For Eots and Other 'Truthers'

[eots]

ironic that the exact same can be said about your particular story as well, isn't it?

It might be said, but it would not be true. I have examined all available evidence and statements of experts, there has been no evidence presented
by the present administration that backs the official story .much of the proof they offered has clearly been proven to be false and this includes the 911 commission report .as i have proven to be a fact by the statements of the members which make this very claim and the evidence offered by high ranking government Intel agents and esteemed physicist from the worlds top university

how many people have been arrested or charged for the attacks of 911
wheres the 84 tapes of the pentagon
wheres bin laden
don't tell about the confession tape as with several other bin laden tapes proved to be fake but not proved who faked it
wheres the flight data
wheres the wreckage
why was all the eyewitness testimony that did not fit the story
get left out of all official reports
even tho it was from highly credible government agents and employees
and statements that fit the official story where included often from far less credible people ....2+2= 4

 

[Bern80]

It might be said, but it would not be true. I have examined all available evidence and statements of experts, there has been no evidence presented
by the present administration that backs the official story .much of the proof they offered has clearly been proven to be false and this includes the 911 commission report .as i have proven to be a fact by the statements of the members which make this very claim and the evidence offered by high ranking government Intel agents and esteemed physicist from the worlds top university

how can you not see the problem with that statement? Basically you're claiming you already know the answer to the below questions, so why bother doing the 'research'?

how many people have been arrested or charged for the attacks of 911
wheres the 84 tapes of the pentagon
wheres bin laden
don't tell about the confession tape as with several other bin laden tapes proved to be fake but not proved who faked it
wheres the flight data
wheres the wreckage
why was all the eyewitness testimony that did not fit the story
get left out of all official reports
even tho it was from highly credible government agents and employees
and statements that fit the official story where included often from far less credible people ....2+2= 4

 

[eots]

how can you not see the problem with that statement? Basically you're claiming you already know the answer to the below questions, so why bother doing the 'research'?

no i m claiming a cover up along with 911 commission members and top level military ,intelligence agents



Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps (ret) – Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense during the Reagan Administration and a highly decorated Vietnam veteran (two Silver Stars, a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart). Appointed by President George H.W. Bush to serve on the American Battle Monuments Commission (1990 - 1994), and on the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces. Military Historian and Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center, Washington, D.C. 1990 - 1994.

Article 7/10/06: "The former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under the Reagan Administration and a highly decorated Vietnam veteran and Colonel has gone on the record to voice his doubts about the official story of 9/11 - calling it ‘the dog that doesn't hunt.’ ‘I'm astounded that the conspiracy theory advanced by the administration could in fact be true and the evidence does not seem to suggest that's accurate,’ he said." http://www.knowledgedriven


Bio: http://www.firstprinciplespress ct







Capt. Eric H. May, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Army Intelligence officer. Former inspector and interpreter for the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty team.

Essay 9/11 and Non-investigation: "As a former Army officer, my tendency immediately after 911 was to rally 'round the colors and defend the country against what I then thought was an insidious, malicious all-Arab entity called Al-Qaida. In fact, in April of 2002, I attempted to reactivate my then-retired commission to return to serve my country in its time of peril. ...

Now I view the 911 event as Professor David Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor, views it: as a matter that implies either

A) passive participation by the Bush White House through a deliberate stand-down of proper defense procedures that (if followed) would have led US air assets to a quick identification and confrontation of the passenger aircraft that impacted WTC 1 and WTC 2, or worse ...

B) active execution of a plot by rogue elements of government, starting with the White House itself, in creating a spectacle of destruction that would lead the United States into an invasion of the Middle East ..." http://mujca.com/captain.htm


Signatory: Petition requesting a reinvestigation of 9/11. http://www.911


Raymond L. McGovern – Former Chairman, National Intelligence Estimates, CIA, responsible for preparing the President’ Daily Brief (PDB) for Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. 27-year CIA veteran. Former U.S. Army Intelligence Officer.

Video 7/22/06: "I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 report is a joke. The question is: What’s being covered up? Is it gross malfeasance, gross negligence, misfeasance? … Now there are a whole bunch of unanswered questions. And the reason they’re unanswered is because this administration will not answer the questions. … I just want to reassert, what Scott [Ritter, former Major in the U.S. Marines Corps, former Chief Weapons Inspector for the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq] said and this is the bottom line for me, just as Hitler in 1933 cynically exploited the burning of the parliament building, the Reichstag, this is exactly what our President did in exploiting 9/11. The cynical way in which he played on our trauma, used it to justify attacking, making a war of aggression on a country that he knew had nothing to do with 9/11. That suffices for me, I think Scott is exactly right, that’s certainly an impeachable offense." http://video.google


Endorsement of 9/11 and American Empire (Vol I) – Intellectuals Speak Out: "It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. But the present volume confronts us with compelling evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited. If this is true, it is not merely the case, as the Downing Street memos show, that the stated reason for attacking Iraq was a lie. It is also the case that the whole 'war on terror' was based on a prior deception." http://www.interlinkbooks.com


Signatory: Petition requesting a reinvestigation of 9/11. http://www.911truth.org


Bio: http://en.wikipedia.org





William Christison – Former National Intelligence Officer and Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis. 29-year CIA veteran.

Essay Stop Belittling the Theories About September 11 8/14/06: "I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. … An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. … The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them." http://www.dissidentvoice.org


Article 9/7/06: "David Griffin believes this all was totally an inside job - I've got to say I think that it was too. … I have since decided that....at least some elements in this US government had contributed in some way or other to causing 9/11 to happen or at least allowing it to happen. … The reason that the two towers in New York actually collapsed and fell all the way to the ground was controlled explosions rather than just being hit by two airplanes. … All of the characteristics of these demolitions show that they almost had to have been controlled explosions." http://www.prisonplanet.com


Audio interview 9/29/06: "We very seriously need an entirely new very high level and truly independent investigation of the events of 9/11. I think you almost have to look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a joke and not a serious piece of analysis at all. It gave the administration what it wanted to support their official story on what happened on the date of September 11 and that's all they cared about. ... It's a monstrous crime. Absolutely a monstrous crime." http://www.electricpolitics.com


Bio: http://www.amalpress.com




Thomas H. Kean
Thomas H. Kean, Chairman, 9/11 Commission – Former Governor of New Jersey 1982 - 1990. Also served for 10 years in the New Jersey Assembly. Currently President of Drew University.

Without Precedent, a book about the 9/11 Commission authored by Chairman Thomas Kean and Vice-Chairman Lee Hamilton 8/4/06: "Fog of war could explain why some people were confused on the day of 9/11, but it could not explain why all of the after-action reports, accident investigations and public testimony by FAA and NORAD officials advanced an account of 9/11 that was untrue." http://www.washingtonpost.com


Washington Post Article 8/2/06 - "Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate. ...

"We, to this day, don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. "It was just so far from the truth. ... It's one of those loose ends that never got tied." http://www.washington


Editor's note: Despite the many public statements by 9/11 Commissioners and staff members acknowledging they were repeatedly lied to, not a single person has ever been charged, tried, or even reprimanded for lying to the 9/11 Commission.


Bio: http://www.9-11commission


John J. Farmer, Jr., Senior Counsel, 9/11 Commission – Former Attorney General of the State of New Jersey. Former Chief Counsel to former New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman. Former Commissioner of the State Commission of Investigations. Former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey.

Washington Post Article 8/2/06 - "Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate. ...

"I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described," John Farmer, a former New Jersey attorney general who led the staff inquiry into events on Sept. 11, said in a recent interview. "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." http://www.washingtonpost


Editor's note: Despite the many public statements by 9/11 Commissioners and staff members acknowledging they were repeatedly lied to, not a single person has ever been charged, tried, or even reprimanded for lying to the 9/11 Commission.


Bio: http://www.klng



Peter Rundlet, Counsel for the 9/11 Commission – Former Associate Counsel to President Clinton. Former White House Fellow, serving in the Office of the Chief of Staff to President Clinton. Currently Vice President for National Security and International Affairs, Center for American Progress.

Essay 9/30/06: "A mixture of shock, anger, and sadness overcame me when I read about revelations in Bob Woodward’s new book about a special surprise visit that George Tenet and his counterterrorism chief Cofer Black made to Condi Rice, also on July 10, 2001 ...

If true, it is shocking that the administration failed to heed such an overwhelming alert from the two officials in the best position to know. Many, many questions need to be asked and answered about this revelation — questions that the 9/11 Commission would have asked, had the Commission been told about this significant meeting. Suspiciously, the Commissioners and the staff investigating the administration’s actions prior to 9/11 were never

informed of the meeting.
The Commission interviewed Condoleezza Rice privately and during public testimony; it interviewed George Tenet three times privately and during public testimony; and Cofer Black was also interviewed privately and publicly. All of them were obligated to tell the truth. Apparently, none of them described this meeting, the purpose of which clearly was central to the Commission’s investigation. Moreover, document requests to both the White House and to the CIA should have revealed the fact that this meeting took place. Now, more than two years after the release of the Commission’s report, we learn of this meeting from Bob Woodward.
Was it covered up? It is hard to come to a different conclusion.

Bogdan Dzakovic
Bogdan Dzakovic – 14-year Counter-terrorism expert in the Security Division of the Federal Aviation Administration. Team Leader of the FAA's Red (Terrorism) Team, which conducted undercover tests on airport security through simulated terrorist attacks. Former Team Leader in the Federal Air Marshal program. Former Coast Guard officer. Witness before the 9/11 Commission.

Video transcript 8/21/05 : Regarding the 9/11 Commission "The best I could say about it is they really botched the job by not really going into the real failures. … At worst, I think the 9/11 Commission Report is treasonous




.

 

[eots]

Action: Congress wants to monitor all emails, IMs, etc.

The Seminal | February 13, 2007

A bill introduced last week by Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) is beginning to raise eyebrows.

[It] would require ISPs to record all users' surfing activity, IM conversations and email traffic indefinitely . The bill, dubbed the Safety Act by sponsor Lamar Smith, a republican congressman from Texas, would impose fines and a prison term of one year on ISPs which failed to keep full records. (emphasis mine)

This is a terrifying development and it must be stopped before it gains any significant momentum. Background, Action items and contact information below the fold.

Under the guise of reducing child pornography, the SAFETY (Stopping Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Today's Youth) Act is currently the gravest threat to digital privacy rights on the Internet. Given the increasing tendency of people, especially young people, to use the Internet as a primary means of communication, this measure would affect nearly all Americans in ways we are only beginning to understand. Also, given the fact that the Act requires all Internet Service Providers to record the web surfing activity of all Internet users, this amounts to the warrantless wiretapping of the entire Internet.

Amazingly, although the bill was introduced and referred to the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday Feb. 6, it has been virtually ignored by both the corporate media and major blogs alike. By combining such draconian legislation with several child pornography measures, Smith is trying to pull a fast one on the Judiciary Committee and on the democratically controlled Congress as a whole. I say we don't let this happen. So, first, a little background information. Then below, I've outlined a few actions you can take if you'd like to spread the word on this.

Background :
The original SAFETY Act, introduced in June of 2006 by Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ), was shot down due to free speech concerns over aspects of the bill other than the ones I've focused on here. At the time, the Center for Democracy and Technology wrote that the bill “would undermine First Amendment free speech protections and do nothing to protect children on the Internet.”

So what was Lamar Smith's response, you ask? He added the misguided measures discussed above in an attempt to fulfill the demands of the FBI. In an October 2006 conference of police chiefs, FBI Director Robert Mueller made the following statement :

Terrorists coordinate their plans cloaked in the anonymity of the Internet, as do violent sexual predators prowling chat rooms. All too often, we find that before we can catch these offenders, Internet service providers have unwittingly deleted the very records that would help us identify these offenders and protect future victims.

Mueller was signaling to Congress that he would like to see measures put in place that would require ISPs to store records of all Internet usage so he could access it when he felt it was neccessary. But, as has been pointed out :

The thing about retention laws is that they require all data to be maintained, not simply the data from child pornographers and terrorists. This means that such laws are usually favored by other, unrelated groups who would like access to such log files. Groups like the music labels. In Europe, where retention rules are already in place, the entertainment industry has already stated its belief that the data should be available for use in the investigation of any crime, even copyright infringement.

Action:
There are two ways to make members of Congress listen to your concerns.

1. Inundate them with phone calls and emails.
2. Get negative media coverage of what they are trying to accomplish.

Please contact any or all of the people and organizations listed below. Let them know that the SAFETY ACT, as it is written, is not acceptable.

Sponsor:
Rep. Lamar Smith, web form , 202-225-4236

Cosponsors:
Rep. Steve Chabot, (202) 225-2216
Rep. Tom Feeney, (202) 225-2706
Rep. J. Randy Forbes, (202) 225-6365
Rep. Trent Franks, (202) 225-4576
Rep. Elton Gallegly, (202) 225-5811
Rep. Dan Lungren, (202) 225-5716
Rep. Mike Pence, (202) 225-3021

House Judiciary Committee Chair:
Rep. John Conyers, (202) 225-5126
Big Brother 666

 

[Annie]

Action: Congress wants to monitor all emails, IMs, etc.

The Seminal | February 13, 2007

A bill introduced last week by Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) is beginning to raise eyebrows.

[It] would require ISPs to record all users' surfing activity, IM conversations and email traffic indefinitely . The bill, dubbed the Safety Act by sponsor Lamar Smith, a republican congressman from Texas, would impose fines and a prison term of one year on ISPs which failed to keep full records. (emphasis mine)

This is a terrifying development and it must be stopped before it gains any significant momentum. Background, Action items and contact information below the fold.

Under the guise of reducing child pornography, the SAFETY (Stopping Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Today's Youth) Act is currently the gravest threat to digital privacy rights on the Internet. Given the increasing tendency of people, especially young people, to use the Internet as a primary means of communication, this measure would affect nearly all Americans in ways we are only beginning to understand. Also, given the fact that the Act requires all Internet Service Providers to record the web surfing activity of all Internet users, this amounts to the warrantless wiretapping of the entire Internet.

Amazingly, although the bill was introduced and referred to the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday Feb. 6, it has been virtually ignored by both the corporate media and major blogs alike. By combining such draconian legislation with several child pornography measures, Smith is trying to pull a fast one on the Judiciary Committee and on the democratically controlled Congress as a whole. I say we don't let this happen. So, first, a little background information. Then below, I've outlined a few actions you can take if you'd like to spread the word on this.

Background :
The original SAFETY Act, introduced in June of 2006 by Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ), was shot down due to free speech concerns over aspects of the bill other than the ones I've focused on here. At the time, the Center for Democracy and Technology wrote that the bill “would undermine First Amendment free speech protections and do nothing to protect children on the Internet.”

So what was Lamar Smith's response, you ask? He added the misguided measures discussed above in an attempt to fulfill the demands of the FBI. In an October 2006 conference of police chiefs, FBI Director Robert Mueller made the following statement :

Terrorists coordinate their plans cloaked in the anonymity of the Internet, as do violent sexual predators prowling chat rooms. All too often, we find that before we can catch these offenders, Internet service providers have unwittingly deleted the very records that would help us identify these offenders and protect future victims.

Mueller was signaling to Congress that he would like to see measures put in place that would require ISPs to store records of all Internet usage so he could access it when he felt it was neccessary. But, as has been pointed out :

The thing about retention laws is that they require all data to be maintained, not simply the data from child pornographers and terrorists. This means that such laws are usually favored by other, unrelated groups who would like access to such log files. Groups like the music labels. In Europe, where retention rules are already in place, the entertainment industry has already stated its belief that the data should be available for use in the investigation of any crime, even copyright infringement.

Action:
There are two ways to make members of Congress listen to your concerns.

1. Inundate them with phone calls and emails.
2. Get negative media coverage of what they are trying to accomplish.

Please contact any or all of the people and organizations listed below. Let them know that the SAFETY ACT, as it is written, is not acceptable.

Sponsor:
Rep. Lamar Smith, web form , 202-225-4236

Cosponsors:
Rep. Steve Chabot, (202) 225-2216
Rep. Tom Feeney, (202) 225-2706
Rep. J. Randy Forbes, (202) 225-6365
Rep. Trent Franks, (202) 225-4576
Rep. Elton Gallegly, (202) 225-5811
Rep. Dan Lungren, (202) 225-5716
Rep. Mike Pence, (202) 225-3021

House Judiciary Committee Chair:
Rep. John Conyers, (202) 225-5126
Big Brother 666

Instead of #'s, how about a bill #? We can check Thomas ourselves. Thanks.

 

[Bern80]

no i m claiming a cover up along with 911 commission members and top level military ,intelligence agents



Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps (ret) – Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense during the Reagan Administration and a highly decorated Vietnam veteran (two Silver Stars, a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart). Appointed by President George H.W. Bush to serve on the American Battle Monuments Commission (1990 - 1994), and on the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces. Military Historian and Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center, Washington, D.C. 1990 - 1994.

Article 7/10/06: "The former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under the Reagan Administration and a highly decorated Vietnam veteran and Colonel has gone on the record to voice his doubts about the official story of 9/11 - calling it ‘the dog that doesn't hunt.’ ‘I'm astounded that the conspiracy theory advanced by the administration could in fact be true and the evidence does not seem to suggest that's accurate,’ he said." http://www.knowledgedriven


Bio: http://www.firstprinciplespress ct

please stop posting links that don't work.

Capt. Eric H. May, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Army Intelligence officer. Former inspector and interpreter for the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty team.

Essay 9/11 and Non-investigation: "As a former Army officer, my tendency immediately after 911 was to rally 'round the colors and defend the country against what I then thought was an insidious, malicious all-Arab entity called Al-Qaida. In fact, in April of 2002, I attempted to reactivate my then-retired commission to return to serve my country in its time of peril. ...

Now I view the 911 event as Professor David Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor, views it: as a matter that implies either

A) passive participation by the Bush White House through a deliberate stand-down of proper defense procedures that (if followed) would have led US air assets to a quick identification and confrontation of the passenger aircraft that impacted WTC 1 and WTC 2, or worse ...

B) active execution of a plot by rogue elements of government, starting with the White House itself, in creating a spectacle of destruction that would lead the United States into an invasion of the Middle East ..." http://mujca.com/captain.htm

That link does work. I am going to tackle your links from the standpoint of wether the link someone is trying to make is logical/factual. The author claims that he subscribed to his theory based on two things: 1) forensic evidence (which is not elaborated on) 2)and the numerical significance of dates 9/11 and 3/11. The link from date significance/symbolism to U.S. gov't involvement is not a logical one. It makes far more sense that is was planned that way by the terrorists. Islamic terrorists especially is prone to symbolism as much as brutality in it's attacks. While horrible in nature the attck the WTC was not what would be defined as a strategic target. The significance of those dates is what it is. 911 in our country is the number you call in an emergency and 3/11 occurred exactley 911 days after that. That is most likely not a coincidence and my belief is that is more logical that it was planned that way by the terrorists.

Further I think this is another example of a person with an agenda mainly because it appears a logical train of thought was not followed. The furthest you can go with the date thing is that there are striking conicidence in the two. the follow up questions would be then, Was it planned that way? and if so by who? I think it is safe to assume the first answer is Yes. but I will have to admit it is remains a presumption unsupported by fact. I tend to think the second is by the terrorists and specifically al queda, because they said they did it.

More to come as I get to them...

 

[eots]

please stop posting links that don't work.



That link does work. I am going to tackle your links from the standpoint of wether the link someone is trying to make is logical/factual. The author claims that he subscribed to his theory based on two things: 1) forensic evidence (which is not elaborated on) 2)and the numerical significance of dates 9/11 and 3/11. The link from date significance/symbolism to U.S. gov't involvement is not a logical one. It makes far more sense that is was planned that way by the terrorists. Islamic terrorists especially is prone to symbolism as much as brutality in it's attacks. While horrible in nature the attck the WTC was not what would be defined as a strategic target. The significance of those dates is what it is. 911 in our country is the number you call in an emergency and 3/11 occurred exactley 911 days after that. That is most likely not a coincidence and my belief is that is more logical that it was planned that way by the terrorists.

Further I think this is another example of a person with an agenda mainly because it appears a logical train of thought was not followed. The furthest you can go with the date thing is that there are striking conicidence in the two. the follow up questions would be then, Was it planned that way? and if so by who? I think it is safe to assume the first answer is Yes. but I will have to admit it is remains a presumption unsupported by fact. I tend to think the second is by the terrorists and specifically al queda, because they said they did it.

More to come as I get to them...

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 ...This website provides responsible criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report by senior military, intelligence and government officials.
www.patriotsquestion911.com/ - 229k - Cached - Similar pages


heres a link to the site , the official story makes more sense to those not involved in intelligence but a overwhelming number of those with intimate knowledge of intelligence the opposite appears to be true
the bin laden confession tapes are admitted a fraud its not admitted who created them however .go to the FBI web site bin laden is not listed as wanted for 911 the Cole and other terrorist acts but not specifically and if you want to spend a week phoning them and emailing them to explain why the will eventually tell you the reason is it is a on going investigation

 

[Annie]

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 ...This website provides responsible criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report by senior military, intelligence and government officials.
www.patriotsquestion911.com/ - 229k - Cached - Similar pages


heres a link to the site , the official story makes more sense to those not involved in intelligence but a overwhelming number of those with intimate knowledge of intelligence the opposite appears to be true
the bin laden confession tapes are admitted a fraud its not admitted who created them however .go to the FBI web site bin laden is not listed as wanted for 911 the Cole and other terrorist acts but not specifically and if you want to spend a week phoning them and emailing them to explain why the will eventually tell you the reason is it is a on going investigation

Eots, you totally ignored the request about posting links that work. Bern was correct, the princess site is nonfunctional. Check your (copy and paste) links before posting. Even in your threads, continuing to post nonfunctional links will get the posts deleted.

 

[Bern80]

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 ...This website provides responsible criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report by senior military, intelligence and government officials.
www.patriotsquestion911.com/ - 229k - Cached - Similar pages


heres a link to the site , the official story makes more sense to those not involved in intelligence but a overwhelming number of those with intimate knowledge of intelligence the opposite appears to be true
the bin laden confession tapes are admitted a fraud its not admitted who created them however .go to the FBI web site bin laden is not listed as wanted for 911 the Cole and other terrorist acts but not specifically and if you want to spend a week phoning them and emailing them to explain why the will eventually tell you the reason is it is a on going investigation

I have done you the courtesy of trying to specifcally address your points. Why is it that you can't seem to do the same?

 

[eots]

I have done you the courtesy of trying to specifically address your points. Why is it that you can't seem to do the same?

a] i posted the site it has links for all quotes i have found them to work perhaps that one does not i can find it in multiple sources however

b] i believe i addressed your issues to a laymen your assumptions seem logical but to experts in Intel it does not add up that way

 

[Bern80]

a] i posted the site it has links for all quotes i have found them to work perhaps that one does not i can find it in multiple sources however

your link malfunction is not rocket science:

http://www.knowledgedriven

http://www.firstprinciplespress

You can click on them as well as I can. they don't go anywhere

b] i believe i addressed your issues to a laymen your assumptions seem logical but to experts in Intel it does not add up that way

Stay on topic man. For this particular segment we're focusing on the 'Intel' dealing with the dates. What is it exactly that doesn't add up as far as these dates are concerned? Are you trying to say that someone knows that they are a code of some type? The following adds up quite well: Terrorists plot an attack on U.S. soil and because they want some type of symbolism involved in there attack they decide to pick a date that is appropriate. 9/11 or 911 again conotates an emergency. There meaning as it 'may' apply to a government source is not elaborated on. All that is indicated are the neat mathematical things pertaining to the two numbers. The do not mention what significance as far as some gov't code is concerned.

So you tell me how is the above spefically suppossed to add up in your mind?

 

[eots]

??????? comments

YouTube - Flight 93 Crashes into Camp David! (PART-1)

10 min -
[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqh2aof6W80[/ame]

 

[eots]

YouTube - Rumsfeld says Flight 93 was "shot down."
In a candid moment in front of US troops, Donald Rumsfeld ...
19 sec -
[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6Xoxaf1Al0[/ame]




YouTube - Silverstein Spills The Beans About WTC Building 7
Clip from the Alex Jones and infowars.com movie "Martial Law ...
11 min -
[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9b4D-aO3zY[/ame]

 

[dilloduck]

??????? comments

YouTube - Flight 93 Crashes into Camp David! (PART-1)

10 min -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqh2aof6W80

evidence of a conspiracy nuts' desperation?

 

[Alpha1]

e....example
o....of
t....twisted
s....schizophrenia

 

[eots]

at this point id like to draw attention to the fact it was rumsfeld that said
shot down ans silverstine that said building 7 was pulled and cbs that said a plane crashed at camp david ,not me I just know the truth has not been told


Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 ...This website provides responsible criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report by senior military, intelligence and government officials.
www.patriotsquestion911.com/ - 419k -