Was 9/11 an inside job?

[ledge]

Oh another reason I can't believe it was an inside job.

If the (now multiple) governments involved were so clever to organise this whole thing without anyone catching them out beforehand why were they so stupid to have it pinned on al queda rather than Iraq and Saddam Hussein seeing as that is where they ultimately wanted to invade.

That just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

[nvisibl]

Originally Posted by ledge

why were they so stupid to have it pinned on al queda rather than Iraq and Saddam Hussein seeing as that is where they ultimately wanted to invade.

May have been because Al-Queda is CIA funded? and Afghanistan is an easy target with easy access to Oil and Opium fields? 2 Big money spinners.

Al Queda & CIA funding - http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...ding&spell= 1


New Afghanistan Oil pipepline - http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...line&sp ell=1

CIA drug trafficking in Afghanistan - http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...afficking&meta=


Afghanistan also provides a very good strategic toe hold in the middle East.

Its not really so stupid when looked at in terms of gaining financial and military advantages in this apparently ongoing conquest. Iraq like Afghanistan is only another step along the way.

Careful not to dimiss anything without first doing some proper research.

[ledge]

Originally Posted by nvisibl

May have been because Al-Queda is CIA funded? and Afghanistan is an easy target with easy access to Oil and Opium fields? 2 Big money spinners.

Its not really so stupid when looked at in terms of gaining financial and military advantages in this apparently ongoing conquest. Iraq like Afghanistan is only another step along the way.

Careful not to dimiss anything without first doing some proper research.

Al Queda, or the people now involved were originally funded and helped by the CIA, this does not mean they are currently funded by them. Also if Al queda are controlled by the CIA then why did they bomb a US warship in the middle east, along with embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania? Seems odd that a US controlled group would do that.

The more you follow what this alleged conspiracy would mean in terms of actual events that have occurred the more and more you have to explain and draw into the conspiracy.

So far you have drawn in the US Government and other governments, the FBI the CIA, air traffic controllers, the BBC and the rest of the world media, private security firms, private demolition firms, the families of people on at least one jet airliner, police, fire and rescue teams from several cities and god knows who else.

It just gets ridiculous. If you want to believe this nonsense go ahead but you have to throw so much common sense out the window to accept the conspiracy theory that it means you are being willingly stupid.

As I've said before, the US Government couldn't keep quiet the tapping of some phones that would have involved perhaps a handful of people, yet you want me to believe that they have managed to keep quiet a conspiracy that involved large numbers of people and led to the deaths of thousands of people?

Yeah right.

[nvisibl]

Originally Posted by ledge

Al Queda, or the people now involved were originally funded and helped by the CIA, this does not mean they are currently funded by them. Also if Al queda are controlled by the CIA then why did they bomb a US warship in the middle east, along with embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania? Seems odd that a US controlled group would do that.

Seems odd also that a US Government would lie, sanction wars and carry out so much brutallity across the world in the name of Peace & Democracy. But it sure happens!

Fair points though Ledge, I certainly don't have all the answers, and I cant tell you right or wrong. You just got to go with your own gut, and read up on things a bit more if need be.

The more you follow what this alleged conspiracy would mean in terms of actual events that have occurred the more and more you have to explain and draw into the conspiracy.

I disagree..
I also wrote back at the begining of this thread that its best to keep things as simple as possible and go with your own gut feel else you can get lost in the vast amounts of perspective info, contradictions and agendas out there.

Simple example - And this fact you can easily verify for yourself with a simple google search - Why are the two main WTC buildings the first and only buildings in history to collapse due to fires, especially when they were built to withstand Earthquakes, and hurricanes.

My gut feel tells me theres something definately not right there

So far you have drawn in the US Government and other governments, the FBI the CIA, air traffic controllers, the BBC and the rest of the world media, private security firms, private demolition firms, the families of people on at least one jet airliner, police, fire and rescue teams from several cities and god knows who else.

I gave an example previously about how workers in any workplace are not necessarily aware of the goals and strategy of those above them of whom they report to. They just do their job as their meant to.

and btw - there are people in these groups who are and have been speaking out, and there are many who have quit their jobs or have even "commited suicide".

It just gets ridiculous. If you want to believe this nonsense go ahead but you have to throw so much common sense out the window to accept the conspiracy theory that it means you are being willingly stupid.

You don't have to throw away any common sense at all, especially to know that something just isn't right here.

As I've said before, the US Government couldn't keep quiet the tapping of some phones that would have involved perhaps a handful of people, yet you want me to believe that they have managed to keep quiet a conspiracy that involved large numbers of people and led to the deaths of thousands of people?

Back to the example re: Staff and Managers

Check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IHgFwYeB-Y

[Old Vantaa Man]

I would assume the BBC was given an official press release that WTC 7 had gone down. They started reporting it 5 minutes before the hour, and the main - on the hour - news. They then reported it in the main news. The broadcast then went live to NYC and a reporter giving live comments with the burning towers behind her. She also reported that the Solomon Brothers Building (WTC7) had gone down.

I'm sure that she had no idea what WTC 7 even looked like or was standing right behind her left shoulder. Only a native New Yorker would know it by sight. And someone clearly did, because 2 minutes before it really went down the live connection from NYC to BBC London was mysteriously cut.

Now that would have been a major fuck up!

nvisible mate, Fahrenheit 911 is a good one, but I think Bowling for Columbine also answers a lot of questions about where the money goes. Now, what's a couple of thousand office workers against the prospect of endless wealth needed to fight an invisible enemy? I have to admire the sheer audacity of this evil.

You probably won't read it, but a great book is The Whisper of the Axe by Richard Condon. UN-fekkin-CANNY. He also wrote The Manchurian Candidate and the Prizzi sagas. Prizzi's Glory is just sheer genius. I sent it to Alex ages ago and he still hasn't returned it. Pah!

[ledge]

Originally Posted by Old Vantaa Man

I would assume the BBC was given an official press release that WTC 7 had gone down.

That's a rather large assumption. I would assume that in the chaos that morning that there were no press releases from anyone, just a lot of rumour.

[ledge]

Originally Posted by nvisibl

Seems odd also that a US Government would lie, sanction wars and carry out so much brutallity across the world in the name of Peace & Democracy. But it sure happens!

But that all makes sense if you assume George Bush and pals are a bunch of power and money hungry evil cunts, the conspiracy just doesn't.

Originally Posted by nvisibl

I disagree..
I also wrote back at the begining of this thread that its best to keep things as simple as possible and go with your own gut feel else you can get lost in the vast amounts of perspective info, contradictions and agendas out there.

If you want to keep things as simple as possible then the simplest explanation is that a group of men hijacked some planes with the plan to fly them into buildings.

Originally Posted by nvisibl

Simple example - And this fact you can easily verify for yourself with a simple google search - Why are the two main WTC buildings the first and only buildings in history to collapse due to fires, especially when they were built to withstand Earthquakes, and hurricanes.

My gut feel tells me theres something definately not right there

Can you point out all the other buildings that have had 767 full of fuel flown into them? I was listening to a discussion between one of the proponents of the theory that the towers were brought down with explosives and the chief designer of the towers which answers a lot of the questions surrounding the towers.

Originally Posted by nvisibl

I gave an example previously about how workers in any workplace are not necessarily aware of the goals and strategy of those above them of whom they report to. They just do their job as their meant to.

and btw - there are people in these groups who are and have been speaking out, and there are many who have quit their jobs or have even "commited suicide".

Yeah, but taking enough explosives into the towers and getting them all wired up? Surely one person would have said, something isn't right about this?

And as for people speaking out, why didn't they do so before hand? The problem with anyone making claims afterwards is that unless they are providing some proof their claims are basically worthless.

Originally Posted by nvisibl

You don't have to throw away any common sense at all, especially to know that something just isn't right here.

Back to the example re: Staff and Managers

So why could a US president keep quiet a handful of people involving something that threatened no ones lives?

[Old Vantaa Man]

Ledge mate

Good points all, but Ronald Reagan was in charge? Well, the man could hit his marks like a true pro when he walked on stage, read from an auto-cue and look a camera in the eye and salute fresh air when he got off the helicopter at Camp David. But The Great Communicator was in charge?

Same goes for them all since Carter as far as I can see.

PAC's. The winner is the guy with the most.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee
Who decides where the most are going to be given? That's my conspiracy theory.

Addendum: I meant to convey that I believe The President of the United States of America is not the guy in charge of anything apart from what he's getting for lunch and tee-off times at the golf club.

[nvisibl]

Whilst some may mention that the Conspiracy doesn't make sense. For me the Official story just doesn't make sense, especially as in just 1 example when so called Hi-Jackers who by all accounts should be as dead as dust are actually turning up alive and well in different parts of the world.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...+alive&spell=1

For me it would make more sense for anyone who disbelieves in the so called conspiracy to start with questioning and researching the actual glaring anomolies in the Official story first.