Job Discussion Forums

anonymous_alaska · Joined: 25 Mar 2004 Posts: 35

This is from ZMag.org The Indy Media hard drives were taken by the FBI. Is this a hoax?

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=4&ItemID=6392

jeddahteacher · Joined: 17 May 2004 Posts: 291 Location: Arabia

No, it is not a hoax. Welcome to the New America.
JT

moonraven · Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094

Brazil and Uruguay were particularly affected. Indymedia folks were also quick to raise the specter of the slab of steak--er wireless receiver--that turned the Bushbag into Quasimodo in the first debate. I expect him to be wearing the rectal suppository model tonight....

jeddahteacher · Joined: 17 May 2004 Posts: 291 Location: Arabia

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/summing_up.htm

(i) The twin towers could not have collapsed as a result
of plane impacts and the resulting fire. I believe this would be
the conclusion of a proper investigation by structural engineers
if a free investigation were permitted, which presently it is not.
(See http://www.serendipity.li/wtc2.htm and
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/wtc_demolition_init.htm.)

(ii) Whatever caused the damage to the Pentagon was obviously
not a Boeing 757. The photographic evidence, as well as rational
considerations, demonstrate this. No need for engineering experts.
(See http://www.serendipity.li/wtc3.htm and the recently-appeared
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr68.html.)

(iii) The collapse of WTC7 at 5 pm on 9/11 is explicable only
as a controlled demolition. Again no need, anyone can see this
from the video. (See http://www.serendipity.li/wot/wtc_other.htm
and http://www.wtc7.net/videos.html.)

These three items establish a strong prima facie case that the
official story is false. Arab hijackers could not have
produced a controlled demolition of any of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7,
and no 757 hit the Pentagon, thus not one piloted by an Arab hijacker.
(Which is not to say that there were no Arab wannabe hijackers,
just that the role of Atta & Co. was most likely that of patsies set up
to give apparent support to the official story. Like Oswald in 1963.)

For the purposes of showing that it was an inside job
there is no need to consider anything beyond (i)-(iii) above.

Peter Meyer

moonraven · Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094

WTC7 was clearly demolished for the insurance money. Does demolition qualify as arson?

santo · Joined: 03 Sep 2004 Posts: 11

Does the FBI really go to such lengths? You bet.
They come to my college and hang out in the libray. Our librarians tell us they can confirn that the FBI has been on campus, but by law(Patriot Act? I dunno) cannot tell who, when or how often the FBI is there- but we're a really small school so apparently they're pretty easy to distinguish from the real students.... CREEPY.

jpvanderwerf2001 · Joined: 02 Oct 2003 Posts: 1117 Location: New York

I've got some time-share property in Florida that might interest you all.

Sadken · Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 341

I think that the idea that 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by the Bush administration or anyone else is just so mental that I don't even want to consider it. Surely to God people aren't that evil, are they? I mean, I'm no idealist but that just goes beyond the pale.

moonraven · Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094

I am shocked that so many folks are in denial about that. It was only 3,000 people--small potatoes for those guys, and Bush's dad made a fortune off of it through the stock sales of the Carlyle group the week before 9/11. Not to mention other folks such as Jim Baker....

They saw it as a small price to pay for the opportunities it unfolded. Besides, they didn't pay the price anyway.

lagerlout2006 · Joined: 17 Sep 2003 Posts: 985

When ANY event gets put under a microscope there will appear to be all sorts of "inconsistencies." With morbidly fascinating things things -like JFK-people just won't let it go.

The theory I hear---it was done by FBI to create a pretext for war-well they failed miserably didn't they? Nobody supported those wars. The motive doesn't make sense. Oh well--I guess there will be some good grassy knoll books coming out in the next few years.
(Just what is supposed to happen when a jet hits a building? Everyone is such an expert these days.)

Ariadne · Joined: 16 Jul 2004 Posts: 960

The Twin Towers an inside job? Balderdash.

jeddahteacher · Joined: 17 May 2004 Posts: 291 Location: Arabia

http://www.spearhead.com/0410-jm.html
The Truth about the 'War on Terror' :John Morse looks at the realities behind the hype

"By way of introduction, it may be said that 'conspiracy theories', i.e. views of events contrary to those disseminated by the Government and established authorities, have long been the butt of mainstream writers and publicists in our mass media and academe, who largely tend, from whatever motives, mental laziness or otherwise, narrowly to echo the official line on any tragic and momentous incident. Anyone who radically questions what these 'authorities' tell us is liable instantly to be stigmatised by these gentry as a crank, misfit or extremist."

....

"During 2000 alone NORAD [North American Air Defense Command] had managed to meet the type of situation in which ground control-cockpit contact had been lost, and/or aircraft had wandered off course (exactly as happened to Flights 11, 175, 77 and 93) with perfect efficiency no less than 125 times (Alice in Wonderland, p.219), as it is required to do when "anything inexplicable is happening." Any sensible explanation has so far been refused as to why it failed to do so four times in one morning on September 11th 2001."

ChinaEFLteacher · Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 104 Location: China

It appalls me that you would cast our honest, respectable, and good authorities in such light. I'm sure anything bad that is happening or has happened is all the fault of the bad people over there.
When god is on your side, you can do no wrong.

moonraven · Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094

Balderdash my butt. It made complete sense for the Bush Gang to facilitate 9/11.

In any action of this sort you don't need to speculate about how it was pulled off. You only need to look at who has gained from it. Osama (who is probably dead anyway as there aren't too many dialysis clinics in caves in Afghanistan) didn't gain anything. The Saudis didn't either. The Bush Gang did--and still are.

nomadic · Joined: 14 Feb 2004 Posts: 118

I do not find the evidence for Bush/Cheney being responsible for 9/11 to have merit, but I also haven't given it any in-depth analysis, since I still have enough faith in the system to think that had they tried something of that magnitude, somewhere along the line, a good person would've done something. That said, I still think they're an embarassment to the USA and it's people, and I hope we do better come November 2nd.

... However, for those who say the US wouldn't even conceive of doing anything of this nature, look up "Operation Northwoods", which was a plan in the early 1960's by the US military (and presumably at least some members of Kennedy's cabinet?) to provoke a war with Cuba by, if necessary, attacking US citizens on our own soil and blaming Cuban terrorists. Plans included such ideas as hijacking planes, and blaiming it on Cubans, or destroying a US ship in Guantanamo Bay.

This operation never went ahead, thankfully, but it's all the more reason why we, the people, need to be more informed about our politicians, and ensure we do our best to elect good, responsible people to office!

Operation Northwoods: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

Cheers,
- nomadic