Now Rudy Guiliani has got Rumsfeld disease. In the span of answering one question on 9/11, he admits that the Twin Towers 'imploded' ( yeah, must have been because, when structural steel heats up to twice the temperatures possible in a hydrocarbon fire, that also causes all the concrete surrounding the impossibly heated steel to *explode*, spreading dust clouds in every direction and leaving a two story pile of rubble for 110 stories of building ), and he admits that WTC7 collapsed in 'stages', contradicting the official myth of the 'unpredictable sudden collapse due to fire and debris damage' that was nevertheless so well predicted, the police began clearing the perimeter hours before the controlled demolition, and despite the BBC reporting the controlled demolition of WTC7 30 minutes before it happened.

Rudy Giuliani has been caught in a bizarre lie about WTC 7, in which he claims the building collapsed in stages over a sustained period of time, when in reality the structure fell in under seven seconds. Giuliani also reveals that he expected the twin towers to collapse but "not in the way they did."

Giuliani was a speaker along with former Oklahoma City Mayor Ron Norick at an April 19th event held at the Oklahoma City Museum and National Memorial in Ahoma City, Oklahoma.

Giuliani is asked if he had expected the twin towers to collapse on 9/11. Here is his response.

"Yeah, but not in the way they did."

"It occurred to us all that they might ultimately collapse over....the way buildings usually collapse, which is in stages."

"It looked like at some point the top of the building would come off, and then maybe the middle of the building and then maybe there'd be a shell left....the way number 7 came down 4 or 5 o'clock in the afternoon - over a period of time - but the idea that it would implode, the implosion that took place, I actually didn't realize that until much later."

"An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does the truth become error because nobody sees it. Truth stands, even if there be no public support. It is self sustained." -Gandhi.

"Defenders of the official 9/11 myth hate Gandhi, the truth, peace, and free speech. They love lies, blood libels to support murder, censorship, American imperialism, and the safety of a police state."- Clocker Gandhi

I don't understand why the US Government would need to demolish the WTC and Pentagon themselves, when there are plenty of people in the world who are angry enough at us and willing to do it for them. All they needed to do was allow the NSA, the CIA and the FBI to look the other way long enough, and something bad was bound to happen.

Besides, if you just consider how many people would have to be in on a conspiracy of that magnitude (thousands, easily) and how they'd all have to keep their mouths shut about their contribution to the greatest atrocity in US History...

The US government is a very large bureaucratic organization made up of individuals, most of them ordinary Americans. Do you really think that these people would knowingly destroy over 3,000 American lives out of loyalty to George W. Bush? Do you think that American special forces and demolition experts would knowingly destroy an American building filled with Americans, in an American metropolis as densely populated as NYC, with all the collateral damage--American lives--that such an action would cause, just on the political whims of the Bush administration?

Even if you're willing to allow that, then answer this: How and when, exactly, did these demolition experts gain access the building, tear out the interior walls down to the steel support beams, drill into the beams, set the charges, run the necessary wiring and control mechanisms for detonation, and then repair all that damage so the tens of thousands of employees who worked every day in the WTC didn't notice? And how did they do all that without the WTC security cameras or staff being made aware of it? How many top-secret operatives would such an operation take? How many hours, how many opportunities for discovery by civilians? Who flew the planes? If the planes were remote-controlled drones, then what happened to the passengers on those flights? Were they surreptitiously rerouted, kidnapped and murdered without the notice of the hundreds of air traffic control personnel who monitor all commercial flights? How could the perpetrators of this vast conspiracy be sure that such an insanely complicated plot be pulled off without being discovered? Imagine the political fallout if such a plot were discovered! Where would that leave the Bush administration? Are Bush's people completely incapable of calculating simple risk/benefit assessments? (on second thought, scratch that last question... )

Sonny Barger, lifelong leader of the Hell's Angels motorcycle gang, is credited with this saying: "Three people can keep a secret if two are dead."

These kinds of conspiracy theories always fall apart when you look at the sources from which they originate. Most of these sources are not promoted by disinterested, objective researchers but by people with extreme political or social views, who for that reason are incapable or unwilling to think in a fully objective, rational manner.

Not that I'm going to go mentioning any names or anything...

Colonel Panic wrote:Besides, if you just consider how many people would have to be in on a conspiracy of that magnitude (thousands, easily) and how they'd all have to keep their mouths shut about their contribution to the greatest atrocity in US History...

That's a fundamentally misguided interpretation of how conspiracies work, to begin by saying that everyone who was 'used' to carry it out had to be aware of how they were used. Did everyone who worked for Enron know what Skilling and Lay and Fastow were up to?

# Doesn't the government-conspiracy view of the attack necessitate the involvement of large numbers of people?

Not in the execution of the attack. In fact there are plausible scenarios that involve fewer conspirators than the official story. High-ranking officials in the government have at their disposal several things that Osama bin Laden did not, including advanced weapons systems operable by computer, and a hierarchical and compartmentalized military command structure that allows complex operations to be hidden from all but a small group of operatives.

# How could even a small number of people be persuaded to participate in such a horrific plan?

Money is very persuasive, and given the magnitude of the economic interests riding on the success of the attack (measurable in hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars), huge sums could have bought people's cooperation. Some operatives may have been misled about the scope and cruelty of the plan. For example, operatives who set up the Pentagon attack may have been unaware of the planned World Trade Center attack and vice versa. People who installed explosives in the towers may have believed they were preparing the buildings for demolition under circumstances quite different than the 9/11/01 attack.

# How is it that none of the conspirators have changed their minds and come forward, allowing the story to remain invisible in the mass media for more than four years?

Operatives would be carefully screened to assure their loyalty to the attack's planners and to each other. Given the magnitude of the crime, admission of involvement would expose a conspirator to swift silencing by co-conspirators, vigilante justice by an outraged public, or harsh judgment by a court of law. It is also possible that many of the operatives could have been killed before or during the attack.

# How is it that no one who was NOT involved -- but who happened to be close enough to see evidence and draw the right conclusions -- has come forward either?

Appearances that there are no such witnesses are deceptive. For example, firefighters reported explosions in the towers, but official transcripts of their statements were purged of all such references. The objections of many people to the destruction of Ground Zero evidence was not widely reported. Coverage has also been sparse on the lawsuits by some of the victims' families.

# How could the conspirators have been confident enough to plan such a complex attack given the risk of exposure by witnesses who saw too much?

The key to success was to make the attack so bold and shocking that even people who were involved in covering it up (like leaders in the media, FEMA, FBI, etc.) would fall for the fraud. The FBI agents running around seizing video around the Pentagon may have thought they were covering up a war-game-gone-bad. Architects of the massive evidence destruction operation at Ground Zero may have thought they were shielding the building's designers from charges of faulty engineering. Layers of cover stories allow people abetting the scam to think they are covering up less serious crimes.

# In spite of the consolidation of ownership of the media, wouldn't there at least be some reporters and editors willing to expose the scam to make names for themselves?

To seriously investigate the 9/11/01 attack, reporters and editors have to question the basic tenets of the official story. Such questioning, while widespread on the web, continues to be heresy in newsrooms. For reporters to acknowledge the larger implications of the attack being an inside job, they would have to question much of what they have been taught since childhood about the beneficence of our leaders and the nobility of our government and economic system. Such a "Matrix"-like awakening can involve a great deal of painful disillusionment. The small group of wealthy people who own and control the media are not inclined to question the OBL myth since that myth shifts responsibility away from the real perpetrators, whom they associate with.

Colonel Panic wrote:then answer this: How and when, exactly, did these demolition experts gain access the building, tear out the interior walls down to the steel support beams, drill into the beams, set the charges, run the necessary wiring and control mechanisms for detonation, and then repair all that damage so the tens of thousands of employees who worked every day in the WTC didn't notice? And how did they do all that without the WTC security cameras or staff being made aware of it? How many top-secret operatives would such an operation take? How many hours, how many opportunities for discovery by civilians? Who flew the planes? If the planes were remote-controlled drones, then what happened to the passengers on those flights? Were they surreptitiously rerouted, kidnapped and murdered without the notice of the hundreds of air traffic control personnel who monitor all commercial flights? How could the perpetrators of this vast conspiracy be sure that such an insanely complicated plot be pulled off without being discovered? Imagine the political fallout if such a plot were discovered! Where would that leave the Bush administration? Are Bush's people completely incapable of calculating simple risk/benefit assessments? (on second thought, scratch that last question... )

Go on the web and ask your questions- or read the existing 9/11 threads here and then go on the web to ask your questions. I've written and written and written answers to your questions ( based on my opinions ), and the web is exploding with all the research you need. I'm not taking passengers in my car. Drive yourself.

Moving on with some quick answers:

I don't need to prove how the demolition was accomplished to prove the case that the fires and impacts by the planes could not have caused those towers to explode. The official story is a failure. It is scientifically impossible. It's dead on arrival. The responsibility of having all the answers is incumbent on those given the authority to investigate the crime, and given the access to the evidence. Conspiracy theorists are watching their shitty work from the other side of a fence. We just have to point out their lies, not replace their lies with our truths.

Once we demonstrate that, then we move on to a new investigation and get to the bottom of the questions you're asking ( and that I'm asking ). I don't need to prove what happened in the cockpits or prove who flew the planes to state that the alleged hijackers could not have. I don't need to prove the whereabouts of flight 77 to state my opinion that no 757 struck the Pentagon.

"The Day Today" rules.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SPWgodul_E

Truth passes through three phases:

* First it is ridiculed.

* Second it is fiercely and violently opposed.

* Third, it becomes self-evident.

Brand new poll of 800 likely voters:

Did the CIA Know About the 9/11 Attacks in Advance?

Yes: 29%

No: 41%

Not sure: 30%

Did Bush Know About the 9/11 Attacks in Advance?

Yes: 22%

No: 55%

Not sure: 22%

Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.

Republicans reject that view and, by a 7-to-1 margin, say the President did not know in advance about the attacks. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 18% believe the President knew and 57% take the opposite view.

Overall, 22% of all voters believe the President knew about the attacks in advance. A slightly larger number, 29%, believe the CIA knew about the attacks in advance. White Americans are less likely than others to believe that either the President or the CIA knew about the attacks in advance. Young Americans are more likely than their elders to believe the President or the CIA knew about the attacks in advance.

read the full results here

Psychiatrists and Psychologists: Government's 9/11 Story is Crazy
Should people who question the government's version of the events of 9/11 have their heads examined?

Well, the following psychiatrists and psychologists have concluded that the official version of 9/11 is false. Moreover, many of these mental health experts have concluded that the government's account is so obviously false that people who believe the government's version are in psychological denial:

Psychiatrist Carol S. Wolman, MD

Psychiatrist E. Martin Schotz

Professor of Psychology at University of New Hampshire William Woodward

Professor of Psychology at University of Essex Philip Cozzolino

Professor of Psychology at Goddard College Catherine Lowther

Professor Emeritus of Psychology at California Institute of Integral Studies Ralph Metzner

Professor of Psychology at Rhodes University Mike Earl-Taylor

Retired Professor of Psychology at Oxford University Graham Harris

Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from the University of Nebraska and licensed Psychologist Ronald Feintech

Ph.D. Clinical Neuropsychologist Richard Welser

Clinical psychologist, Ed.D., Harvard University Gwendolyn Atwood,

Psychology researcher, M.A., Psychology Victoria Ashley

Psychotherapist, M.S. Clinical Psychology, Greg Henricks

M.S. in educational psychology, Roy Holcombe

M.A. in Counseling Psychology Tova Gabrielle

There are literally thousands of other mental health professionals who have reached the same conclusions. So who is out of touch with reality: those who question 9/11 or those who believe the government's version without question?

There's no doubt in my mind that we are faced with self-induced cognitive dissonance among those who cling to the official version of 9/11. They're trapped inside a coping mechanism that has become a jail cell. They have let fear turn them into pretzels defending the myth.

Step across the divide into Reality World and join those who have applied critical theory to this hoax. Stop being driven by peer pressure. Dogma and conventional wisdom must end their rule over your minds. Your self-images won't collapse if you join the conspiracy side at this late date. Stop lashing out, stop hiding from the truth. You know the time has come.

That's okay if they still won't listen. They'll be part of a clear minority soon, and then their reflexive pursuit of mainstream acceptance will drive them to leap across the moat they have dug between themselves and reality.

We are entering phase three of the truth.

Truth passes through three phases:

* First it is ridiculed.

* Second it is fiercely and violently opposed.

* Third, it becomes self-evident.

Never underestimate the ability of people to deny the truth and/or be completely fucking stupid..........

JC23by5 wrote:Never underestimate the ability of people to deny the truth and/or be completely fucking stupid..........

I don't, but I don't want to adopt a defeatist attitude. Even though the protectors of the lies have terrified so many into falling for their hoax, we have gained ground back steadily, for five years. We grow, and they panic. The internet has leveled the playing field enough for the undergound to combat manufactured consent, despite other tactical disadvantages. If the internet existed after Dallas 1963, that coup would not have survived.

This advantage will probably be stripped from us in the near future, because when the next inside job arrives, the free internet will be walked to the gallows.

Long and fair piece on 9/11 Truth in the Chico, CA News and Review:

Truth believers

Some of the least-likely conspiracy theorists fervently preach the gospel of 9/11 accountability.

Samuel Ready, looking somewhat like a retired professor on vacation, sporting a graying beard and ball cap, is a calm, cheery and well-spoken man. His educational background includes a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering from Georgia Tech and a master's in electrical engineering from USC. Ready worked in the defense industry for 26 years in Los Angeles. Currently, the 72-year-old Chicoan works as a budget maker for local and Bay Area homeowners' associations, and he attends Trinity United Methodist Church.

As unlikely as it may seem to some, Ready also is the man responsible for starting up the Chico 9/11 Truth group, just one part of a loose yet highly communicative network of people worldwide who are challenging the official explanation for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Contrary to the popularly held belief that anyone who charges that the government had any direct responsibility for the 9/11 attacks should immediately be dismissed as a "conspiracy-theory kook," more and more well-educated, "normal" people--teachers, engineers, computer scientists--are becoming part of the movement.

article here

Italian television recently aired a special on 9/11. There's a six minute clip up on youtube. Beginning at the 4:40 mark, the explosions inside WTC7 are clearly audible.
watch it here

Just for the record, the new George Tenet book confirms that he lied to the 9/11 Commission about whether he met with Bush about the PDB warning of al Qaeda flying airplanes into buildings. The foreign press reported these lies immediately, and so did many bloggers, but your corporate US press ignored it.

Washington, DC, June 7, 2004 - Former CIA Director George Tenet committed perjury in his April 14 testimony before the 9/11 Commission when he claimed he had not met with President Bush in the month before the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. That misrepresentation in Tenet's testimony was noted within hours by Agence France-Presse.

The following day, AP reported the CIA issued what was described as a correction after the Director "misspoke." The Agency asserted that its records showed Tenet meeting with Bush on August 17 and 31, and then on at least six occasions in September prior to Tuesday, the 11th, below.

However, that CIA announcement omits mention of the visit that then DCI Tenet apparently made to the President's Crawford, Texas ranch on August 24. The White House website on August 25 quotes a remark made by George W. Bush that he met with Tenet the previous day.

What Tenet told the 9/11 commission:

Tenet yesterday told the commission he did not meet with Bush in August 2001. "I didn't see the president. I was not in briefings with him during this time. He was on vacation; I was here" in Washington, he said. "In this time period, I'm not talking to him," Tenet added, noting that they had not even spoken by phone at the time. The month before the attacks has come under particular scrutiny after the inquiry discovered that Bush received a briefing on August 6, 2001 about al-Qaeda activities in the United States.

Tenet in his new book:

"A few weeks after the Aug. 6 PDB was delivered, I followed it to Crawford to make sure the President stayed current on events," Tenet wrote in his memoir, At the Center of the Storm. "This was my first visit to the ranch. I remember the President graciously driving me around the spread in his pickup and my trying to make small talk about the flora and the fauna, none of which were native to Queens,"

Okay, and you already know about the Rice lies:

CLAIM: "I do not remember any reports to us, a kind of strategic warning, that planes might be used as weapons." [responding to Kean]

FACT: Condoleezza Rice was the top National Security official with President Bush at the July 2001 G-8 summit in Genoa. There, "U.S. officials were warned that Islamic terrorists might attempt to crash an airliner" into the summit, prompting officials to "close the airspace over Genoa and station antiaircraft guns at the city's airport." [Sources: Los Angeles Times, 9/27/01; White House release, 7/22/01]

CLAIM: "I was certainly not aware of [intelligence reports about planes as missiles] at the time that I spoke" in 2002. [responding to Kean]

FACT: While Rice may not have been aware of the 12 separate and explicit warnings about terrorists using planes as weapons when she made her denial in 2002, she did know about them when she wrote her March 22, 2004 Washington Post op-ed. In that piece, she once again repeated the claim there was no indication "that terrorists were preparing to attack the homeland using airplanes as missiles." [Source: Washington Post, 3/22/04]

CLAIM: There was "nothing about the threat of attack in the U.S." in the Presidential Daily Briefing the President received on August 6th. [responding to Ben Veniste]

FACT: Rice herself confirmed that "the title [of the PDB] was, 'Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.'" [Source: Condoleezza Rice, 4/8/04]

This woman is laughing at many of you. She knows you can't lay a glove on her, because you're too terrified to confront these facts about 9/11:

Everyone in the President's inner circle knew it was coming.

Nobody tried to stop it.

Ha ha.