Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The Truth About 911
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > News, Media & World Events > Conspiracies & Secret Societies
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Bad Mojo
QUOTE(turbonium @ May 24 2005, 08:42 PM)
First you say...
QUOTE(Bad Mojo @ May 24 2005, 07:56 AM)
Radical muslim terrorists hijacked commercial planes and crashed two into the WTC, one into the Pentagon, and one hit the dirt in PA.

Then you say....
QUOTE
Where did I mention whether I think it was a controlled demolition or a natural collapse? I haven't said either way. Take that how you will.

no.gif I'll take that as you don't have a clue what you're talking about! laugh.gif


A better way to take would be to realize your reading comprehension needs work. That first quote of mine deals with the towers and the pentagon, the second talks about building seven which was not hit by a plane. Nice try, but apples/oranges.

QUOTE(turbonium @ May 24 2005, 08:42 PM)
QUOTE
Another funny one... Somehow I'm guessing rational people will always outnumber the irrational, so I don't think I have anything to worry about.  Conspiracy Theories are fun to talk about, but when you start to believe them you quickly become the minority.  You should give the government it's due, with people so willing to jump on the first available bandwagon, they could lead them in circles literally forever.  Thankfully they have more important things to do.

The collapse of the towers on 9/11 by controlled demolition is NOT A THEORY. It is a proven FACT. Would you like me to show you the scientific evidence, or do you prefer to remain in denial and take the word of the gov't propaganda?
[right][snapback]638818[/snapback][/right]


Yes, please show me the "scientific fact" that the towers (not WTC7) were destroyed by controlled demolition. Reputable sources please, no <insertconspiracybuzzwordhere>.com sites. Also explain how the legions of workers that sifted through the debri in the months following found *nothing* that pointed to controlled demolitions. Let me guess, they were all FBI/CIA operatives, lol. Next you'll be telling me there were no planes blink.gif
turbonium
QUOTE
Also explain how the legions of workers that sifted through the debri in the months following found *nothing* that pointed to controlled demolitions.


This explains why they found "nothing"......
From this link Investigation a Farce
Fire Engineering magazine, the 125-year old journal of record among America’s fire engineers and firefighters, recently blasted the investigation being conducted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the collapsed World Trade Center as a “a half-baked farce.”

Fire Engineering’s editor, William Manning, challenged the theory that the towers collapsed as a result of the crashed airliners and the subsequent fuel fires, saying, “Respected members of the fire protection engineering community are beginning to raise red flags, and a resonating theory has emerged: The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers.”

No evidence has been produced to support the theory that the burning jet fuel and secondary fires “attacking the questionably fireproofed lightweight trusses and load-bearing columns directly caused the collapses,” Manning wrote, adding that the collapses occurred “in an alarmingly short time.”

Because no “real evidence” has been produced, the theory that the twin towers collapsed due to fire “could remain just unexplored theory,” Manning said.

Manning visited the site shortly after the collapse and his photographs appeared in the October issue of Fire Engineering. None of the photos show the load-bearing central steel support columns standing or fallen, which raises the question, what caused these columns to disintegrate?

An eyewitness to the collapse told AFP that as he stood two blocks from the World Trade Center he had seen “a number of brief light sources being emitted from inside the building between floors 10 and 15.” He saw about six of these brief flashes, accompanied by a “crackling sound” immediately before the tower collapsed.

DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE

The steel from the site must be preserved to allow investigators to determine what caused the collapse, Manning said. “The destruction and removal of evidence must stop immediately.”

“For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices and performance under fire conditions is on the slow boat to China,” Manning said, “perhaps never to be seen again in America until you buy your next car.”

“Such destruction of evidence,” Manning wrote, “shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history.”

Nowhere in the national standard for fire investigation does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall, Manning said. “Clearly, there are burning questions that need answers. Based on the incident’s magnitude alone, a full-throttle, fully-resourced, forensic investigation is imperative. The lessons about the buildings’ design and behavior in this extraordinary event must be learned and applied in the real world.

“Did they throw away the locked doors from the Triangle Shirtwaist fire? Did they throw away the gas can used at the Happyland Social Club fire? Did they cast aside the pressure-regulating valves at the Meridian Plaza fire? Of course not. But essentially, that’s what they’re doing at the World Trade Center.”

The collapse of the World Trade Center was the first total collapse of a high-rise during a fire in United States history and the largest structural collapse in recorded history. The collapse resulted in the deaths of some 3,000 people, the second largest loss of life on American soil and the largest loss of firefighters ever at one incident, yet congressional hearings or a “blue ribbon” commission looking into the events of Sept. 11 have not been called for, and may never be.

WTC ‘INVESTIGATION’?

In a separate editorial, “WTC Investigation? A Call to Action,” by the magazine’s technical editor, Prof. Glenn Corbett of John Jay University in New York City, and two other expert fire engineers who specialize in high-rise buildings, the FEMA-led investigation was called “uncoordinated” and “superficial.”

“The World Trade Center disaster demands the most comprehensive, detailed investigation possible,” the writers said. “No event in our entire fire service history has ever come close to the magnitude of this incident.”

Given the magnitude of the disaster “you would think we would have the largest fire investigation in world history,” the editorial says. “You would be wrong. Instead, we have a series of unconnected and uncoordinated superficial inquiries. No comprehensive ‘Presidential Blue Ribbon Commission.’ No top-notch National Transportation Safety Board-like response. Ironically, we will probably gain more detailed information about the destruction of the planes than we will about the destruction of the towers. We are literally treating the steel removed from the site like garbage, not like crucial fire scene evidence.”

RECYCLING THE EVIDENCE

On Christmas Day, The New York Times reported that structural engineers have demanded a completely new investigation because the decision to quickly recycle the tower’s steel columns, beams and trusses had resulted in the wholesale destruction of critical evidence.

Dr. Frederick W. Mowrer, an associate professor in the fire protection engineering department at the University of Maryland, said the decision had compromised any investigation of the collapses.

“I find the speed with which potentially important evidence has been removed and recycled to be appalling,” Mowrer said.

Officials in the New York mayor’s office refused to reply to written and oral requests from The New York Times over a three-day period about who actually made the decision to recycle the steel, seriously handicapping the investigation.

The engineers said that the “serious mistake” to recycle the structural steel deprived investigators of the most important direct physical evidence required when trying to piece together what caused the towers to collapse. In the United States there are thousands of similar lightweight, center-core construction high-rise buildings with light-density, sprayed-on fireproofing, according to Manning.

“We have to learn from incidents through investigation to determine what types of codes should be in place and what are the best practices for high-rise construction,” Manning told the Daily News. “The World Trade Center is not the only lightweight, core construction high-rise in the U.S. It’s a typical method of construction.”

ACCOUNTABILITY VACUUM

The builders and owners of the World Trade Center property, the Port Authority of New York-New Jersey, are a government agency that is reported to operate “in an accountability vacuum beyond the reach of local fire and building codes.”

The Port Authority has denied charges that the buildings of the World Trade Center lacked fire protection or that construction components were substandard, but has refused to cooperate with requests for documentation supporting its contentions.

A group of engineers from the American Society of Civil Engineers, commissioned by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is reported to be studying “some aspects of the collapse,” but not all, according to Manning and others. The engineers’ investigation, they say, has not looked into all aspects of the disaster and has had limited access to documents and other evidence.

“Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation committee members—described by one close source as a “tourist trip”—no one’s checking the evidence for anything,” Manning said. “As things now stand and if they continue in such fashion, the investigation into the World Trade Center fire and collapse will amount to paper- and computer-generated hypotheticals.”

Engineers have also complained that they have been shackled with bureaucratic restrictions that prevented them from examining the disaster site, interviewing witnesses and requesting crucial information like recorded distress calls to the police and fire departments.

“This is almost the dream team of engineers in the country working on this, and our hands are tied,” one engineer who asked not to be identified told the Times. Members of the team of engineers have been threatened with dismissal for speaking to the press.

“FEMA is controlling everything,” the anonymous engineer complained.

“Comprehensive disaster investigations mean increased safety,” Manning said. “They mean positive change. NASA knows it. The NTSB knows it. Does FEMA know it?

“No. Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the ‘official investigation’ blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure,” he wrote.
turbonium
QUOTE
Yes, please show me the "scientific fact" that the towers (not WTC7) were destroyed by controlled demolition. Reputable sources please, no <insertconspiracybuzzwordhere>.com sites.


Seismic spikes occurring just BEFORE the towers fell Seismic Data

WTC Collapse defies Newton's First Law of Motion, Galileo's Law of Falling Bodies
Link here Laws of Physics didn't apply on 9/11

First -two of the Laws of Physics that 'magically' were defied on 9/11....

The Law of Falling Bodies:
In the absence of air resistance, any two bodies that are dropped from rest at the same moment will reach the ground at the same time regardless of their mass.

A stronger statement is: The acceleration of all objects is the same in the absence of air resistance. As long as an object is in freefall - regardless if it is going up, down or sideways - its acceleration is equal to 9.80 m/s2downwards.

An example of the Law of Falling Bodies:
Two identical objects except with different masses are dropped from the same height at the same time. With air resistance set to zero, both balls strike the ground at the same time. As the air resistance is increased, the more massive object will strike the ground first. With enough air resistance the lighter ball is seen to reach a terminal velocity.

Newton’s First Law of Motion

An object at rest tends to stay at rest and an object in motion tends to stay in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.

Here is the article ...

What if you discovered that the government’s “official” explanation for the World Trade Center collapse on the morning of 9-11 was not exactly true? In addition, what if their “official” version of events could be disproven solely on the basis of physics, mathematical equations, scientific formulas, physical evidence, and expert testimony – without the use of a single “conspiracy theory”? Would your perspective on 9-11 be dramatically altered?

This is precisely what is illustrated in 9-11 on Trial, a book that shreds the government’s official story – and credibility – beyond repair. Did you know, for instance, that never before in the history of the world has a steel building collapsed due to fire? Yet on 9-11, three of them did just that in seven hours – with WTC 7 not even being hit by an airliner.

Furthermore, it takes a temperature of 2,795 degrees to melt construction grade steel, yet the highest temperature jet fuel can reach is 1,517 degrees. Plus, all the jet fuel burned off within two minutes of the towers being struck, while two independent studies proved that the fires within each tower never rose above 500-600 degrees. In fact, FEMA revealed in their final report that, “The heat produced by burning jet fuel does not by itself appear to have been sufficient to initiate the structural collapse.”

Also, the WTC towers were designed to withstand the impact from a Boeing 707 (similar to a Boeing 767), and each floor was designed to hold 2,600,000 pounds beyond its own weight. Likewise, the steel used in these structures was rated to hold five-times its normal load. MIT professor Thomas Eager admitted as much when declaring, “The impact of the airplanes would have been insignificant” in toppling the towers.

Also, how do we explain the pools of molten steel which were found bubbling 70 feet beneath the towers five weeks after 9-11? Incidentally, a temperature of 5,182 degrees is needed to transform steel into a liquefied state. Do you think fires that FEMA admitted “would have burned at, or below, temperatures typical in office fires” could have produced such extremes? Even NYFD audiotapes of firefighters who reached the South tower’s impact point reveal that they “judged the blazes to be manageable” and were easily extinguishable in less than an hour.

Even more interesting is the South Tower. Even though it experienced a less forceful hit than the North Tower and had smaller fires, it fell in only half the time of its counterpart (56 minutes). It takes five-times that long to cook a turkey! Plus, the South Tower’s cap, which initially tipped 23 degrees past vertical, suddenly reversed direction, then dropped vertically, defying Newton’s First Law of Motion.
Most incriminating, though, is the resistance-free speed (a mere 10 seconds) at which the towers collapsed. To put this matter into perspective, if you were standing atop the WTC towers, and at the precise moment when they began to fall you dropped a football over the side, you and the football would have hit the ground at nearly the exact same moment. In other words, 200,000 tons of steel, 425,000 cubic yards of concrete, and all the walls, desks and floors provided no resistance whatsoever. Not only does such a collapse defy Galileo’s Law of Falling Bodies, it is physically impossible unless all resistance was removed via a controlled demolition.


Of course there’s more (seismographic data, the ridiculous pancake & truss-bolt theories, and the complete vaporization of nearly all the concrete into a fine microscopic dust),
Bad Mojo
QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 01:00 AM)
QUOTE
Also explain how the legions of workers that sifted through the debri in the months following found *nothing* that pointed to controlled demolitions.


This explains why they found "nothing"......



So... a magazine editor (Bill Manning) has declared that the structural damage and subsequent fires were not enough to collapse the towers. I can see where a newspaper editor would be a far more reliable source than:

Dr. Thomas Eager, Engineer from MIT and professor of materials engineering and engineering systems.

Further explained by Tim Wilkinsin, lecturer on Civil Engineering

And again by Dr. Shyam Sunder, acting deputy director of the BFRL at NIST

And Zdenek P. Bazant, from the American Society of Civil Engineers... written for the journal of engineering mechanics.

I won't even mention how Bill Manning's editorial was published in January of 2002, and the two year $16 million dollar inquiry into the matter was launched in August of 2002. Oops! I just mentioned it didn't I! wacko.gif

Maybe we should just let magazine editors build our buildings from now on instead of the Engineers that actually went to school for it and have experience in such things? While we are at it we should look into having appendectomies done by employees of Wal-Mart! And of course police investigations would be much more accurate and complete if done by the homeless. wink2.gif
Bad Mojo
QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 01:30 AM)
QUOTE
Yes, please show me the "scientific fact" that the towers (not WTC7) were destroyed by controlled demolition. Reputable sources please, no <insertconspiracybuzzwordhere>.com sites.


Seismic spikes occurring just BEFORE the towers fell Seismic Data

WTC Collapse defies Newton's First Law of Motion, Galileo's Law of Falling Bodies
Link here Laws of Physics didn't apply on 9/11

First -two of the Laws of Physics that 'magically' were defied on 9/11....


Read my post above, according to engineers the towers would of had to sway over 100 degrees to topple over, and the collapse straight down was the only way they would have fallen given the area and nature of the damage. I'll trust someone in the know over a couple of links to an ip address and an author pushing sales on his new book. If you want I'll make a quick web page tomorrow citing that the towers didn't actually collapse, they indeed floated upwards and were destroyed by the sun. Obviously it must be true if it's on the interweb!
turbonium
QUOTE
Dr. Thomas Eager, Engineer from MIT and professor of materials engineering and engineering systems.


laugh.gif I didn't think anyone would still use him as a reference. That's funny....here is a link that rips apart Eager's 'theories'
Eager The Liar
From that link are a couple of points easily shown to be false - in bold are the comments added that point out Eager's false assumptions and lies....
NOVA: How high did the temperatures get, and what did that do to the steel columns?

Eagar: The maximum temperature would have been 1,600°F or 1,700°F. It's impossible to generate temperatures much above that in most cases with just normal fuel, in pure air. In fact, I think the World Trade Center fire was probably only 1,200°F or 1,300°F. There is no evidence the fires were anywhere near that hot. To be that hot they would have required good air supplies, which they did not have as shown by the black smoke. People who passed through the impact zone of the South Tower didn't report the stairwells were particularly hot.

Investigations of fires in other buildings with steel have shown that fires don't usually even melt the aluminum, which melts around 1,200°F. Most fires don't get above 900°F to 1,100°F. The World Trade Center fire did melt some of the aluminum in the aircraft and hence it probably got to 1,300°F or 1,400°F. The discovery of some melted aluminum in the rubble could also be explained by the heat from explosives. But that's all it would have taken to trigger the collapse, according to my analysis.

NOVA: You mean one part of a beam is 300ºF hotter than another part of the same beam?

Eagar: Exactly. If there was one part of the building in which a beam had a temperature difference of 300ºF, then that beam would have become permanently distorted at relatively low temperatures. So instead of being nice and straight, it had a gentle curve. If you press down on a soda straw, you know that if it's perfectly straight, it will support a lot more load than if you start to put a little sideways bend in it. That's what happened in terms of the beams. He speaks of beams, but box columns supported the towers. If the columns distorted enough to lose their rigidity, it would have been apparent before the towers exploded. They were weakened because they were bent by the fire.

But the steel still had plenty of strength, until it reached temperatures of 1,100º to 1,300ºF. Where is the evidence? At 1300º F, the steel would have been glowing red hot and would have been visible even in broad daylight. In this range, the steel started losing a lot of strength, and the bending became greater. Eventually the steel lost 80 percent of its strength, because of this fire that consumed the whole floor. The only time the fire had any chance to soften the steel was before the jet fuel burned off. Eagar makes the false implication that the softening of steel due to heating is cumulative and irreversible.

If it had only occurred in one little corner, such as a trashcan caught on fire, you might have had to repair that corner, but the whole building wouldn't have come crashing down. The problem was, it was such a widely distributed fire, and then you got this domino effect. As if the columns of the building were merely balanced on top of each other. Once you started to get angle clips to fail in one area, it put extra load on other angle clips, and then it unzipped around the building on that floor in a matter of seconds. Not only is Eager's ridiculous zipper theory incompatible with the fact that neither of the towers had fires covering an entire floor, it is also relies on the deliberate omission of any mention that there were cross-trusses, which were perpendicular to and interlocked with the trusses shown in the animation.
turbonium
Why Did It Collapse? Tim Wilkinson, Lecturer in Civil Engineering

(This is an initial suggestion, originally written on Sept 11 2001 (with some minor subsequent changes) on one possible reason for failure, and should not be regarded as official advice.)


The above qualifier which precedes this guy's "Pancake Theory" sums up the confidence he showed in presenting it! Bogus theory, as shown with Eager's version..
turbonium
QUOTE
While the buildings were able to withstand the initial impact of the aircraft, the resulting fires that spread through the towers weakened support columns and floors that had fireproofing dislodged by the impacts," says Sunder, who led the NIST investigation. "This eventually led to collapse as the perimeter columns were pulled inward by the sagging floors and [became] buckled."

no.gif What proof can be shown for THIS, the latest in a series of ridiculous 'theories' on the collapse.

Grasping at straws, and with no scientific data or photographic or video evidence, our beleagured Dr. Sunder hopes the public will believe the fireproofing was dislodged and then the fires sagged the building into a free-fall collapse!! w00t.gif
turbonium
OK - now for the last link you have..
the aircraft fuel spilled into the structure causes the steel of the columns to be exposed to sustained temperatures apparently exceeding 800°C. The heating is probably accelerated by a loss of the protective thermal insulation of steel during the initial blast.

Do I really need to go on with THIS 'theory'?
Bad Mojo
QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 02:17 AM)
There is no evidence the fires were anywhere near that hot. To be that hot they would have required good air supplies, which they did not have as shown by the black smoke. People who passed through the impact zone of the South Tower didn't report the stairwells were particularly hot.


So the only reason smoke burns black is lack of air? That's a good one. Tar and plasitc gives off black smoke, and you can give it all the O2 in the world for example. Not to mention that on initial impact, there was plenty of unconsumed air in the building, modern scyscrapers hold plenty of air and is evidenced by the fact that the towers collapsed into stacks of rubble only a few stories high. Funny how a blacksmith can heat and forge metal in a smithy, with nothing more than a fire, an anvil, and a hammer... But supposedly an exploding plane can't heat it enough to weaken it? Maybe blacksmith's used some kind of ancient chinese secret ph34r.gif

QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 02:17 AM)
The discovery of some melted aluminum in the rubble could also be explained by the heat from explosives.


Or it might not. Maybe it was planted by alien operatives from the planet Kli'k.

QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 02:17 AM)
He speaks of beams, but box columns supported the towers. If the columns distorted enough to lose their rigidity, it would have been apparent before the towers exploded.


The science still stands. A straight column can take more pressure from above than a curved one, which is why support columns used in architecture are straight, and have been for centuries. Arguing semantics will get us nowhere.

QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 02:17 AM)
Where is the evidence? At 1300º F, the steel would have been glowing red hot and would have been visible even in broad daylight.


Visible in broad daylight? What floors of the buildings were hit again? How far above ground level where the spectators were? And what about that black smoke? Was it magic smoke that doesn't impede sight? Since when was glowing steel that bright?

QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 02:17 AM)
The only time the fire had any chance to soften the steel was before the jet fuel burned off. Eagar makes the false implication that the softening of steel due to heating is cumulative and irreversible.


So heating steel doesn't soften it? Again, blacksmith's can do it in a forge... but a burning building full of solid fuels can't? I'd like to point out here that the raw iron blacksmith's use has a *higher* resistance to heat than steel, and yet, somehow they managed to start bending it around 500 BC.

QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 02:17 AM)
As if the columns of the building were merely balanced on top of each other.


Er, does he think they were offset from each other? Because diagrams of the construction of the towers shows different.

QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 02:17 AM)
Not only is Eager's ridiculous zipper theory incompatible with the fact that neither of the towers had fires covering an entire floor, it is also relies on the deliberate omission of any mention that there were cross-trusses, which were perpendicular to and interlocked with the trusses shown in the animation.
[right][snapback]639142[/snapback][/right]


Cross trusses wouldn't be all that helpful in a vertical collapse as far as I know. I'm not an engineer but I don't think horizontal supports are going to do much for keeping a structure up that's collapsing down.
Sub-Zer0
I'll be back to own these government bloggers tommarow.
Bad Mojo
QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 02:41 AM)
QUOTE
While the buildings were able to withstand the initial impact of the aircraft, the resulting fires that spread through the towers weakened support columns and floors that had fireproofing dislodged by the impacts," says Sunder, who led the NIST investigation. "This eventually led to collapse as the perimeter columns were pulled inward by the sagging floors and [became] buckled."

no.gif What proof can be shown for THIS, the latest in a series of ridiculous 'theories' on the collapse.

Grasping at straws, and with no scientific data or photographic or video evidence, our beleagured Dr. Sunder hopes the public will believe the fireproofing was dislodged and then the fires sagged the building into a free-fall collapse!! w00t.gif
[right][snapback]639153[/snapback][/right]


So despite drilling a huge hole into the building, it didn't dislodge a single piece of fireproofing? Do you think that the fireproofing hung suspended in the air of it's own accord when the plane went in and took out the structure it was attached too? Wow, some nice technology there for a building built in the 60's and 70's!
Bad Mojo
QUOTE(Sub-Zer0 @ May 25 2005, 03:40 AM)
I'll be back to own these government bloggers tommarow.
[right][snapback]639211[/snapback][/right]


You are on right now... Gathering new "evidence?"

huh.gif
death
a very well put together post and i have to say i agree with you entirely i am one of those people who believe that the government are hiding a hell of a lot of things from us not just about this but about life on other planets and supernatural stuff as well so well done ! yes.gif
fallingalien
QUOTE(Sub-Zer0 @ May 7 2005, 01:11 PM)
Ok, this is to all of the people who still believe 9/11 was the work of 19 Arabic Hijackers and an operation entirely masterminded by Osama Bin Laden, mainly because he hates our freedom’s and disagrees with American Liberalism. Despite all of their hard work, the United States Government simply could not see the attack coming.

When one considers all of the hardcore facts, there is no way this excuse holds even a grain of truth in it. The official story is impossible and simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Even more laughable is the excuse given by government officials that it was simply a "failure of intelligence" and the attack could not be averted. Politicians should not even form their mouths to even use an incompetence excuse.  Warnings were received by the US by at least 18 other countries, and agents in the CIA, and the FBI were warned. The FAA got warnings too. In fact,

Prior Knowledge:

CIA had high-jacker details
Taliban warned the US of huge attack
FBI warned of plot to high-jack planes in 1995
FBI warned of Suspicious flight student last yearCIA ignorned warnings of Al-Queda
US knew of Suicide highjack threat in 1995
The airlift of evil
Threat of US attacks passed Taliban weeks before the attacks
US clamps secrecy on attacks before 911


It seems that there were so many warnings, that


"The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defence of incompetence."  Micheal Meacher, Tony Blairs former environmental advisor until 2003.  London Guardian

In addition to these Government officials and other people received individuals warnings as well. Mayor Willie Brown was warned by Condoleezza Rice not to fly on 911, author Salmon Rushdie was publicly banned from flying before 911, and John Ashcroft former Attorney General stopped flying commercially six months before 911. Even some people working inside of the towers got instant messages, telling them to evacuate the WTC.

We must ask ourselves, where did all this prior knowledge come from, and why was it all ignored? Is it possible for that this much information of this magnitude of importance to get tangled up in a beaurecratic web of telephone lines? The answer is NO, people in side of the Trade Towers got INSTANT MESSAGES telling them the buildings were going to be destroyed two hours before it happened. You’re going to tell me someone can get an INSTANT MESSAGE to someone inside the World Trade Center two hours before the attack, but no one can get the message to the President of the United States? Bullshit. Condoleezza Rice calls Mayor Willie Brown and tells HIM not to fly, BUT SHE CAN'T CALL THE PRESIDENT AND TELL HIM TO STOP THE ATTACK?!?!?

Sources:

Odigo Says Workers Were Warned of the Attack
San Francisco Chronicle - Mayor Willie Brown got Low-Key Warning about Air Travel
The Truth Seeker-Condi Lisa Rice Warned Willie Brown and Told him not to fly on 911
CBS News -  Ashcroft Flying High


In addition there are over 600 smoking gun holes and unanswered questions in the official story of 911; I'm only going to scratch the surface, w/ some of the main ones.

First thing is the NORAD stand down order.

"The first hijacking was suspected at not later than 8.20am, and the last hijacked aircraft crashed in Pennsylvania at 10.06am. Not a single fighter plane was scrambled to investigate from the US Andrews airforce base, just 10 miles from Washington DC, until after the third plane had hit the Pentagon at 9.38 am. Why not? There were standard FAA intercept procedures for hijacked aircraft before 9/11. Between September 2000 and June 2001 the US military launched fighter aircraft on 67 occasions to chase suspicious aircraft" (AP, August 13 2002)
guardian, once again

NORAD completely stood down, this is a clear violation of FAA flight regulations, and NORAD could have probably stopped the attack, at least partially. The morning of 911 NORAD was training in a war game of flying hijacked aircrafts into buildings ON the Morning of 911. On the Morning of 911??!?! Yep, the drill stopped just 50 minutes before the Hi-Jacking began. No wonder there was no Military Response, NORAD was told that the planes being Hijacked were just part of a drill. That's why they stood down.

What are the chances of this happening? It's just a coincidence that they were running a war-game drill of the same monumental event to be documented in history books for centuries? Of course it’s possible, but very unlikely. 


Yahoo News - Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building
USA Today - NORAD has drills to use jets as weapons

In addition, the list of the 19 hijackers and their picture identification was assembled and aired just hours after the attack. How do we jump to the accusations that 19 suspects are guilty of 3,000 American murders when most, if not all of the evidence, is twisted metal and degenerated ashes that used to be people? Actually by the time the hijackers had their mug shots aired on TV, all of the crime scenes had been destroyed. Buildings one and two collapsed, as well as the mysterious building seven collapsing on its own, the plane that hit the pentagon decentegrated, and flight 93 was likely shot down, hours later we miraculously post all of their mug shots on the news? Damn, we must be good.

So how exactly did the United States leap to their allegations of guilt?

A travel bag belonging to one of the 911 hijackers was found at the airport after the attacks, absolutely ruling beyond any doubt, that this was the work of Al-Queda.

Question: Why would a hijacker, planning to commit suicide, even BRING A BAG? Let alone pack it w/ incriminating evidence sure to unleash a fire storm of military hell on all of his fellow Afghani people? The bag contained enough evidences to precisely tie the perpetrators to the Taliban and Al-Queda justify the assault in Afghanistan.
(911 the Great Illusion)

Answer: this is MANUFACTURED EVIDENCE


Now BBC has began running stories that nine of these men have shown up as being still alive. 911 eleven Hijackers steal our planes to suicide attack us because were not doing what Allah says, and then they show up still being alive. So that means that at least five of the men on the hi-jackers list cannot be the same men who were on the plane. But the government has stuck to their official story on this, and no one in the mainstream media has ever brought this up, or challenged them on it. Many of the Hijackers are now appearing on television in their countries and professing their innocence. A lot of information like this has been circulating around other parts of the world, and it is likely the reason why America's image has dropped from negative to terrible. Most people in other countries know this is going on, but Americans are sleeping.


The Truth is unleashed in other parts of the world but it’s concealed from American eyes as a way to demonize Americans to the rest of the world, while American media demonizes the rest of the world (particularly Arabs) to America, this is a way of polarizing both side to inspire conflict on both sides.

Sources:


High JAck Suspects alive and well
High Jack Suspects Alive in Morroco


Bombs in the Towers


user posted image

___ This next part is important, because it's hardcore vissual evidence of government involvement in 9/11 and is nearly impossible to deny.

Building seven, first of all, was the third building to collapse within the World Trade Center Complex. According to the government’s official story, building seven was destroyed from fire, along with buildings one and two.

Videos Show Building 7's 6.5 second symmetrical collapse

user posted image

First of all it’s important to say that fire has never once brought a steel structure down. Out of 100 uncontrolled fires in the last 50 years NEVER has fire collapsed a steel building, only earthquakes and explosives have been able to flatten these architectural structures.

So, why is building seven so significant? It’s important because building seven collapsed without being struck by an airplane or anything else, almost as if it were the wind that knocked it over.

Several videos have been salvaged which show building seven's collapse and shocking evidence has surfaced from scrutiny.

CBS Broadcast  of Buildinding Seven's fall - Dan Rather admits it looks like Explosives
Building Seven's Collapase from a mile away
Building Seven's Colapse from 1000 feet away, this is very obvious

You see, building seven DECENTEGRATED INTO RUBBLE in a vertical symmetrical fashion in 6.5 seconds. If building seven was taken down by an aircraft impact (even though it was not) it would have thrown back horizontally, transferring the energy away from the air plane impacts. And if it was fire that had brought it down, we would have seen the structure reduced into liquid metal, and the streets would be a river of flame.  But this building simply fell straight to the ground and crumbled.

I need to explain something about controlled demolition. First of all, when buildings are demolished the explosives are placed in the central column, so the structure falls inwards and does not damage other surrounding buildings. So they only way the building can fall like this or fall period is through the use of explosives.

THE FEMA REPORT ON WORLD TRADE CENTER 7 COLLAPSE IS A TOTAL JOKE.

user posted image

“Each of the following videos shows the entire visible portion of the building falling with a vertical precision otherwise seen only in controlled demolition. Moreover, they show that the collapse took only about 6.5 seconds from start to finish. That rate of fall is within a second of the time it would take an object to fall from the building's roof with no air resistance”

user posted image

user posted image

Good lookin to Dem Bruce Lee Stylez, and his MIGHTY nine eleven thread right here

Historical Comparison

user posted image

----The Burning of the Reichstag



In 1933 Adolph Hitler wanted to seize dictotorial powers and turn Germany into a police state. So he set the massive governmental building on fire, that is known as the Reichstag (German Parliament) the blazing infernos sent the population into a state of petrified fear. Adolph Hitler and his party won by a landslide in the election just weeks later and later on was able to merge the Chancellor’s powers with that of the Presidents, and this is the origin of where his dictatorial power came from. Hitler also blamed the terrorist attack on the communists, and recived a pretext, or a reason, to attack them.


The real Pretext

Hitler’s conspiratorial tactic of burning the Reichstag to receive dictatorial power, and a pretext to attack his enemies is a method that is known as the Hegelian Dialectic, which is translated simply as problem, reaction, solution. The Hegelian Dialectic is a tactic that was developed by the 19th century German philosopher George Wilhelm Fredric Hegel. The way this works is, you create a crisis, the population is thrown into fear, and then you, the creator of the crisis, step in with a pre-organized solution, and pose as the savior. As soon as 911 occurred, literally while the smoke was still streaming from the building, politicians began targeting us with Doublethink approaches to get us to give up our freedom for security.

I don't want to digress too much, but this is important.

Doublethink is the practice of misrepresenting something bad as something good, such as pushing identity theft propaganda in order to get the people wanting a national ID card. This was the phrase coined in George Orwell's book 1984, which psychologically persuaded the population to relinquish there freedom and unto big brother simultaneously being happy about it. We see doublethink utilized daily by politicians.

The Hegelian Dialectic fused with the double think approach has given ruthless men an unbelievably effective tactic of power consolidation. But this time it's bigger,

user posted image


PNAC(Project For a New American Centeury

The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was founded by Dick Chenney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis Libby and others in 2000. This is a pro-globalization neo-con think tank. On his website Dick Cheney lays out a Blueprint for America to invade many of it's neighbors and construct a "global command and control system" Cheney sites Syria, Libya, and North Korea as terrorist regimes, and uses their existence to justify invasions and restructuring there powers under a Pax America. It's strange, earlier in the year, Rumsfeld was selling Nuclear Reactors to North Korea. Now he's sitting in meetings at PNAC calling them a dangerous regime. HaHa, who made them more dangerous, Mr. Rumsfeld?
This document also mentions that public support would be very difficult to rally for these upcoming wars, and that a "Pearl Harbor Like Attack" would be very helpful. Now this is a public document, saying we need helpful Pearl Harbor attacks, that's motive, and practically admittance.

Sources:

PNAC offical site read the documents.
Meacher talks about PNAC too
Guardian UK - The Two Faces of Rumseld

Not only this, but


"the US and the UK, are running dangerously low on hydrocarbon energy supplies. And by 2010 the Muslim world will control as much as 60% of the worlds oil production, and 95% of the remaining exportable oil. "

Protecting oil supplies in a crisis
Taliban to Texas for Oil Talks
Bottom of the Barrel, the world is runnin out of oil, why do Politicans refuse to talk about it?
Threats of US to strike Taliban weeks before the attacks



Key Bono(Who Benefits?)

Three Corporations involved in the war on terror/The World effort. They are the
Carlyle Group, Unocal, and Halliburton,

Carlyle group: Bush and the Bin Laden family are BOTH investors in this company, that is headed almost exclusively by former government officals.


Unocal: Bush just hired the former CEO, I believe to his administration, others inside the camp are investors as well. This is the company building the pipeline through Afganistan.

Halliburton: I don't even half to say it.


Meacher for the last time,

"No serious attempt has ever been made to catch Bin Laden. In late September and early October 2001, leaders of Pakistan's two Islamist parties negotiated Bin Laden's extradition to Pakistan to stand trial for 9/11. However, a US official said, significantly, that "casting our objectives too narrowly" risked "a premature collapse of the international effort if by some lucky chance Mr Bin Laden was captured". The US chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Myers, went so far as to say that "the goal has never been to get Bin Laden" (AP, April 5 2002). The whistle blowing FBI agent Robert Wright told ABC News (December 19 2002) that FBI headquarters wanted no arrests. And in November 2001 the US air force complained it had had al-Qaida and Taliban leaders in its sights as many as 10 times over the previous six weeks, but had been unable to attack because they did not receive permission quickly enough (Time Magazine, May 13 2002). None of this assembled evidence, all of which comes from sources already in the public domain, is compatible with the idea of a real, determined war on terrorism"
Micheal Meacher

The War on terror is not the war on terror, it's putting the PNAC agenda into action.

Not only have they blatantly avoided chances to catch Bin Laden, but many reporters have written articles about top government officials holding the investigation in the dark, delaying them, and in some cases even protecting the terrorists. I'd post the actual document but I'm out of picture slots so you have to settle for the article, or research the rest yourself.

Bush restricts 911 probesTop Taladan leader freed by US
911 study hindered
Bush trying to hide 911 information
911 documents to sensitive for realse
Bush discourages 911 investagations
Times of India - Bush took FBI agents off the Trail of Bin Ladens
Guardian UK - Agent Blasts FBI over 11 Sept 'cover up'


Goes on and on


ILLUMINATI NEW WORLD ORDER, THE CARD GAME

Not only has PNAC directly stated that they want "helpful Pearl Harbor Attacks" on their website, but a card game entitled Illuminati New World Order, surfaced in 1995, which discribed the events of 911 with a shocking level of acuracy. The game INWO contained cards that said the words "Terrorist Nuke" at the top with an illustration of the Twin Towers being destroyed clearly shows tower one being demolished first.

user posted image

-This amazingly means, that this card predicted almost exacty what what happened in New York City, six years before the actual event. It also identifies the villians as "Terrorist" at the top, which was not a term used nearly as much before 911, I don't know about the nuke part, although explosives were definetly in use on September 11th.

-The explosion on the card is very close to the actual planes entry point.

-Another interesting thing to note, is the illuminati pyramid to the left of tower two.

user posted image

This card is chilling. We know that the plane or the missile or whatever hit the pentagon, peirce through several walls puncturneing  holes through several of the steel reinforced concrecte walls at the Pentagon, and actually exploded somwhere in the middle, Although it took out a wing, the rest of the pentagon was unscathed.

Here is a flash of the Pentagon which accurately shows the damage very simmilar to this card.

http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryho...ntagon.php#Main

Funny how they got both of these right and didn't make any mistakes six years before the attack, it seem someone had some advanced knowledge of it.

On March 1st 1990 the Secret Service and Austin Police raided Steve Jackson, the maker of the game's, office and confiscated four of his computers. Steve JAckson games fought back in court, but nearly suffered bankrupcy in the process. The charges were so bogues on the aff the judge awarded $50,000 as well as attornies fees to SJG. It's strange the secret service would bother the manufactuer of a role play game, perhaps it was to stop them from realeaseing Illuminati New World Order.

Here is the website of the game maker.
http://www.sjgames.com/inwo/

And props to the Cutting Edge for bringing this to my attention, most of what I have articulated is paraphrased from their article on INWO. Although theirs gets a bit to weird for me, here is the original article and props to them.


http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1753.cfm

The really scary thing is,


Home Land security = Police State Mechanism

New Laws in the Works, are...

Patriot Act: Old school now, Police and government officials do not need warrants to enter homes now, and can seize anything in your house, and not tell you they were there for 60 days. Also ambiguous language could allow for secret juryless trials and even executions for supposed "Terrorists". The definition of a terrorist as shown in the Patriot Act is one who commits "Any act that endangers human life, IN VIOLATION WITH ANY FEDERAL OR STATE LAW" So Jay walkers and pot dealers are terroist too. The Patriot Act has been used on many "domestic terrorists" for crimes such as being a gang member to writing a story here are some examples.

Student Arrested For Terroristic Threatening Says Incident A Misunderstanding, (HE gets arrested for writing a story byt doesen't say that in the head lines)

NY Post - N.Y. Using Terrorism Law To Prosecute Street Gang



National ID cards, which contain name, address the usual things, but also a finger and a retinal print, also rumors are circulating about a possible tracking chip inside of them.

We have the National all Prescriptions reporting act, which makes all of your medical drug information accessible by Federal agencies, all of them in fact since their all allowed sharing information now.

And the possible enactment of mandatory psychological testing for children and prescribing drugs without the parents consent. 
There are also talks of extending the program to the entire population. (Note: The Forced psychological testing bill has already been passed, search “new freedom initiative” for more info)

AND the mother of them all of course, the Patriot Act II, while the first Patriot Act is just a destruction first, third, fourth and fifth amendments, Patriot Act II is a carbon copy of the powers that Hitler and Julius Caesar gave themselves
Patriot Act II creates an expanded definition for domestic terrorism, And it allows any terrorism act to result in the death penalty, allows federal access to your bank, educational, and financial records, and makes conspiracy to commit terror a crime with out endangering any life what so ever. And amazingly makes information gathering illegal, in fact this post right here would go under the heading of "Info Terrorism"

Patriot act II is enormously unpopular, and received massive amounts of bad press, so it's being passed in smaller increments, 10% of it has already been passed as HR2417,  which allows for the pulling of all Financial and Medical transcripts.

"Strengthening Patriot Act I is code for passing Patriot Act 2."
There trying to do this now.


Summary:


911 was such a cataclysmic event, it galvanized both the idiots and the intellectuals of America into a flag waving frenzy for nearly five years.  911 has become a never ending excuse to fight any war over seas, and implement any authoritarian rule domestically. Politicians were so quick to exploit this event, jumping in there tanks and battle suits while rushing 1000 page bills through the Senate and House. One has to wonder, why knee jerk reaction of this attack was to shift into throwing doublethink deception at the people, telling them to give up freedom for liberty before the smoke had yet to even clear from the air.

Giving up freedom for Liberty is a False Paradigm. No Liberty = Tyranny.

As the Roman judges used to say when a crime was committed, “key bono?”, or who benefits? The globalists who masterminded this attack want authoritarian control of America, invasion into uncontrolled Arab states, and overall a world climate that is so dangerous and unstable, the people will beg them for a one world government. A government ruled by them. Order out of chaos.

I've developed quite a case here, and I think my arguments are supported extremely well, even without all of my information on the towers; this is very strong evidence that we are being lied too, almost on a daily basis. Most of this literally proves the official story is a fraud and there's a lot of things I chose not to talk about, like 100s of Al-Queda and Taliban being flown out after 911, Insider trading right before 911, or Bush pulling  FBI agents off of the Trail of the Bin Laden right before 911 (Edit: I did touch on that) and signing documents to protect them. However I've come to the conclusion that in this instance, the problem is there is actually TOO MUCH evidence here, so I won't even bother with the links for my last claims.

If you think I've made a compelling case, than I urge you learn more about this, because if I'm even remotely correct, and this New World Order aka the "Global Union" is created, by the same creatures who carried out this attack, I don't think your going to want to live under the tyranny grids they've constructed for you.  I'm not charging the government with carrying this out, but these Rogue elements with tentacles into our government, who live in families who are worth five times as much as our countries annual budget. If you look more into this, I know you'll see that what I'm saying is true, this is what has happened with me.  So please spread this thread around as much as you can, watch some of these movies I post at the bottom, PLEASE look into this more.  I know when you find out what I'm saying is real, you'll fight it with even more compassion.

In the past only small pockets of people have had information on this subject, which served to cloak events in a protective secrecy. But lately a plethora of new information has been consolidated, creating an incredibly chaotic environment for the globalist where the risk of mass exposure is becoming very real. So once you learn, please spread this information on to others.

This is an information war, against elites with 90% of the wealth trying to control the political and financial systems to control mankind, and doing it for there own selfish desires.  And information of this type is so much more powerful than any gun or grenade or tank or anything. Every single word we spew of resistance is a bullet, discharged from a chamber and sent into the heart of the New World Order Demon, and it will take a lot to kill it, but humanity will prevail.

911 Documentaries


Martial Law: 911 Rise of the Police State (The best damn 911 movie ever made)
Windows Media Player:

Broadband:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml.wmv

Dial up:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml56k.wmv

Stream:

Broadband:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml.wmx

Dial up:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml56k.wmx

911- The Road To Tyranny

Paineful Deceptions
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 1 (pentagon)
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 2 (building 7 and the two towers)
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 3 (media propaganda)

The Masters of terror
2:00:09
http://thewebfairy.com/video/collected/Mas...ror_128KBps.wmv

911 Truth and Lies 4 parts

http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart1.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart2.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart3.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart4.wmv

Michael Parenti-Terrorism, Globalism and Conspiracy
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti1.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti2.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti3.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti4.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti5.wmv

Illuminazi 9-11
http://www.nwowatcher.com/downloads/illuminazi.wmv

The Microchip
http://www.nwowatcher.com/downloads/The%20Microchip.wmv

Free ebooks

The Secret Rituals of the O.T.O. (Illuminati, Templars, Freemasons, etc.).pdf
Order Out of Chaos - Paul Joseph Watson
A Chronological History of the New World Order - Denis Cuddy
Conspiracy ebook - The New World Order - Milton William Cooper
Global Tyranny Step by Step - By WIlliam F. Jasper


A sh** load more Documentaries and ebooks can be found here
[right][snapback]609990[/snapback][/right]


they show planes flying into them. videos and everything
turbonium
QUOTE
Read my post above, according to engineers the towers would of had to sway over 100 degrees to topple over, and the collapse straight down was the only way they would have fallen given the area and nature of the damage. I'll trust someone in the know over a couple of links to an ip address and an author pushing sales on his new book. If you want I'll make a quick web page tomorrow citing that the towers didn't actually collapse, they indeed floated upwards and were destroyed by the sun. Obviously it must be true if it's on the interweb!


Over 100 degrees?? Do you not realize how ridiculous that is?? If you want to "trust someone in the know" over the Laws of Physics as stated by Newton and Galileo, you cannot be reasoned with no.gif Let me show you what a 100 degree angle would look like. The green arrow points to the 90 degree line-
[attachmentid=15142]


NOVA: The Twin Towers collapsed essentially straight down. Was there any chance they could have tipped over?

Eagar: It's really not possible in this case.

This statement by Eagar is utterly amazing. It is a wonder MIT has not fired him. Given that the south tower did in fact tip over (and quite visibly so). This shows Eagar's desperation. One thing is certain, all buildings, even the World Trade Center towers, will tip over if enough lateral (sideways) force is applied to them.

In our normal experience, we deal with small things, say, a glass of water, that might tip over, and we don't realize how far something has to tip proportional to its base. The base of the World Trade Center was 208 feet on a side, and that means it would have had to have tipped at least 100 feet to one side in order to move its center of gravity from the center of the building out beyond its base.

The laws of physics do not change. The same laws of physics that tell you a glass of water will tip over, also tell you that (if enough lateral force is applied) large buildings like the World Trade Center towers, will in fact, tip over. You must ask yourself why Eagar chooses to lie about this (he certainly knows the physics, but chooses to tell the world a transparent lie).
What Eagar says about the center of gravity is true, however, it does not imply that the building would come straight down, so his statement is just another piece of misdirection. His implication is clearly wrong, as shown by the fact that the south tower did in fact tip over (videos of the south tower collapse clearly show that the top 30, or so, floors tipped over, but this section was being demolished as it fell, so after a few seconds it was reduced to rubble and no longer fell as a unit).


turbonium
QUOTE
So despite drilling a huge hole into the building, it didn't dislodge a single piece of fireproofing? Do you think that the fireproofing hung suspended in the air of it's own accord when the plane went in and took out the structure it was attached too? Wow, some nice technology there for a building built in the 60's and 70's!


LOL! No sh** fireproofing was dislodged - the point is that he is claiming that plus the "raging" fire collapsed the towers. Not a chance!! Look at this pic to see how "raging" the fire was at the impact point!!
user posted image

These are NY Times articles describing a 1975 fire in one tower which lasted for three hours!! even BEFORE the sprinkler systems were installed!! In case you're doubting THAT - from this link on the NIST findings NIST "The installed fire sprinkler systems in WTC 1, 2, and 7 exceeded minimum NFPA requirements."Geez, no PANCAKE that day!! laugh.gif
user posted image
user posted image
FIRE STORM101
i don't bring much to the table, but it you're going to talk about 911, u might as well talk about Pearl Harbor. we had warnings about that attack too, up till it happen. the problem is that it was ether ignored or didn't reach the presadent in time

any ways, i don't care if it could have been diverted or not, what good would it have done becides save the lives of thousands of people and billions of dollars, they would have been wasted one way or another

turbonium
QUOTE
any ways, i don't care if it could have been diverted or not, what good would it have done becides save the lives of thousands of people and billions of dollars, they would have been wasted one way or another

??? You must be joking around, no??
QUOTE
Pearl Harbor. we had warnings about that attack too, up till it happen. the problem is that it was ether ignored or didn't reach the presadent in time

Pearl Harbor and 9/11 WERE arranged by US Gov't with orders from the Big Banks. Documentation has now been brought into the public domain about Pearl Harbor being intentionally provoked by the US into being attacked, and that even though US officials knew that the Japanese had sent their attack fleet, the information was purposely hidden from the US Armed Forces at Pearl. The FDR cabal committed acts of treason and were accomplices in mass murder!! (Same with Shrub)
LucidElement
damn thats a lot of information.. anyways i dont no if you linked it because i dont have time to go thru all your stuff... but ican tell ya, have you seent hat one video about the Pentagon and the big circle in it, and they said that it couldnt have been a commercial airline that went thru it??? its like a huge circle, looked like a missle, im sure you have it linked though!!
Tiggs
You're all missing the point. The planes were flown into the Towers to make sure there was a guaranteed worldwide audience before they were destroyed. Maximum worldwide impact for a symbolic attack on capitalism.

What's more scary? The idea that terrorists hijacked two planes, or the idea that they infiltrated both Trade Center towers, placed explosives on every floor (and the big ones in the basement) and then calmly pushed the button when they knew the whole world was watching. Just to make the point, they destroy building 7, too. How much more organised would you suddenly believe that terror organisation to be? How much more panic would the American Public be feeling?

If I was a government official, I'd be telling everyone it was a result of the planes, too, regardless of whether it was or it wasn't. Think about it. Given the choice, which would you do?

yes.gif
Bad Mojo
QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 08:36 PM)
Over 100 degrees?? Do you not realize how ridiculous that is?? If you want to "trust someone in the know" over the Laws of Physics as stated by Newton and Galileo, you cannot be reasoned with no.gif   Let me show you what  a 100 degree angle would look like. The green arrow points to the 90 degree line-
[attachmentid=15142]


I meant 100 feet, that's what I get for debating on a total of 12 hours of sleep for 4 days. Given the fact you went on to quote my source, I would have figured you'd have seen what I was trying to say.

QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 08:36 PM)
This statement by Eagar is utterly amazing. It is a wonder MIT has not fired him. Given that the south tower did in fact tip over (and quite visibly so). This shows Eagar's desperation. One thing is certain, all buildings, even the World Trade Center towers, will tip over if enough lateral (sideways) force is applied to them.


This statement by "RandomGuy347" illustrates why most conspiracy sites are a joke.

1) Eager says the buildings would need to sway 100 feet in order to topple over.

2) Idiot comes in and says "wait, the towers DID sway! They should have tipped over but didn't! CONSPIRACY!!" -- But notice that while the theorist says they swayed, he doesn't say HOW MUCH, he doesn't even make a guess.

It's called a "straw man argument" and it means to take something that's said, focus on only part of it, and build a false argument from there. The theorist makes it seem as if Eager said the buildings didn't sway at all, when in fact he said they would have to sway 100 feet. I'm surprised by this method of debate, it seems to be pretty common among the 911 conspiracy theorists, even you've used it extensively in this thread wink2.gif

QUOTE(turbonium @ May 25 2005, 08:36 PM)
The laws of physics do not change. The same laws of physics that tell you a glass of water will tip over, also tell you that (if enough lateral force is applied) large buildings like the World Trade Center towers, will in fact, tip over. You must ask yourself why Eagar chooses to lie about this (he certainly knows the physics, but chooses to tell the world a transparent lie).
What Eagar says about the center of gravity is true, however, it does not imply that the building would come straight down, so his statement is just another piece of misdirection. His implication is clearly wrong, as shown by the fact that the south tower did in fact tip over (videos of the south tower collapse clearly show that the top 30, or so, floors tipped over, but this section was being demolished as it fell, so after a few seconds it was reduced to rubble and no longer fell as a unit).

[right][snapback]641091[/snapback][/right]


Wait, so above he says it swayed but mysteriously fell straight down... and now he says it did indeed have some variance? Tell this guy to get his story straight and try again. The "top 30 floors or so" also does not equal "the 110 story tower." Isn't this the same guy that blasted the "zipper theory" and is now using that same principle [he said was impossible] to disprove a seperate point? That's laughable! IT IS! IT ISN'T! IT IS! IT ISN'T.

hehe, cracks me up grin2.gif
Bad Mojo
QUOTE(Tiggs @ May 26 2005, 09:37 AM)
You're all missing the point. The planes were flown into the Towers to make sure there was a guaranteed worldwide audience before they were destroyed. Maximum worldwide impact for a symbolic attack on capitalism.

What's more scary? The idea that terrorists hijacked two planes, or the idea that they infiltrated both Trade Center towers, placed explosives on every floor (and the big ones in the basement) and then calmly pushed the button when they knew the whole world was watching. Just to make the point, they destroy building 7, too. How much more organised would you suddenly believe that terror organisation to be? How much more panic would the American Public be feeling?

If I was a government official, I'd be telling everyone it was a result of the planes, too, regardless of whether it was or it wasn't.  Think about it. Given the choice, which would you do?

yes.gif
[right][snapback]641736[/snapback][/right]


Nono, it was a massive act of misdirection. By having the world focused on the towers, the aliens could sneak their ships throught the atmosphere and into the ocean unawares. Nobody noticed the odd lightshow of several thousand alien warships burning on entry. It's all over now man, right now a massive army of reptilians is forming off the coast of Australia, which they will take first as their first land base of operations. ph34r.gif
Sub-Zer0
QUOTE(Bad Mojo @ May 26 2005, 10:37 AM)
QUOTE(Tiggs @ May 26 2005, 09:37 AM)
You're all missing the point. The planes were flown into the Towers to make sure there was a guaranteed worldwide audience before they were destroyed. Maximum worldwide impact for a symbolic attack on capitalism.

What's more scary? The idea that terrorists hijacked two planes, or the idea that they infiltrated both Trade Center towers, placed explosives on every floor (and the big ones in the basement) and then calmly pushed the button when they knew the whole world was watching. Just to make the point, they destroy building 7, too. How much more organised would you suddenly believe that terror organisation to be? How much more panic would the American Public be feeling?

If I was a government official, I'd be telling everyone it was a result of the planes, too, regardless of whether it was or it wasn't.  Think about it. Given the choice, which would you do?

yes.gif
[right][snapback]641736[/snapback][/right]


Nono, it was a massive act of misdirection. By having the world focused on the towers, the aliens could sneak their ships throught the atmosphere and into the ocean unawares. Nobody noticed the odd lightshow of several thousand alien warships burning on entry. It's all over now man, right now a massive army of reptilians is forming off the coast of Australia, which they will take first as their first land base of operations. ph34r.gif
[right][snapback]641843[/snapback][/right]


Shut up Straw man, THere's hardly any evidence for the offical story. All u have is the travel bag with passport, coveniently left by the Hi-Jacker, the Bin LAden Tapes, and the Media's compliance, all of that evidence could be easily manufactured, as it was. Save the media's compliance, that's obviously decided by the gatekeepers and who owns it. You cannot manufacture the evidence of building seven being blown up, along with buildings one and two, it's ridiculous what u suggest.

This guy has already revealed who he works for, he's just trying to sap are time and strenght away, you make it sound so out there to say that the globalist who own the Military Industrial Complex carries it out, when you if you weigh the evidenece on both sides we have your pawns outclassed by kings, there is not a honest jury out there who when face w/ our evidence, would not convict the Globalist with carrying out 911.

In your heart of hearts, You know this is true,
turbonium
QUOTE
1) Eager says the buildings would need to sway 100 feet in order to topple over.

2) Idiot comes in and says "wait, the towers DID sway! They should have tipped over but didn't! CONSPIRACY!!" -- But notice that while the theorist says they swayed, he doesn't say HOW MUCH, he doesn't even make a guess.

It's called a "straw man argument" and it means to take something that's said, focus on only part of it, and build a false argument from there. The theorist makes it seem as if Eager said the buildings didn't sway at all, when in fact he said they would have to sway 100 feet. I'm surprised by this method of debate, it seems to be pretty common among the 911 conspiracy theorists, even you've used it extensively in this thread


Talk about STRAW MAN!! You are trying to muddle the issue by misinterpreting the FACT that one tower tipped from the top 30 or so floors to a 23 degree angle! You can't get around that fact, nor can you get around the Laws of Physics, no matter how often you ignore them in your lame replies!!
sowegaMIB

I really didn't know where to put this topic so I put it here.....



Has anyone ever thought that maybe our Government done it to ourselves to bring us as a country together? It has been done before by Hitler, so why can't our government think it can bring us together if they done something like 9/11.


Fact: 9/11 brought us as a country together, we pulled together at a time our country was beinging threatened and our people being hurt and killed.
brittish_gurl
No, I don't think so. I think it just happened, then it just so happen showed how much of a strong country we are....except for Bush....
A lot of people love our country and would come together to save it....
ForRizzle
I think this should be merged with all the other 911 threads.. Do we really need another thread on the same exact thing?
sowegaMIB
sorry



how do you do that? or how do you close a thread?
ForRizzle
Hit the report button on the bottom left side of the post and ask a Mod to merge the topic with other 911 threads. There is one going right now with a video.
sowegaMIB


thanks
BurnSide
Merged topic with previous 911 topic. thumbsup.gif
ForRizzle
Thanks BS. SowegaMIB - I doubt the government did it to unit the people. At first I thought no way about them having any hand in it. Now and days I am more skeptical. They could have encouraged it, turned a blind eye to let it happen in the name of Money and Corporate profit, to spur the economy. Just think about the billions being pumped into the military industrio complex to develope new weapons, replenish spent arsenals, planes, ships, bombs, missles, bullets,, and so much more. Bush has said this war will go on for possibly decades.. He needed public support, congressional support.. Long term industrial growth!
sowegaMIB



I have alot of friends and family in the military, in every branch, they all have tried to get me to see the reason behind war, the problem I did have with it is I don't see how a country can go into war over something a hand full of people decides on, but when 9/11 happened I really didn't remeber much about it b/c I was in the hospital having my beautiful son, after I got out and started hearing and seeing things on it what got me is all the people that got killed, all those babies, and now almost four years later we are still having our people killed in war, its just so very sad that innocent people have to die like this....
openmind1963
our government pisses away a lot of money,and no doubt has some unbelievable secrets they are keeping i've no doubt.what justification would they have to stage
an attack on what were at one time the world's most famous twin buildings?was the first attempt in 93 a test run?question the government,yes.not with crazy out
of orbit foolish conspiracy theories.most of them are complete speculation of an insane and foolish nature.
user posted image
Sunofone
QUOTE(sowegaMIB @ May 27 2005, 01:40 PM)
I really didn't know where to put this topic so I put it here.....



Has anyone ever thought that maybe our Government done it to ourselves to bring us as a country together? It has been done before by Hitler, so why can't our government think it can bring us together if they done something like 9/11.


Fact: 9/11 brought us as a country together, we pulled together at a time our country was beinging threatened and our people being hurt and killed.
[right][snapback]644157[/snapback][/right]

uh yeah hello-have you read the "project for a new american century(PNAC)"? they claim that just such an event was necessary in order to rapidly advance their energy and defense agenda,otherwise(and i quote) "it will be a slow process in moving forward with the agenda"---yeah it brought us together allright behind a huge insurance scam and land grab for oil with side of "regime change" which the downing street memos proove was premeditated and that the evidence was fixed wacko.gif
turbonium
The scientific evidence, the photographic and video evidence, and documentation are overwhelming proof of a controlled implosion of the twin towers. UM members have posted everything needed to show what was reallly done on 9/11. The naysayers have tried every trick in the book from distractions, red herrings, straw man arguments, and misleading and false statements.

I hope and await that the day comes when these cowardly traitors who happily murdered their fellow Americans on 9/11 hang by their slimy little necks.
openmind1963
all i have seen/read is speculation on top of more speculation all adding up to complete and total bullshit!our government hides things from us,we should all realize that,but it does deserve a certain amount of trust,and using the us military against its own civilians is something they would just not ever do,especially to make a few people some money!the only 911 conspiracy was the one al qaedia
put together when they attacked us the beautiful late summer day!
Sub-Zer0
pin this?
747400
Let's assume that it was terrorists for now: the next question is, were they really Al Qaeda? What is Al Qaeda? Does it exist? Is there any real organised network at all? Are we honestly to believe it was all coordinated by one guy, sitting in a cave in Afghanistan? A guy who had a kidney complaint that meant he was on dialysis? In a cave?!

So who are Al Qaeda? Did Osama have anything to do with it?
narafa
QUOTE(TaintedDoughnuts @ May 9 2005, 04:38 AM)
hi subzero!  welcome to UM! im TaintedDoughnuts, the forum idiot.  thumbsup.gif

i agree with you 100%.  i made a post with some other links in a different thread.  my only question is: whats the government trying to cover up?
[right][snapback]611826[/snapback][/right]


Dear All,

Although I am not an American, and I haven't even lived or dealt with Americans except in very special cases and rare times, but I think that I can understand a little bit how some Americans are thinking.

Now about what the gov is trying to cover, I think that the American gov, the CIA and the FBI have lots of things to cover and still have many more plans to come.

Although they are supposed to work for the National Security of the USA, they don't care how they do it or what could be the implictions or the consequencies of what they do.

1 thing I am sure of, if the US gov is not directly involved in the Sep. 11 Attacks, and if the official story is true and the hijackers were really Arabs and Muslims, then I assume that the Arabs must be the stronger part of the world and not the weaker one right now.

Let's face the truth and say that most strong countries are strong because they are strong from the military point of view. N. Korea is considered a strong country because of their weapons and not because of their economy or anything else. And the same concept applies to any country.

And by far, the Arab countries are very poor in military forces compared to many other countries, that's why they are considered in the weak side of the world although they are relatively rich countries.

No hard feelings original.gif I am from the Arab world and live there, but I know that the western world is a lot stronger, richer and bla bla bla..Not because you say so, but because I know this is the truth. That's why many in the Arab world are facing the truth and not trying to change it by using power or terrorism.

Anyway, back to the Sep. 11 attacks, just ask yourself, what can the Arab countries gain from such a thing?? Money? I don't think so...Power?? Not to mention?? Propaganda?? How come, specially that we had no control over the media, TV, newspapers and magazines?

You know, if I was going to think that Arabs or Muslims specifically made it, I might think that it was better to use non-Arab and non-Muslims in such an attack. By this way, I acheive my goal and blame someone else at the same time, and I think that's exactly what the US gov did in the Sep. 11 Attacks.
narafa
[quote=Bad Mojo,May 23 2005, 08:21 AM]
Quoting got a little screwy, my replies are in bold disgust.gif

Do you work in the intel community? because I do and I find that the events described above are indeed *very* plausible.

If you work in the intel community, why have you bothered yourself and came here to reply to all this, if it's hoax as you say?


Aside from two links from US sources talking about events 6 years prior to 9-11, the rest are from the UK. I have a hard time believing that a reporter in another country knows more about what's going on in the US than we do.

The 9/11 attacks itself are the biggest proof that at some point of time, all the intel units knew nothing about what is going inside the USA, according to the official story.


Tony Blair was under his own personal scrutiny at the time, due to getting the UK involved in the WOT that we started. I think it's more likely that this was nothing more than political jockeying, it happens. Probably nothing more than "oh look, he's a bad bad man, elect me next time!"

Is this an admission that you were the main cause of many traps that faced Tony Blair in his political life as a pressuring method??


I'd like to see a link from a reputable news source about instant messaging people in the WTC, the only thing I can find is about two Odigo employees that were notified with IM's - but they were working in Isreal, and the messages did not mention the WTC specifically. Links from conspiracy theory sites are just that - theory. If Ashcroft was flying privately to avoid the WTC attacks, then why do it 6 months in advance?

Can you please define a reputable news source?? Do you consider the newsweek a reputable news source for example??

If the USA knew information about the Sep. 11 prior to them happening, then probably they might not know when exactly are these events going to happen, and in such cases and for security issues, you will know why Ashcroft did it 6months in advance.


your own links:
NORAD was conducting those excercises for *years* prior to 9-11. And the drill that you mention consisted of a small corporate jet having a mechanical failure and crashing into one of the agencies towers... no hijacking involved. As far as scrambling jets, we didn't have the foresight to see the possibility of an American plane getting hijacked in US airspace and then being used as a weapon. This was something completely unexpected, historically hijackers request prisoner releases, political actions, etc. and end up landing eventually. This was unprecedented.



IF the NORAD was conducting for YEARS prior to 9-11, why through all those years, no one ever imagined that something similar to this program can happen against the USA???


the bag? Maybe to hold the Quran and toiletries? Radical Muslims don't die dirty, and never without a copy of their holy book.


Do you know Muslims?? Have you lived with them?? Do you know what are their beliefs and what do you they like and hate?? I don't think so. Plus, how can you be sure that those who hijacked the planes were carrying bags although such type of bags you are talking about are simply considered handbags that are not usually reported before logging to the plane as they are not counted for weight purposes??


I won't comment on this, though I think if anyone googled enough you'd probably come close to the truth. But what I *can* say is why exactly would the gov't demolish building seven? Think about it, it stood for several hours after the attack before falling. Nobody was inside the building when it collapsed, so what exactly woudl be the purpose of some grand coverup involving building seven? Done with this one, don't expect anymore...

Things usually aren't what they seem to be..And that's all I can say about this.


There's also redirection. Letting the people believe one thing, and in fact fostering it - knowing it's nowhere near the truth. Personaly, I think anyone that believes the gov't has released *all* the pertinent information about 911 are misguided... but not *nearly* as much as those that persue crazed cospiracy theories. In the long run, those that believe such things are no threat to the gov't at all.

Ya sure, no threat I agree, simply because there is no actual proof about what they are talking about.

The fact is that the US past govs missleaded the public in many historic cases before, that's why many are feeling right now that the whole official story is simply cooked.


Rumor? Fact is it's nothing more than a nationwide driver's license.

What prevents making the rumor as a fact?? Simply nothing...Many rumors are out there and stressed that they are rumors just to cover the real truth and that what is being told as a rumor is a real fact, but most of the people believe it's a rumor.


How do *you* propose we prevent terrorism in America if the gov't can't investigate it? Unless you are having tea with the local terrorist cell, the odds of them targeting you for intrusion into your bank records is pretty slim. Do you think they are going to field an office that just randomly harasses people? I don't see it. What I do see is that if you deny the gov't the right to do what is necessary to combat terrorism, nobody else is going to do it. Something has to be done, and while I see lots of criticism about the policies being made, I've seen *nobody* offer up any alternatives. Let's hear some ideas of how to protect america, but still keep pre-911 freedoms. It's easier to just blast them then actually work the problem - and if your not a part of the solution...

You can keep America safe and still keep pre-9-11 freedom if the intel community work harder than before, not by depriving people from their freedom..I am not attacking the intel community, on the contrary, I am just saying that winning the WWII could have been acheived without throwing any nuclear bombs over Japan. Have you gotten what I said???


Bush has four years left in office, I'm not seeing an NWO situation here. Isn't one of the goals of the NWO to have a one world gov't? Not going to happen anytime soon in my opinion, maybe after WWIII if it's big enough to topple the major players... Or maybe not, since there's enough nuclear power in the world to destory it several times over and I don't see a nation willingly conceding themselves to an NWO situation without going out with a "bang."

And why is the NWO there from the beginning?? A simple question though...What would have been the situation and the image of America in general in the whole world in case of trying to acheive the goals of the NWO without the Sep. 11 Attacks???? Now think about the image, supporters and everything else, but with the Sep. 11 attacks in mind?? A Coalition, everyone wants to help, and things are really done for freedom while they are actually not.


Been that way since the dawn of time. I don't recall any "rags-to-riches" world leaders off hand, most are from the affluent. I'm not seeing anything different now.

It is not like that, or else the oil rich Arab countries should have been the leaders of the world right now because they have the money weapon.


I am not against what you said, I am just trying to have a good and debatable conversation with you. At last, everyone believes what he believes, there is nothing wrong in this. But the real truth is and will stay a mystery.
openmind1963
QUOTE(747400 @ May 28 2005, 07:04 PM)
Let's assume that it was terrorists for now: the next question is, were they really Al Qaeda? What is Al Qaeda? Does it exist? Is there any real organised network at all? Are we honestly to believe it was all coordinated by one guy, sitting in a cave in Afghanistan? A guy who had a kidney complaint that meant he was on dialysis? In a cave?!

So who are Al Qaeda? Did Osama have anything to do with it?
[right][snapback]645373[/snapback][/right]

that's an assinine question,of course al qaedia exsists,bin laden came up with the plan,but he and his top officers gave it life,and dispatched and financed the cells that carried it out.pull your head out the sewer hole it's stuck in,and breathe the sunshine,okay?
Bad Mojo
QUOTE(turbonium @ May 26 2005, 08:03 PM)
QUOTE
1) Eager says the buildings would need to sway 100 feet in order to topple over.

2) Idiot comes in and says "wait, the towers DID sway! They should have tipped over but didn't! CONSPIRACY!!" -- But notice that while the theorist says they swayed, he doesn't say HOW MUCH, he doesn't even make a guess.

It's called a "straw man argument" and it means to take something that's said, focus on only part of it, and build a false argument from there. The theorist makes it seem as if Eager said the buildings didn't sway at all, when in fact he said they would have to sway 100 feet. I'm surprised by this method of debate, it seems to be pretty common among the 911 conspiracy theorists, even you've used it extensively in this thread


Talk about STRAW MAN!! You are trying to muddle the issue by misinterpreting the FACT that one tower tipped from the top 30 or so floors to a 23 degree angle! You can't get around that fact, nor can you get around the Laws of Physics, no matter how often you ignore them in your lame replies!!
[right][snapback]642891[/snapback][/right]


"Top 30 floors" says it all. Less than 1/3 of the tower sways and you expect it to topple over?
Bad Mojo
QUOTE(narafa @ May 28 2005, 03:08 PM)
If you work in the intel community, why have you bothered yourself and came here to reply to all this, if it's hoax as you say?


Because people are impressionable, and in my opinion if you are going to show one side of the story the other needs to be addressed as well. That's the point of a debate original.gif

QUOTE(narafa @ May 28 2005, 03:08 PM)
The 9/11 attacks itself are the biggest proof that at some point of time, all the intel units knew nothing about what is going inside the USA, according to the official story.


Nah, you have to understand the US gets threats *all the time*. Every day threats roll in from various sources, and it's largely a guessing game as to what's "real" and what's "hoax." And those that are deemed "possible" are usually cloaked in vaguery. It's not like a report rolls in that says "these people are going to hijack this plane on this date at this time and fly it to this location and crash it into this building." It would be nice if terrorists were that forthcoming, but generally they try to hide their plans.

QUOTE(narafa @ May 28 2005, 03:08 PM)
Is this an admission that you were the main cause of many traps that faced Tony Blair in his political life as a pressuring method??


Nope, it was an observation on the cut throat practices of politics. People jockey for position here, I'm sure they do there too.

QUOTE(narafa @ May 28 2005, 03:08 PM)
Can you please define a reputable news source?? Do you consider the newsweek a reputable news source for example??

If the USA knew information about the Sep. 11 prior to them happening, then probably they might not know when exactly are these events going to happen, and in such cases and for security issues, you will know why Ashcroft did it 6months in advance.


Thank you, that's exactly the point I was trying to make. If the gov't was behinf it, they would of had exact dates... Hence Ashcroft's limiting to gov't transportation 6 months in advance actually goes against the popular conspiracy theory.

QUOTE(narafa @ May 28 2005, 03:08 PM)
IF the NORAD was conducting for YEARS prior to 9-11, why through all those years, no one ever imagined that something similar to this program can happen against the USA???


They were conducting tests of planes crashing into buildings, not necessarily hijacked planes - in fact the example I gave (the excercise of the morning of 911) was a plane with mechanical failure.

QUOTE(narafa @ May 28 2005, 03:08 PM)
Do you know Muslims?? Have you lived with them?? Do you know what are their beliefs and what do you they like and hate?? I don't think so. Plus, how can you be sure that those who hijacked the planes were carrying bags although such type of bags you are talking about are simply considered handbags that are not usually reported before logging to the plane as they are not counted for weight purposes??


My statement stands, and yes, I do know muslims - It's not like they are rare.

QUOTE(narafa @ May 28 2005, 03:08 PM)
Things usually aren't what they seem to be..And that's all I can say about this.


Couldn't of said it better myself.

QUOTE(narafa @ May 28 2005, 03:08 PM)
Ya sure, no threat I agree, simply because there is no actual proof about what they are talking about.

The fact is that the US past govs missleaded the public in many historic cases before, that's why many are feeling right now that the whole official story is simply cooked.


Name one government in the world that has not mislead their public? This is hardly a "US" thing. We could easily be discussing how China orchestrated it to increase tensions between the US and their allies. It's a political thing, there's pretty much nowhere on earth you can go to escape it short of buying your own island.

QUOTE(narafa @ May 28 2005, 03:08 PM)
What prevents making the rumor as a fact?? Simply nothing...Many rumors are out there and stressed that they are rumors just to cover the real truth and that what is being told as a rumor