http://www.blip.tv/file/3960058/
For all honest deniers who may be interested in seeing how some on the other side got to the truth.
PKPolitics Discuss » Current Issues
9/11 Truth
(125 posts)-
Posted 1 year ago on 18 Aug 2010 15:38 #
-
Hussain Farooqui
Member9/11 is such a deep rooted drama that it is very difficult to fathom any realities about it.
Posted 1 year ago on 19 Aug 2010 6:16 # -
@MG
A firm believer in the "9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB" myself, I just find this fella Richard D Hall -- an Alex Jones wannabe (he even copies the Prison Planet name and logo) -- and his theory of the flying **** (he describes it as "top-secret remote-controlled anti-gravity-propelled drone") to be a fvcking joke. This my dear is a silly "mindfvck", nothing more.Posted 1 year ago on 19 Aug 2010 10:20 # -
Hi, nota. I quite agree that the video I posted sounds a bit far-fetched. But I chanced upon it yesterday and since I'd just been having a bit of a falling out about the US 9/11 fantasy with several persons here, I thought I'd post it and see if anyone reacted. Yours is a another version of the US fairytale and Hall refers to it on several occasions as well. The controlled demolition theory sounds the most likely. But with which material exactly? Probably something nuclear seems to cover the case.
And HF, not true. Nothing difficult about 9/11. The technicalities of it, yes, all right. We don't quite know for certain how it was done. But who did it? No problem there at all. CIA-Mossad and no one else.
BTW: Do not trust Alec Jones, anyone. He's a Jewish-asset. Another Chomsky-style establishment "dissident". Ask M. Riviero if you have any doubts.
P.S. Thanks for extending my vocab. Mindf, indeed!
Posted 1 year ago on 19 Aug 2010 10:59 # -
Abdul Rahman
MemberNORAD tested pilotless planes crashing into buildings BEFORE 9/11.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/04/19/norad.exercise/
Sometime between 1991 and 2001, a regional sector of the North American Aerospace Defense Command simulated a foreign hijacked airliner crashing into a building in the United States as part of training exercise scenario, a NORAD spokesman said Monday.
The exercise was solely to test procedures and was no indication that NORAD had any reason to believe the scenario would happen in the real world, according to a spokesman.
It is unclear whether the simulated scenario was that of a hijacked plane being "used as missile" -- intentionally crashing into a building -- or that of an out-of-control hijacked plane.
Military officials said the exercise involved simulating a crash into a building that would be recognizable if identified, but was not the World Trade Center or the Pentagon.
Posted 1 year ago on 19 Aug 2010 11:01 # -
Welcome to the club, AR, if that's what you are. A truther I mean, like nota and myself and eventually, I hope, HF, too. Strange that even Pakistanis prefer to believe what the US tells them, instead of trusting in their own judgement.
Posted 1 year ago on 19 Aug 2010 11:08 # -
@AR
Another FACT not to be overlooked is the NORAD's (more than one) wargames taking place on 9/11 . See also 'Let's Get Rid of This **** Sim': How NORAD Radar Screens Displayed False Tracks All Through the 9/11 Attacks@MG
Posted 1 year ago on 19 Aug 2010 11:26 # -
Good, excellent, nota. Now we're getting there. Long live Muslim innocence. Down with US fairytales. We're all grown ups now. Or soon to be.
Posted 1 year ago on 19 Aug 2010 11:52 # -
@MG
An excellent post -- a MUST READ:
The Anniversary of 9/11(And while we are at it, here's another one.)
Posted 1 year ago on 09 Sep 2010 20:23 # -
Thanks for remembering, nota. Shall be back with more when I've gone through the links.
Posted 1 year ago on 09 Sep 2010 20:32 # -
Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,
Video: Loose Change
15-February-2007
--------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------
Source: Youtube Channel: TheStraight911TruthPosted 1 year ago on 09 Sep 2010 22:20 # -
Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,
Video: Loose Change
3 years ago
--------------------------------------------------------
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5651675924179685534
--------------------------------------------------------
Source: Google VideoPosted 1 year ago on 09 Sep 2010 22:28 # -
nota, both links were superb. I wish everyone on pkpolitics would come and have a look at them, attentively read the doubts expressed by high ranking people in the US themselves or take a look at some of the "hijackers" supposedly dead and gone looking hale and hearty and still very much of this world. BTW: Remember the story of Barbara Olson, the one that finally turned the US public in favour of the official version of 9/11 events? Her story was also so full of holes, it's incredible anyone still clings to the notion of a strange, savage bunch of Muslims attacking the Twin Towers with planes.
Posted 1 year ago on 09 Sep 2010 23:09 # -
HK, thanks for videos. I'll let you know what I thought of them as soon as I've found time to watch them one after the other.
Posted 1 year ago on 09 Sep 2010 23:09 # -
Posted 1 year ago on 10 Sep 2010 9:11 #
-
HK, Loose Change was one of the most comprehensive of the 9/11 videos I've seen so far. And its debunking of the Osama bin Laden confession at the end was absolutely perfect. In the one video we know was by Osama, he never claimed he or his people had carried out the attacks. Afghanistan was bombed and occupied without ryhme or reason, except for the nefarious schemes against the Muslims the Zionists have in their heads.
Posted 1 year ago on 10 Sep 2010 15:59 # -
nota, a good take on the 9/11 myth, too. Only the opening phase was not to my liking at all. Muslims were planning to do some such thing and then Mossad agents took over... Stupid conjecture. But the rest of it then made up for the initial faux pas.
Posted 1 year ago on 10 Sep 2010 16:01 # -
"Muslims were planning to do some such thing and then Mossad agents took over... Stupid conjecture."
Agreed. I noticed that but like you say, "the rest of it made up..."
(Muslims were dreaming to do such thing would have been more like it) ;-)Posted 1 year ago on 10 Sep 2010 16:06 # -
naseemkhanan
MemberMG
Both towers imploded as they stood. A demolition expert will never agree that both buildings fell because of planes colliding into them.
This job was done weeks before 9/11 by demolition experts. All what followed is cosmetic.Posted 1 year ago on 10 Sep 2010 16:06 # -
@Naseem
"This job was done weeks before 9/11 by demolition experts."WITHOUT A SHADOW OF A DOUBT! :)
Posted 1 year ago on 10 Sep 2010 16:09 # -
Hussain Farooqui
Membernota
There are so many conspiracy theories behind the incident. One of them should be true.
Posted 1 year ago on 10 Sep 2010 16:16 # -
I wholly agree with Naseem and Nota. One would think that anyone in their right mind would have by now shelved all doubt about who was behind 9/11. Fat chance. Millions still cling to the official version and claim those who absolve the Muslims of all blame in those events are "conspiracy theorists", just as though they were lepers of some kind or the other.
HF has also said it right. Which theory exactly covers all the facts, one can't really tell - and is it even important? What counts is the US government lied and the war in Afghanistan couldn't be more illegitimate. Of course, the war on Iraq no less so.
Posted 1 year ago on 10 Sep 2010 16:38 # -
A group of architects and engineers say the have proof that the official 9/11 story is a lie.
Fri Sep 10, 2010 6:44PM
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/142025.htmlImportant evidence has emerged showing the official story the American public has been fed about the 9/11 attacks is a 'lie,' a group of architects and engineers say.
A day before the ninth anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth say evidence regarding the destruction of the World Trade Center towers has emerged that show pre-set explosives were used in the demolition of the buildings.
Gregg Roberts, who is a member of the non-profit organization disputing the results of official investigations into the September 11 attacks, says the “official story is a lie, it is a fraud.”
According to experts, the Twin Towers suffered total destruction within 10-14 seconds in near free fall accelerations which can only occur as a result of pre-set demolition explosives.
“There had to be explosives, there is no other way for the building to come symmetrically straight down... like a tree if you cut into the tree it falls to the side, that you cut,” said Steven Dusterwald, another member of the truth seeking organization.
The group also asserts that molten metal was found after the 9/11 inquiry.“Jet fuel and office fires cannot melt iron or steel. They don't even get half as hot as that and so something else was there, very energetic material that had to be placed throughout the buildings,” Roberts said.
“Once we take the blinders off, we can see. There are very few people in America who have taken the blinders off. So we are assisting people by showing them the evidence,” said founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth Richard Gage.
“The 600 architects I represent are most concerned about the freefall collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, the third skyscraper that was not hit by an airplane to fall on the afternoon of 9/11...the whole building is destroyed in 6.5 seconds,” the American Free Press quoted Gage as saying.
World Trade Center 7 reportedly collapsed about eight hours after the main World Trade Center towers fell.
The new evidence makes void the official story line that 19 al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four commercial airliners and crashed into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City.
The Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth group is calling on US Attorney General Eric Holder to request a federal grand jury investigation into this alleged cover-up, which Gage calls the “largest crime of the century.”
“If there is a responsible party,” former US Senator Mike Gravel told Press TV, “it ends with former US President George W. Bush and it comes down to Former Vice President **** Cheney and then it comes down to the military and the various bureaucracies. No question that this kind of activity goes to the very top.”
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 9:14 # -
Oops!
;-)
You know Controlled Demolitions, Inc. (CDI), don't you? They are the experts at demolition. Funny that they ended up getting the contract "to remove the debris" of an already demolished building.BTW: CDI "was also hired to level and remove the remainder of the Alfred P. Murrah structure in Oklahoma City" but that's a whole another can of worms
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 9:45 # -
naseemkhanan
MemberBoth towers had stood there for long and were to be demolished sooner or later. Killing two birds with one stone is what the neo-cons did by flying remote controlled planes into both towers and one in the pentagon for sake of credibility.
A few days before 9/11 American media relayed a documentary demonstrating a new type of fuel that won't ignite after a plane crash. A remote controlled Boeing was used for this.
Why not the same for those towers.Where are the relatives of those passengers who were flying in the belly of flying bombs? I doubt if there were any passengers at all.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 10:00 # -
How appropriate that on this day of Eid which comes together with the infamous 9/11 hoax (I see a message in this coincidence. Does anyone else?), this particular thead takes on a new lease of life.
Naseem asks an excellent question and nota rightly reminds us of the very first act of 9/11, the Oklohoma City bombing and the judicial killing of Timothy McVeigh.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 10:39 # -
@MG
Let's not forget the FIRST WTC bombing either nor the "ludicrous diversion" aka London 7/7 ;-)Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 11:17 # -
Indeed, nota, it would be most remiss of me to forget the First WTC event with its Mossad-CIA connection, the 7/7 absurdity or the similar inside event in Spain. Plus the miniest of mini 9/11's like the recent Faisal Shezad story, etc.
I have just one question to ask of my own people: When on earth are we going to straighten up and hit back at the enemy ourselves and not just through our stalwart proxy Afghanistan?
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 11:35 # -
achtung
Membermirza ghalib bhai
my answer is - never - till we stop behave as enemy of ourselves - till we are strong enough - till we are compatiable in science and technology - till we use our head instead of emotions to analyse the issues - till we are truthfull.
it is a very long way. there are no short cuts.
and eid greeting to you and all friends.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 12:14 # -
Eid Mubarak to you, as well, Dear achtung.
And yes, your reply contains many of the ingredients explaining our present failure today. But I am incapable of losing hope myself. However long it may take, we'll get there. Of that I am absolutely sure. As for using our head instead of emotions to analyse the issues - I'd say use both. They are inseperable. But use both with honesty.
Which brings me to the last point: In the light of what this thread has presented about 9/11 doings, I hope you too have joined the Pakistani Truther movement at long last.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 13:26 # -
You mean there is NO record of those passengers who were in those "4 unfortunate"(2 WTC,1 Pantagon and 1 hit the ground) planes on 9/11. Are relative of passengers missing? INCREDIBLE!!!
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 13:59 # -
achtung
Membergeo news reported a interview of gulbadeen hikmatyar by saleem safi. according to that, gulbadeen hikmatyar says 9/11 was done by 19 arab nationals and alqaeeda was involved with them.
i dont know. is gulbadeen hikmatyar a liarr?
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 14:36 # -
achtung
Membersorry, above comment repeated here.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 14:37 # -
shimatoree
MemberMirza Sahib-
I must express my suprize at YOU calling a group which does not agree with your point of view as those who DENY!
So far the only so-called proof that has been put forth to support your point of view is YOUTUBE videos and interviews.
I expect a better CUT of meat from you.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 16:16 # -
Good, good! All the pro 9/11 activists (see Shimatoree, how we listen to your every command and have removed the word denier from our vocab) gathering here now.
No, I can't give you what I don't have: a better CUT of meat. This is all our shop here has to offer. If you carry on believing in your version of events, please not to be deterred. I can only say, I knew within the first week following 9/11 2001 that all that was being said was pure bunkum. Others caught up with this form of thinking as we went along.
Those who trust CIA/Mossad, aka US and West govts, enough to take their word for things, have only one problem; i.e., the Afghanistan War. The utter illegality of it escapes them completely, you included, Shimatoree. Which means you can't share the utter horror some of us feel when we see how the population of Afghanistan, then Iraq have been tortured in support of a shameless lie.
What CUT of meat can you provide, friends, in support for your views?
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 17:30 # -
shimatoree
MemberMirza Sahib-
Your quote- " The utter illegality of it escapes them completely, you included, Shimatoree. Which means you can't share the utter horror some of us feel when we see how the population of Afghanistan, then Iraq have been tortured in support of a shameless lie.
What CUT of meat can you provide, friends, in support for your views? "
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 17:38 # -
shimatoree
MemberI pushed the button too fast. Here is the rest of my comment.
Mirza Sahib-
I am not impressed by "legality " arguement for anything. What drives me is ethics and morality.
I feel that in this world of ours very few people are driven by ethics and morality. The West attacked Afghanistan under false premises.They did try to make it legal by having their cronies use the UN but their actions were still immoral and inhuman.
Now the West invaded and bombed Afghanistan and FATA of Pakistan after 9/11.
They have killed and maimed a lot of MY bretheren.
And yet YOU say that I can't and have not felt the utter horror that YOU feel about what has been done to MY people in Afghanistan and those in Iraq.Coming from you this is the " unkindest" cut of all" and like Julius Caeser I must lament- Etu Brute.
You did not provide evidence. You still have not.
All you have done is to provide youtube videos.The cut of MEAT I provide is logic, the event itself, my belief that a group of young men from the Middle East (driven by their fury at the continuous injustice to the Palestinians) could (with their very limited resources) carry out such an operation at that perticular time.
Let me ask you a few questions- if you continue to believe that 9/11 was an inside job.
1.Where is Mohammad Atta now.
2.Where is Marwan Al Shehi now.
3.Where is Ziad Jarrad Now.
Have you gone and spoken with their parents ?
Please provide tangible evidence but even if you still believe in your poit of view- that does not give you a permit to question my humanity and my integrity by saying that I can't share the utter horror that you feel for what the West has done to Afghanistan and the Muslims in Iraq.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 17:55 # -
Now, shimatoree, you're growing emotional. And you're reserving for yourself exclusively the right to ethics, morality and logic, dismising those holding different views as being no more than purveyors of YouTube videos. OK, agreed. I refuse to quarrel over such matters.
It's no to your question above: I have not spoken to the parents of the presumed hijackers you mention.
Which brings us to the heart of the matter: Afghanistan. There is logic there all right, shimatoree. Am I questioning your credentials as a born Pukhtoon? Certainly not. But you must see what I mean when I say that if you believe in 9/11, then some small element of understanding creeps into your way of looking at west reactions thereafter. For us who have always denied the official version, not even a fraction of an instant of understanding has entered the picture. We have seen nothing but bloodthirsty, lying predators on the march in them. Hence the "utter horror" part of my comment.
If you still do not see what I meant, then I beg your pardon and say perhaps we'd do best not to discuss this particular topic any further, you and I. We'll always be at odds over it.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 18:18 # -
naseemkhanan
MemberMG
Brother, my question still awaits an answer. Where are relatives of passengers present on flights that hit both towers and the pentagon?Much fuss was created, dragging on for years by relatives of a plane exploding over Lockerbie! Why not for 9/11?
Billions were extorted from Libya building a sham case against them. Why tight-lipped on 9/11?
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 19:13 # -
But Naseem, you're arguing my case for me with your question. There was no hue and cry because there were no victims as such since there were no passenger flights as such.
I can only speak of one famous passenger supposedly on one of those flights, Barbara Olson, wife to that highly respected personnage, US Attorney General Theo Olson, who has already admitted that for State security reasons one may permit oneself a lie at times.
I personally am morally certain Barbara Olson is alive and somehwere in hiding in Mexico. We'll have to wait a bit longer for proof of this to surface. There are two other pasengers whose names I've forgotten and who alledgedly also phoned people on the ground from one or the other of those so-called flights. Those two as well have gone underground in the US backyard.
So indeed, excellent question: Why tight-lipped on 9/11?
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 19:25 # -
naseemkhanan
MemberMG
Your case or mine brother it is the same and this thread is a vibrant topic that should not die without showing a mirror to neocons and their apologists.Only three reported/purported passengers on four lost flights. What a shame for a self centered, self-styled super power of a westernized hemisphere. No self respecting rational human will refute this as a conspiracy theory. An exception is those who love to claim and prove 2+2=5.
When there were no passengers then it is more difficult to comprehend as if hijackers managed to took off on their own while airport authorities (more than one airport) stood watch.
Or let us conclude neither hijackers nor passengers no living human being ever boarded those flying bombs.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 19:43 # -
@MG
Talking of Barbara Olson, let's not forget she supposedly made the phone call using her cellphone on 9/11/2001 when in fact that was technologically NOT EVEN POSSIBLE at the time. I will quote you a press release by Qualcom from 2004. I have the link too but the page has been removed from the Qualcomm site(http://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2004/040715_aa_testflight.html):American Airlines and QUALCOMM Complete Test Flight to Evaluate In-Cabin Mobile Phone Use
Proof-of-Concept Event Highlights Safe and Reliable Mobile Phone Technology Using CDMA on a Commercial Aircraft
FORT WORTH, Texas and SAN DIEGO — July 15, 2004 — QUALCOMM Incorporated (Nasdaq: QCOM), pioneer and world leader of Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) digital wireless technology, and American Airlines, the world’s largest carrier, today successfully demonstrated in-cabin voice communications using commercially available CDMA mobile phones on a commercial American Airlines aircraft. Through the use of an in-cabin third-generation (3G ) “picocell” network, passengers on the test flight were able to place and receive calls as if they were on the ground.
~~
Today, American Airlines and QUALCOMM showcased their strength as technology pioneers and market leaders in their respective industries,” said Dan Garton, executive vice president of marketing for American Airlines. “American is committed to researching and providing innovative, cutting-edge products and services that enhance our passengers’ traveling experience and give our customers what they value. Even though commercial availability of cell phone use in flight is approximately 24 months away, American Airlines knows that our customers want to stay connected and this proof-of-concept event is an important step in bringing in-cabin wireless services to our customers.”
http://www.qualcomm.com...So even in July 2004, they were still TESTING the damn thing. How did Barbara manage to use it on 9/11/2001?
Could she have been using the inflight phones instead? No way as the following explains (the killer was that she called "collect". If you have ever used inflight phones you know they won't work unless you swipe a credit card. And Mr. Olsen has been ALL OVER trying to keep this lie straight):
Ted Olson's Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials
...However, although Ted Olson’s report of phone calls from his wife has been a central pillar of the official account of 9/11, this report has been completely undermined.
Olson’s Self-Contradictions
Olson began this process of undermining by means of self-contradictions. He first told CNN, as we have seen, that his wife had “called him twice on a cell phone.” But he contradicted this claim on September 14, telling Hannity and Colmes that she had reached him by calling the Department of Justice collect. Therefore, she must have been using the “airplane phone,” he surmised, because “she somehow didn’t have access to her credit cards.”4 However, this version of Olson’s story, besides contradicting his first version, was even self-contradictory, because a credit card is needed to activate a passenger-seat phone.
Later that same day, moreover, Olson told Larry King Live that the second call from his wife suddenly went dead because “the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don’t work that well.”5 After that return to his first version, he finally settled on the second version, saying that his wife had called collect and hence must have used “the phone in the passengers’ seats” because she did not have her purse.6
By finally settling on this story, Olson avoided a technological pitfall. Given the cell phone system employed in 2001, high-altitude cell phone calls from airliners were impossible, or at least virtually so (Olson’s statement that “the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don’t work that well” was a considerable understatement). The technology to enable cell phone calls from high-altitude airline flights was not created until 2004.7
However, Olson’s second story, besides being self-contradictory, was contradicted by American Airlines.
American Airlines Contradicts Olson’s Second Version
A 9/11 researcher, knowing that AA Flight 77 was a Boeing 757, noticed that AA’s website indicated that its 757s do not have passenger-seat phones. After he wrote to ask if that had been the case on September 11, 2001, an AA customer service representative replied: “That is correct; we do not have phones on our Boeing 757. The passengers on flight 77 used their own personal cellular phones to make out calls during the terrorist attack.”8
In response to this revelation, defenders of the official story might reply that Ted Olson was evidently right the first time: she had used her cell phone. However, besides the fact that this scenario is rendered unlikely by the cell phone technology employed in 2001, it has also been contradicted by the FBI.
Olson’s Story Contradicted by the FBI
The most serious official contradiction of Ted Olson’s story came in 2006 at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker. The evidence presented to this trial by the FBI included a report on phone calls from all four 9/11 flights. In its report on American Flight 77, the FBI report attributed only one call to Barbara Olson and it was an “unconnected call,” which (of course) lasted “0 seconds.”9 According to the FBI, therefore, Ted Olson did not receive a single call from his wife using either a cell phone or an onboard phone.
Back on 9/11, the FBI itself had interviewed Olson. A report of that interview indicates that Olson told the FBI agents that his wife had called him twice from Flight 77.10 And yet the FBI’s report on calls from Flight 77, presented in 2006, indicated that no such calls occurred.
This was an amazing development: The FBI is part of the Department of Justice, and yet its report undermined the well-publicized claim of the DOJ’s former solicitor general that he had received two calls from his wife on 9/11.
Olson’s Story Also Rejected by Pentagon Historians
Ted Olson’s story has also been quietly rejected by the historians who wrote Pentagon 9/11, a treatment of the Pentagon attack put out by the Department of Defense.11
According to Olson, his wife had said that “all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers.”12 This is an inherently implausible scenario. We are supposed to believe that 60-some people, including the two pilots, were held at bay by three or four men (one or two of the hijackers would have been in the cockpit) with knives and boxcutters. This scenario becomes even more absurd when we realize that the alleged hijackers were all small, unathletic men (the 9/11 Commission pointed out that even “[t]he so-called muscle hijackers actually were not physically imposing, as the majority of them were between 5’5” and 5’7” in height and slender in build”13), and that the pilot, Charles “Chic” Burlingame, was a weightlifter and a boxer, who was described as “really tough” by one of his erstwhile opponents.14 Also, the idea that Burlingame would have turned over the plane to hijackers was rejected by his brother, who said: “I don't know what happened in that cockpit, but I'm sure that they would have had to incapacitate him or kill him because he would have done anything to prevent the kind of tragedy that befell that airplane.”15
The Pentagon historians, in any case, did not accept the Olson story, according to which Burlingame and his co-pilot did give up their plane and were in the back with the passengers and other crew members. They instead wrote that “the attackers either incapacitated or murdered the two pilots.”16
Conclusion
This rejection of Ted Olson’s story by American Airlines, the Pentagon, and especially the FBI is a development of utmost importance. Without the alleged calls from Barbara Olson, there is no evidence that Flight 77 returned to Washington. Also, if Ted Olson’s claim was false, then there are only two possibilities: Either he lied or he was duped by someone using voice-morphing technology to pretend to be his wife.17 In either case, the official story about the calls from Barbara Olson was based on deception. And if that part of the official account of 9/11 was based on deception, should we not suspect that other parts were as well?
The fact that Ted Olson’s report has been contradicted by other defenders of the official story about 9/11 provides grounds for demanding a new investigation of 9/11. This internal contradiction is, moreover, only one of 25 such contradictions discussed in my most recent book, 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 20:36 # -
1lhr
MemberThe Real Mujaheedeen commander Gulbadin Hikmatyar claims that 'Arab fidayeen behind 9/11 attacks'
http://www.thenews.com.pk/latest-news/1110.htm
KABUL: Hizb-e-Islami leader and Afghanistan’s former Prime Minister Gulbadin Hikmatyar said the September 11 incident was an action carried out by 19 Arab fidayeen hailing from Al-Qaeda, Geo News reported Saturday.
He was talking to Geo News in its program ‘Jirga’ with renowned journalist Saleem Safi, in connection with 9th anniversary of 9/11 incident.
Responding a question regarding a conspiracy theory involving Jews in the Nine Eleven incident, Hikmatyar said the Jews are completely devoid of capabilities to carry out incidents such as these, adding also the Jews could not prepare anyone for sorts of actions.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 21:57 # -
Gulbadin Hikmatyar is free to say anything he fancies anywhere, at anyplace of his choice but this remains a different matter altogether if he is able to backup his own words with rational and logic. Any credible evidence?
Salim Safi is just an anchor like others.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 22:09 # -
1lhr
MemberGH is unlike the nobodys in the clips above claiming fallacies......and perhaps a bit (lot) closer to where those who blew the planes were trained
there is no doubt that Salim Safi is an anchor like others!
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 22:14 # -
Nota, Naseem, thank you for your precious postings. Achtung, sorry, I failed to see your question about G. Hikmatyar. But at least you have had replies from others on that point. I myself could only have responded by saying that Hikmatyar's statement, if really his, made no sense to me whatsoever. Think, everyone, Musharraf too upped and said that was how it happened and so did Muslim leaders the world over, some of them sticking to their original version even till today.
P.S. The Osama bin Laden video where the so-called Osama took the whole responsibility of 9/11 upon himself was a fraud. A fake Osama, a fake, made in Israel video.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 22:30 # -
Abdul Rahman
MemberMG,
Right on. In this age of high tech gadgets, even a child can make videos.
There is speech to text and text to speech technology in the messaging applications field of telecommunications. It is easier to make any kind of video "accepting" responsbility by any one. Those who work for intelligence agencies with billions of dollars of money to spend can easily manipulate and spread disinformation. They have tremendous resources of money and manpower to make any video they want. Again want to reminder about the excerpt from Dr. Muzaffar Iqbal right after 9/11 in 2001.
So far todate, 9/11 investigation are centered on Why it was allowed to happen rather than Who did that. I like the word used by Dr. Muzaffar "ipso facto". Although Western countries do not accept anything without proof, they wholeheartedly accepted the 9/11 lie for their own vested interests.
"Whatever it was, for now 11 September 2001 stands as a watershed between the low intensity invasion of the so called 3rd world of the post-Soviet era and the present intensive and full scale war that has so far conquered two wretched countries and subjugated numerous others without a fight.
Afghanistan was more or less a trial run. Other than the blind fury and raw rage, there was nothing behind the wanton destruction of this ravaged land. Its most significant function proved to be the building of a war engine to provide a magic word for creating the most sinister label in recent
history: Al-Qaeda.
Since this word was invented, framed in a context and spun around a story, it has become a magic wand applicable to numerous situations. From Madrid to Bagdad and from Casablanca to Jakarta, anyone who is stuck with this label, stands guilty, ipso facto. No further investigation is needed. The general public is satisfied merely by the application of this label and the accused is lumbered with a verdict of guilty. This is perhaps the most criminal and brazen act of the aggressors, who have used the full force of their media to propagate this label worldwide."Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 23:09 # -
Good post, AR, and absolutely to the point. We hadn't yet seriously brought up the Al Qaida myth to add to the 9/11 myth, leading the two together to the War on Terror and the Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace fantasies.
Come to think of it, it all sounds like something out of science fiction, doesn't it? And it's unbelievable stories such as these which, for the past almost ten years, have come to determine the lives of people throughout the world, starting with the tragedy of Muslim victims in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Posted 1 year ago on 11 Sep 2010 23:36 #
Reply »
You must log in to post.