Hi all,

Wasn't sure to where to post this as a newbie... so figured I'd just plonk it all down and let the mods figure it out.

I'm not aeronautically employed but studied aerospace engineering for 1 year before changing career direction 12 years ago.

I've read a fair bit on this subject becoming more interested after the London Underground bombings a number of years ago and more specifically since seeing footage of WTC7 in the last 12 months. Watching David Ray Griffin irrevocably convinced me the OCT was crook. Recently read DRG's latest book re Cass Sunstein's position. Have watched most of the videos and now find myself lost down the rabbit hole within the rabbit hole, probably exactly where the COINTELPRO want all of us.


These are the things that bother me the most in regard to what has become the "9/11 juggernaut", now apparently with a life of it's own;


Lack of Pentagon video footage of 757 hitting building, no seats, no bodies, no luggage; official word is plane vaporized on impact but at the same there are time pictures of FBI (?) collecting unsinged plane fuselage pieces from Pentagon lawn, on which there are no wounds, tail or wing pieces, and the only remotely identifiable engine might belong to a GH?


Norman Mineta testimony regarding conversation between DF Cochrane and D Cheney; irrespective of what orders "stood" , if the plane was 50 miles, then 30 miles, then 10 miles out then why wasn't the Pentagon evacuated given the events of the last 45-50 minutes?


Why hasn't anyone pinned down Larry Silverstein on his comments re "pulling" WTC? Either he meant 'demolish it', in which case it was prewired (and in that case are we to believe all buildings are prewired, just in case), or he meant "pull the fire crew out", supposing it might collapse ( in which case are we to believe he was psychic in his pre-knowledge that 7 would collapse?).

Did he actually have a dermatologist appointment early on that day?

Where did the investigation into the $100,00 wired to Mohamed Atta by Pakistani ISI lead? Or was that disinformation? Wasn't that brought to attention before C Rice at some stage?

The put options? Investigation lead to someone in Germany with no conceivable link to "Al-Qeada" so no further scrutiny warranted?

Comparitive silence of family members of crew and passengers on board the four flights to same of those that perished at WTC? Passenger manifests verses death register?

Silence of aircraft manufacturers regarding physical capabilities of aircaft, airphones existence/mobile phone capabilities at alititude?

Where IS Barbara Olsen?

And on and on and on.....

And how can I tell who is a "shill" and who isn't? If you get mainstream media airtime does that mean you must be a "shill" because MSM is controlled by the Z's (they who shall not be named)?
And therefore by association, is anyone who gets a look in on MSM also a shill?


I think my question is really, given everything that has gone before, why isn't 9/11 truth there yet?


Sorry for my poorly organised post. Frustrated that it all seems to be going nowhere. Hope and guidance from genuine veteran truthers would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

Welcome to the forum animaldoctor.


You've summed it up very well there - the whole of 9/11 is designed to be totally confusing - and realising the depth of deception also makes you realise that the world is not at all how it appears through the eyes of the mainstream media.

For example, there are definitely planted witnesses mixed in with genuine witnesses. There is also planted physical evidence mixed in with genuine physical evidence. So if a witness describes seeing something that goes against the OCT and is not mentioned by any other witness, is it

a. A genuine witness describing genuine evidence.
b. A planted witness describing genuine evidence.
c. A genuine witness describing planted evidence.
d. A planted witness describing planted evidence.
e. A planted witness telling a tall story.

Hence contradictions abound and it is difficult to be sure of anything - except of course that the Official version of 9/11 is impossible.

Welcome to the forum.

Thanks KP50,

I wrote a long reply, hit the wrong key and lost it.

I take your point about the horrendous multiple choice question; like a nightmarish exam question where it's just not possible to rule out even 50% of the options to even give yourself a 50/50 chance.

9/11/11 or 11/9/11, depending on where you are in the world, is going to be a major psychological marker for 9/11 truth. If we don't have our shit together by that date, sayonara baby.

My concern is that we already have the indisputable weight of scientific evidence on our side and still.... nothing.

I watched millions of people around the world protest the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 - England, USA, Australia, Germany, France, Italy Sweden, and all the other countries not covered by mainstream media and I remember having a conversation with a friend that "seeing this, they CANT go in; they WONT go in; it would be political suicide.... and yet here we are.

For example Dick Cheney on 9/11 - Norman Mineta testimony - he didn't evacuate and he's still a free man.... WTF???

peace,

ad

I think we have evidence to disprove or falsify the official story. But we don't have evidence of literally what happened. Most of that is still in the category of speculation and hence the insulting degrading comments about conspiracy nut jobs.

So there is sufficient evidence to toss out the OCT and demand to get the story correct and this would still require a new investigation which is what AE911T is demanding as well as many other groups with petitions.

We might be able to exonerate the hijackers because of lack of evidence and this unwinds the whole story. Or in fact, there are a number of fatal flaws which unwinds the entire OCT.

Even this leaves the nation in a very bizarre place on many levels. This would mean that the GWOT is likely bogus and the entire patriot act and HSA was a wasted and unnecessary effort. Can this be walked back with the stroke of a pen? It would also mean that the two wars initiated based on 9/11 need to be stopped and all the policies related to them walked back unless there is some other valid reason for those wars (I think not, but many will argue that regardless of 9/11, terrorism is real and needs to be "fought over there so we don't have to fight it over here". The whole terrorism / blowback thing can't avoid our policies and actions as a cause. But of course TPTB will never admit this. Do we really want to "give up" our strategic interests over in the ME which the MIC is supposedly key to securing... oil, gas and control of its movement?

And finally, do we, as a nation, have what it takes to hold powerful individuals in former and present US governments, foreign governments, corporations, media, MIC, "intel" and the military accountable for the 911 "hoax" - crime?

Proving the 9/11 myth a lie is certainly the first and necessary step toward justice and accountability... and walking back the policies which were built on the false foundation of 9/11. The task associated with accountability are so monumental we, as a nation may not be prepared for it, even though we desperately need it. That is uncharted territory for this nation... and we would definitely have to look back before we can move forward.

SanderO

You labor under the illusion that we have the rule of law in this country.

I don't labor under any illusions about the justice system in the USA. My point was that we can take down the OCT.. and we've pretty much done that already. We haven't affirmatively identified the real conspirators, though we have some in our sights for questioning. That likely will not happen.

Getting justice within this "system" is likely not going to happen. That can only happen if we restore our democracy (not likely either). Not too many options to turn this around at the present moment.

Technically it doesn't matter who did 9/11 - in all cases it would be real zeoalots of whatever ideological or religious or booth - either PNAC or "al-Qaeda" or booth, christian zionists, jewish zionists or wahabi playboys - or all the six...we mostly don't know what to do about it if even we knew all this.

The probability we ever accidentally meet Osama, Obama or Dalailama is fortunately pretty low even they try to scary us with their colored alerts of killings live backfilled with holywoodoo special effects. So why not leave them to pretend that they don't know, what we all think about and leave them play their games and fear we would become mad as hell if they did a bad move - what we can't imagine is what would happen if they stop playing and will start the serious bussiness.

Yes, whenever we know what to do, let's do it.
...But do we know?

Let's ask this question, might be someone can answer it, one never knows...

The problem of 9/11 is much larger than the lives destroyed on that day. This attack has been used to continue the erosion of our rights and to begin a never ending war which supports US hegemony around the world. I suspect that if it were only the latter and everything at home was the same... the economy buzzing along, no high security at airports, and all the reduction of our constitutional rights people would care even less if our military was out raping the world. Fear was used to get the people behind these hideous policies and to get them enlisting and accepting that their treasure be used for the GWOT and the MIC.

Perhaps this is a game where a few interests are manipulating the people, the congress, the military, the media into "acting" in what is "their interest". Perhaps we all dupes in a sense. I am not proposing this as the explanation. But the "resistance" to what has come is remarkably shallow consider how much things have changed in the last 10 years.

Good post, good questions, animaldoctor.

We can only speculate ... but I don't think the elite planners have a solid lock on Media content, some stories do get out on local news outlets. They best they seem to be able to do is block these stories, for the most part, from getting national attention while branding 9/11 truthers as a bunch of fruitcakes. They have largely succeeded. But the recent "Building What" campaign the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth brought to New York seems to have caused a stir. I heard Geraldo nearly admit that the "fruitcakes" may have been right all along, something I never expected to hear on the Fox News Channel.

So, 9/11 is still not a dead issue.

On specific points, re: Larry Silverstein, defenders claimed he was talking about pulling the firefighters out (even though there were none in there). It degenerated into an internet argument over the meaning of "it".

ISI wire of 100,000 to Atta's Florida bank account? That story was quashed. The Indian reporter's questions about it to Condollezza Rice were sanitized in nearly all the transcripts. I.e., that story went down the memory hole too.

Other anomolies, same story. Wherever there is room to argue over details, circular debate ensues until the steam runs out. (That's why the AA77 research which the pilots here did and the paper which was published by a scientific team in Open Chemical Physics Journal are so important, there's little wiggle room, little to debate ... that's why those subtopics are universally ignored, even on the net?)

As for "shills", I think you just have to acquire a nose for that kind of stuff and keep double checking everything you hear.

Good luck, welcome to the forum.

Quote «animaldoctor»:

«Norman Mineta testimony regarding conversation between DF Cochrane and D Cheney; irrespective of what orders "stood" , if the plane was 50 miles, then 30 miles, then 10 miles out then why wasn't the Pentagon evacuated given the events of the last 45-50 minutes?»

See: «9/11: The Myth and the Reality by David Ray Griffin»

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060405112622982

Quote:

«Mineta's Report about Cheney: The attack on the Pentagon, as well as the attack on the World Trade Center, was said to be a surprise, even though it occurred over a half hour after the second strike on the Twin Towers. A Pentagon spokesperson, in explaining why the Pentagon was not evacuated before it was struck, claimed that "[t]he Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way."44 The 9/11 Commission claimed that there was no warning about an unidentified aircraft heading towards Washington until 9:36 and hence only "one or two minutes" before the Pentagon was struck at 9:38.

But this claim is contradicted by Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta's testimony about an episode that occurred in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center under the White House. In open testimony to the 9/11 Commission, Mineta gave this account:

During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, "The plane is 50 miles out." "The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to "the plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the Vice President, "Do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President . . . said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?"

Mineta said that that this final exchange occurred at about 9:25 or 9:26. According to Mineta's account, therefore, Cheney knew about an approaching aircraft more than 12 minutes before 9:38, when the Pentagon was struck. Assuming that Cheney would not have kept this information from his good friend Donald Rumsfeld, Mineta's testimony contradicts the claim of the Pentagon and the 9/11 Commission that there was no advance knowledge, at least not sufficient advance knowledge to have evacuated the Pentagon, which would have saved 125 lives.»

This explains why the commission did not mention the testimony of Norman Mineta in his final report. If the statements of Norman Mineta are accurate, it is impossible to explain why there was no evacuation order of the Pentagon. Even if the orders of Dick Cheney were to shoot down the plane, an evacuation order of Pentagon would have been necessary, if it was not possible to shoot down the plane.

More with this link: «Context of 'Before 9:37 a.m. September 11, 2001: Pentagon Not Evacuated Prior to Being Hit»

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?...tagonevacuation

Partial quotes:

«Pentagon spokesman Glenn Flood will later try to explain why the Pentagon is not evacuated at this time, saying: “To call for a general evacuation, at that point, it would have been just guessing. We evacuate when we know something is a real threat to us.” He says that an evacuation could have put employees at risk by moving them outside the protection provided by the building’s walls».

(This means that unlike the walls of the twin towers, the walls of the pentagon were supposed to provide sufficient protection against the crash of a big aircraft at high speed!)

«Another Pentagon spokesman, Air Force Lt. Col. Vic Warzinski, will add, «The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way. Yet, as early as 9:21, the FAA warned the military of a hijacked aircraft heading toward Washington»

«The order to evacuate will only go out over the Pentagon’s public address system shortly after the building is hit. The Defense Protective Service, which guards the Pentagon, does not order that the building’s threat level be raised until the time when it is hit».

I read that there was however a partial evacuation of the pentagon:

(9:35 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Contractors Evacuate Pentagon Just before It Is Hit

«A contract crew has been installing furniture in the southwest perimeter of the Pentagon. Construction workers are currently doing the final touching up, after more than three years of renovation work on this area of the building, and some Defense Department employees are already moving into their new office spaces. But the wife of one crew member phones her husband after seeing footage of the attacks in New York on CNN and says she feels he is in danger at the Pentagon. Hearing of the attacks, the crew leader instructs his 23 workers to abandon what they are doing and evacuate. Moments later, as they are crossing the parking lot, they see the airliner crash into the exact area of the Pentagon they had just left. [Government Executive, 5/1/2002; Freni, 2003, pp. 43-44] There is no evidence that anyone else in the Pentagon evacuates the building before it is struck. Another report, which appears to be describing the same incident, says the construction crew evacuates for a different reason: to discuss security with a customer in the parking lot.»

Another interesting reading in the link mentioned above: «9:29 a.m.-9:34 a.m. September 11, 2001: Pentagon Command Center Holds Significant Event Conference Call»

Thanks for the replies.

Will check them and their links when recovered from nightshift.

ad

@OP - Of all your questions, the one that stands out the most is one I believe that if answered, would bring this entire sham to a head: The Pentagon video footage.

Show us the tapes. Never mind the painfully obvious lack of a plane, the impact, the skid zone, the foundation damage...why not just Show up the tapes?