti-government traitor, or even being sidelined or marginalized within an academic, government service, or literary career. To question the official 9/11 story is simply and fundamentally revolutionary. In this way, of course, questioning the official story is also simply and fundamentally American.

But 9/11 was such a big event that – if there was anything odd – the big news organization would have drilled down to find out what really happened on 9/11.

VII. You Don’t Want to Be Labeled As Crazy (Or Worse) … Do You?

If – after reading the 6 facts above – you still question 9/11, then you might need a friendly warning …

If you don’t knock it off, you might be labeled crazy … or a terrorist.

After all, we’ve got to censor those darn conspiracy theories.

We hope that the above-described essay disproves – once and for all – all of the crazy theories going around the Intertubes, and that everyone will shut up once and for all about 9/11.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.
  • John Jones

    UTTER BULLSHIT article. After going through everything that was posted on here, it’s a piece of piss to rip apart. A truly pathetic attempt to cover up a massive COVERUP.

    • Ned

      I believe the author was being sarcastic with the title.

      • nomadfiles

        obliviously

    • Rob MacDonald

      sarcasm. fucking google it before you comment man, it’s a life saver

  • Bubble Buster

    Is this article satire? If not, then it’s HOGWASH.

    A&E for 9/11 Truth; Experts Speak Out – In It’s Entirety
    An army of experts speak out about 9/11 and the evidence which points to 9/11 being an inside job from the start.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_Lu_Fl6_IA

    9/11: Best Physical Evidence for Explosives (revised)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3zz2o_8WKQ

    • Carl_Herman

      Dude; I appreciate the comment and your education. That said, it’s looking at an argument from the counter-position; a useful position to see how reasonable your opponents’ argument is. In this case, as you state: all the facts appear to be one one side.

      Maybe this explains why my attempts at satire aren’t very popular…

  • Math & Physics

    Here is the one reason to contradict all the BS. PHYSICS is 100% repeatable by definition. Until someone can show how an aluminum projectile can cut through structural building steel at subsonic speed, all the subjective BS is just that, subjective.

    • Benji0804

      That’s because the twin towers were of a tube design and a plane hitting it weakened it to the
      point it collapsed. Think of it as a house of cards you toss a paper airplane into it the house of
      cards it will collapse without being supported by other cards.

      • Math & Physics

        And yet the materials you want to hold up, do not have the property of IONIC BONDING. Which invalidates all the BS you’re trying to perpetuate, mr C&P.

      • knifemare69

        No, the Twin Towers were GIANT FREAKING RECTANGLES, NOT TUBES!!!

        If you can’t even tell the difference between a *cylindrical* object like a tube and a *rectangular* object like a modern skyscraper, then NOTHING you have to say is worth a damn.

        Move on, government troll. Ain’t nobody buying your snake oil here…

        • knifemare69
        • Benji0804
          • knifemare69

            Nope, still looks rectangular. Tubes are CYLINDRICAL. If you can’t tell the difference between a RECTANGULAR framed structure and a CYLINDRICAL framed structure then you have no business commenting on how ANY buildings came down…

          • eastofnowhere

            You should read Benji’s comments carefully, s/he never said the towers are cylindrical, just that it is tube like design. Just like Square Hollow Sections (SHS) and Rectangular Hollow Section (RHS) are classed as tubular sections yet are not circular in shape.

            In saying that, I don’t agree with Benji’s assertion that the towers fell due to the planes hitting it. If it was a third world country, with corruption, lax standards, poor building codes, shoddy workmanship I’ll believe it. But this is the US.

          • jimberkas

            “If it was a third world country, with corruption, lax standards, poor
            building codes, shoddy workmanship I’ll believe it. But this is the US.”

            not sure I follow. are you implying that these things don’t happen in the US??

          • eastofnowhere

            Less chance of that happening, I believe corners are cut differently in US/EU/AUS. Example, you spec a lift that can hold 30 people and the tender comes in at $X. You will end up paying $X+Y and the final product is good for 15 people and months behind schedule.

            Back to the towers, I think they were built sturdy enough that it should still be standing. Them falling like that just doesn’t seem right.

          • shootist66

            Tubes are cylindrical, not rectangular (or square) isn’t exactly true. Square tubing (yes, that’s what it’s called) of various sizes can be purchased from any steel vending company in the world. It has many uses where round tubing wouldn’t be satisfactory for any number of reasons…such as in construction.

          • Aftter all these years and all the evidence, I’m firmly convinced that when someone knows a lot about 911 and still “says” they believe the “official story”…they’re a shill. I call it my “Hani Hanjour” theory: if you know down to the detail that Hani Hanjour was (supposedly) one of the 911 “muslim pilots” and you STILL say you believe they “official story”….you’re lying and you’re a shill. One cannot do a lot of research into 911 and know a lot about it, and come to the conclusion they still believe the “official story”.

      • John P Bledsoe

        Are you serious Benji? You are either a complete idiot or a paid troll… Go away and tell your hasbara team their services are no longer needed — find a real job loser.

        • Benji0804

          Explain your side of it.

          • Ray

            How could an object much smaller than the building “weaken” it? Especially when most of the fuel burned up after impact (the huge fireballs). This video demolishes the government’s “theory.” And your “house of cards” theory. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJNzaMRsN00&list=LLMPT3XE7jkeNha9EKhl4ehw&index=34

          • John P Bledsoe

            Look Benji, I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain the entire 9/11 conspiracy to you on this board. YOU have an obligation and responsibility to study the events of that day yourself. There are 100’s if not 1000’s of informative documentaries on youtube including one titled “Missing Links” that you can view for yourself. Why not google “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth” to start with — you’ll find that almost 3000 architects from around the world tell us that they can’t design buildings that fall straight down like a house of cards as you stupidly claim. Then google “what happened to building 7” and also google “5 dancing Israelis”. OK Benji, you have a couple links to google, now go study little boy.

          • SIU1968

            There are literally hundreds of problems with the government version, but the most obvious problem is that steel frame buildings do not collapse like the three Trade Center buildings did without a massive use of explosives.

      • Sunstien

        No, think of it as a complex frame of steel, with 47 columns, built to withstand a plane hitting into it..

      • diogenes

        It’s simpler and makes more sense, in view of the evidence presented above, to think of you as either a fool or a troll. Stop wasting our time.

      • Zionist Subversion of America

        Gee let’s hope that engineers and architects around the world still aren’t using the blueprint of “a house of cards” to continue building skyscrapers……

      • John

        Benji0804 you say think of it as a house of cards you toss a paper airplane into it the house of cards it will collapse without being supported by other cards. I don’t think so the Sears Tower (Willis) was design to sway up to 3 feet in high winds and it sways on avg. 8 inches a couple time a year in high winds. In other words all tall building are design to sway.A plane hitting a building design in that manner would dissipate some of that energy.

      • WeAreYourGods

        You lack an understanding of the towers’ construction. The towers were built with a reinforced core with the outer parts basically hung on the inner structure. The design was also meant to specifically withstand an airplane collision. Additionally, jet fuel doesn’t burn hot enough to “weaken” the structural steel of the tower. That’s why no other skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire. The structure was deliberately compromised internally, look up the firefighter and cop reports of explosions in the basement before the second plane hit. Start there.

      • Libertylover143

        What about building 7? It wasn’t hit by any airplanes and perfectly collapsed at free fall speed.

      • Kurt

        All we ask, Benji is that you build a PHYSICAL model and demonstrate the top down crushing pancake theory in action. It must be steel framed and must have nearly nothing left doing the crushing like the WTC did. Call us when you have the working model.

  • Carl_Herman

    Brilliant, GW; thank you.

    So my wife was watching television in the room next to our office last night; some murder investigation show. The victim was described as a “crazy conspiracy theorist.” Dialogue:

    Cop 1: So what did this guy believe? We didn’t go to the moon, Elvis is alive, and aliens?

    Cop 2: Worse. Stuff like 9/11 was an inside job.

    Cop 1: So he was a total nut job.

    Cop 2: Yeah.

    **

    Another day for us to provide choice within the Empire 🙂

    • Bubble Buster

      What you posited is what a lot of people do when it comes to people that assert that 9/11 was an inside job and that is to employ logical fallacies such as appeals to ridicule and ad hominem. Meaning, they are unable to intellectually argue on the merits of the argument and will resort to insults which is not an argument and demonstrating they are either intellectually bankrupt or scientifically wrong and can’t admit it because it’s an ego defense mechanism thing that doesn’t permit them to admit they’re wrong.

    • wunsacon

      Carl, you’ve seen the FOIA releases about media relations. Yes? Here’s one source (though must lives behind a paywall):

      http://www.spyculture.com/biggest-ever-foia-release-from-pentagon-entertainment-liaison-office/#documents
      You/WB might’ve discussed it as well. (Offhand, I forget….Maybe I learned of that site because someone here linked to it…)

      During the Bush II years, I recall reading that the government paid Hollywood writers a bonus for weaving pro “war on drugs” messages into their stories. As with operant conditioning, it’s not necessary for the gov to bonus every writer every time. But, unless there’s a countervailing force, why wouldn’t Hollywood bosses instruct their writers to do it all the time in order to at least increase the odds of receiving a payout? And, who’s to say they’re not paying bonuses for the dialogue you just quoted?

      • Carl_Herman

        Yeah, I’ve heard of it; maybe GW covered it but it wasn’t me.

    • nomadfiles

      There has got to be a name for this insidious narrative tactic. By associating ‘9/11 was an inside job’ with other ‘conspiracy theories’, the idea that 911 was NOT an inside job is implanted in our minds. (Conspiracy theory, by modern CIA definition, means ‘not true’. So to say that 911=conspiracy theory is to say it’s not true.) They’ve implanted this idea in our brains while in a receptive entertainment viewing state. Must be why they call it TV programming.

  • Bubble Buster

    9/11 INTERCEPTED – Brought to you by Pilots For 9/11 Truth
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Laaq44SDgg

    ZERO: An Investigation Into 9-11 | Full Documentary
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gETF0_SOXcg

  • ClubToTheHead

    Secrets known by many in the government can be kept secret.

    Were it not for one single whistle blower who was willing to reveal what he knew at great cost to himself no one would have known all that Edward Snowden has made public.

  • geo1671

    Reason no top official involved with the 9II bombing attacks and cover ups spills the beans—everyone’s homes telephones are bugged. One slip up and the guy/gal is dead meat. Any low lifer that says—I saw/heard explosions WTC basements–so what the media says. But if biggies like Rumsfeld or Rudy Juilienia squeals the truth–Israel is finished as a Whorish state

    • animalogic

      I want to add empirical evidence to the view that large numbers of people supposedly can’t keep secrets. During W.W II the Allies had a great intelligence advantage over the Nazi’s: the Enigma decryption program centred at Bletchley Park. Many hundreds worked on this massive task. No information EVER leaked. It was only many years after the war (60’s, I think) that the secret was allowed out.

    • Steve Sperdacion

      and they know they won’t be taken out quickly, they’ll be slowly tortured to death.

  • yep

    this story is BS, israelis did this and thats it

  • WeAreYourGods

    I was about to rant all over the comments section but after reading this whole article I realize it is a parody. Good thing I didn’t stop at the first paragraph.

  • September 11, 2013 9/11 Debunked in Under 5 Minutes by James Corbett

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrJiKbK0tVM&feature=player_embedded

  • February 22, 2016 Iraq: US, UK Fabricated WMD Threat – Created the Reality

    Things come apart so easily when they have been held together with lies. (Dorothy Allison, b. 1949.) On 7th September 2002, speaking at a Press Conference flanked by Prime Minister, Tony “dodgy dossier” Blair, President George W. Bush stated that Saddam Hussein was just six months away from an Iraqi nuclear age. (1) The timeline, said Bush, had come from the International Atomic Energy Agency Report issued that morning.

    Footnote: Extensive inquiries have so far failed to confirm whether an inventory of what went missing from Tuwaitha and other sites from the abandoned nuclear programme, was undertaken, or whether there were efforts to follow up on the ills from the affected areas or attempts to clean them. Inquiries will continue.

    Notes: http://www.celticguitarmusic.com/MlandCampDavid.htm

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0209/07/bn.01.html

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/12/AR2006061200896.html

    http://www.acronym.org.uk/dd/dd73/73op03.htm

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-nuclear-dirty-bomb-iraq-oil-field-a6879481.html

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-mideast-crisis-iraq-sgs-sa-idUKKCN0VR1IP?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

  • Hey math and physics, this one’s for you. My proof of 911 foreknowledge in the options market https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHHfdQCqfNGk7vhGeyk9VdQ

  • toktomi

    OK, well, you felt that you had to say it and you did – and in a manner that is shade different than most.

    The bottom line of human cognition in my little opinion is that none of it has anything to do with TRUTH because truth is physically unknowable by the human brain [or any creature’s brain for that matter].

    Human cognition is about nothing more than opinions [a mental world picture if you will] based on varying quantities and types of evidence.

    Ultimately the goal of any thinking creature ought to be the achievement of logical thought which has nothing to do with truth but everything to do with a cohesive, contradiction-free mental picture of the world based on the greatest amount of evidence possible.

    So, accusations of “conspiracy theorist” and presentations of nutty evidence by the powers-that-be be damned; I would offer that the best 9/11 logic is nearly self evident as you have outlined here.

    So, let’s move on and leave the rest to the rest.

    ~toktomi~

    • nomadfiles

      Let’s not. Let us examine exhaustively the event that metamorphosed the nation.

      • Steve Sperdacion

        but Obama said we need to move forward he would never lie

        • nomadfiles

          Obama was hired to cover Bush’s ass. Cooling out the mark.

  • My latest assault on the censorship of the 9/11 controversy:

    Toxic Beef: Sacred Cows & Left Gatekeepers
    https://politicalfilm.wordpress.com/2016/03/21/toxic-beef-sacred-cows-left-gatekeepers/

  • Lie_Buster

    I love it. Got me on that one. I came onto this page wearing brass-knuckles. My first thought was, “Oh, I’m gonna grind this one to hamburger meat.”

  • d

    IF you tell a LIE to everyone long enough…..it might become ‘the truth’ to far too many……but that’s what you get when ‘pigs fly’…so what passes as truth in this NWO Amerika is what you are told to believe…”you will comply” and become an honorable member on society ,when you believe what ‘we’ tell you to believe…….now go away…as there is nothing to see here…..wtfo

  • Libertylover143

    Forget about the argument about the Twin Towers and concentrate the discussion on building #7. Here is a building that was not hit by any airplanes and crowned at the top penthouse and collapsed at free fall speed. And Larry Silverstein said they decided ‘To Pull It” referring to the demolition of Building #7. Maybe the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania was to hit Building #7 and not Washington DC. And let’s not forget about all the burned and unburned Thermite or Thermate that was in the ash all over the place. And to follow this was Bushes war in Iraq that killed thousands of our beloved servicemen and there suicides that still occur every single day. The Israels that were caught with a truck full of explosives heading to the George Washington Bridge on 9/11 should be a good indicator on who was behind this attack ..

  • tony

    YOU KNOW WHO DID IT BUT YOUR AFRAID TO TELL THE AMERICANS THE TRUTH, IT WAS CONTROLLED EXPLOSIVES, SEE WHAT RICHARD GAGE HAS SAY ABOUT IT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Brockland A.T.

    Ba’aaaa. Got wool over eyes, will trade for food.

  • Carol Wennerberg

    I was in Durbuy Belgium that day… and one of the first interviews I saw on the internet was a little Jewish lady who lived in the condo where the terrorists lived. She said [and I”m paraphrasing] residents knew ‘something was up’… because the place was ‘crawling with 007 types’…. for weeks before the event.

    She also said Atta and others were nice men with Israeli friends…. such nice young men… who knew?

    This interview disappeared along with that of the bike messenger told to stay away from the towers that day….

    I saw both those stories…. and they disappeared as quickly as we saw them.

    Ditto for the Israeli moving company in Jersey taking pictures of their lighter under the flaming towers in the distance…

    We are so screwed…. and the same demons who have been doing this to us now are destroying Trump even as he tries to save the country…. the propaganda machine is just too big… too evil.

    Help us help ourselves,,,, Vote Trump …

  • Dave Eboch

    From the morning I watched it on TV I believed it looked like a demolition. It was a God Damn demolition. No matter how many claim it wasn’t I know it was. Watch as many demolitions as you can because despite a small difference here and there the WTC looks about the same.

  • Dave Eboch

    When is someone at the top of the government who wasn’t involved in this obvious deception going to grow a pair and do something? Why do you think people don’t give a flying fuck if China invades? Because we know and until someone shares the truth and its out in the open only then will you see America heal.

  • Henry Young

    I think you’re all missing the point. This article looks to have been written tongue firmly in cheek, or as we Brits say “taking the piss” out of those who actually believe the official narrative. The article actually supports the very thing that it purports to discredit, presumably to get past whichever idiot was in editorial policy review duty that day. And they say Americans don’t get irony – what a great demonstration of this effect 😉

  • ocelot152

    Conspiricies are just like that … dumb.

  • Jamie Perritt

    Why is everyone always so eager to believe that the US attacked themselves on 911??
    Planes crashed in to the towers! So yeah, they blew up! Why do we all struggle with that so much? And if people heard bombs going off inside the buildings before the planes hit, that doesn’t prove the US is to blame, either! Those bombs , if there were any, could have still been set by the terrorists.

  • Brian Robinson

    The link to the Salon article with the Bob Kerry quote is broken. This one works: http://www.salon.com/2006/06/27/911_conspiracies/

  • Ralph William O’Brien

    IV is the only credible answer on this list. It is quite obvious that this attack was performed by well trained and well funded terrorists but the examples given here are just silly and weak. All the others are just mere opinions but IV really is strong evidence. Someone certainly would have talked in 15 years.