Yeah, it really is strange that they cut out those parts in the video.....

 

 

Did the peoples who took this video post this on google, or was it someone who just got ahold of the tape? Perhaps it was done purposefully, which is quite suspicious. It is certainly an interesting angle, one that I hadn't really seen before for an extended amount of time. For something like this, I understand they may have wanted to keep it short, or toned down. But the moments before it collapsed, the plane flying into it, all of this is more important than just random shots of people getting into a boat or walking down the street. That's what I can't understand.... I, personally, would be willing to see a "real time" video, the whole thing unedited.

 

Oh well.... Perhaps it will surface, or something like it.

313,577,342,026 - dollars spent by America for the war in iraq

 

 

we could have used that for afghanistan and then saved the rest and had some tax cuts. im pissed about that war.

IS that really how much they've spent?

I think that may include Afghistan too.

Here, it's Iraq and it's always rising...

 

http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

And how much is all the oil in Iraq worth? (roughly)

YAY FOR AMERICA'S TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! if everyone in the world were to cash in their debts right now, we would be SO FUCKING SCREWED.

Poll: More Americans blame Bush for 9/11

POSTED: 9:31 p.m. EDT, September 11, 2006

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The percentage of Americans who blame the Bush administration for the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington has risen from almost a third to almost half over the past four years, a CNN poll released Monday found.

 

Asked whether they blame the Bush administration for the attacks, 45 percent said either a "great deal" or a "moderate amount," up from 32 percent in a June 2002 CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll.

 

But the Clinton administration did not get off lightly either. The latest poll, conducted by Opinion Research Corporation for CNN, found that 41 percent of respondents blamed his administration a "great deal" or a "moderate amount" for the attacks. (Read the complete poll results -- PDF)

 

That's only slightly less than the 45 percent who blamed his administration in a poll carried out less than a week after the attacks.

 

Still, most Americans appear to be fatalistic, with more than half -- 57 percent -- saying they think that terrorists will "always find a way to launch attacks no matter what the U.S. government does."

 

The poll was carried out August 30 through September 2 by Opinion Research Corp. with 1,004 American adults questioned by telephone. The sampling error for the questions was 3 percentage points.

 

From CNN.com

I dont know how anyone could watch or listen to Alex Jones vids and radio show, or see Loose Change and still believe that 9/11 was a terrorist attack..

 

1.theres no way a plane could fit in a 16 foot hole when the wingspan of the plane that was said to have hit the pentagon is 128 feet across.. its rediculous that the government can get away with that one especially.

 

2.Theres no possible way for a building like that to collapse in a freefall from just a fire, the government said that the jet fuel was so hot that it melted the steel beems, the temperature would have to be at a constant and would have to have been held there for a loooooooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnngggggggggggggg time, anyways with out the bit about the steel beems, a man was on the floor where the plane had hit in the WTC and was on the phone and said he had come up with a plan to put out the fire, If it were actually 2000 degrees in there, the man would have been instaneously incinerated floors and floors below..

its just not possible..

 

sorry to ramble but I just saw Loose Change pt 2 last nite and Im very heated.

I also saw one of the Alex Jones documentarys last nite, and Im blown away completely.

Loose Change "Final Cut" is around now too...(but if you look online at the moment you probably will just find video clips that are rough sections that were going to be used in the final cut).

Alex's documentries are very good, really, they are. And if you want a good book on 9/11 get "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9-11"' by David Ray Griffin.

 

And try and watch BYU professor Steven E Jones' WTC Lecture online or read his amazing paper "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?" here > http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/WTC-Jones19mar06.htm (it's very good) He was ordered to remove his paper from the actual University website, not because they say that he's wrong as they actually say that his science is outstanding....but they ordered it removed because the University because of the problems cause by his thoughts regarding the involvement of elements within the US government.

 

Anyway....there's alot of good films out there but there's also a few bad ones which doesn't really help the truth movement but hinder it by talking about things like the "no plane theory" and that it was holograms.....which is pure stupidity and should be ignored.

if a plane didn't crash into the pentagon, then what happened to all the 60 something people who were on board that flight? it's not like the government took them and hid them on some remote island. people actually perished in that plane crash, you can't deny that.

Hey, I don't really know what actually hit the pentagon.....could be a boeing airline, could be a global hawk drone......who knows??

 

Well, I'll tell you who knows...the US government does because they have admitted to have around 80 security tapes from the pentagon and surrounding buildings which shows what exactly hit the pentagon that day......but they won't let anyone see..........but they are happy release select frames which they claim "at long last proves what hit the pentagaon".........but when you see the video that they released it's a joke.

 

Why wont they show us?

 

It's a trap.....a possible trap for the truth movement.

9/11 Gas Station Video Released - Does not show Flight 77

 

September 15 2006

 

The long sought after and much hyped Citago gas station video from 9/11 has finally been released. See below for the video and the Raw Story report.

 

Remember that there are another 84 tapes that the FBI is withholding. The gas station had several security cameras aimed in the direction of the pentagon. Flight 77 flew directly over the gas station at an altitude of roughly 50 feet, less than 3 seconds from impact. If this is all the footage from the gas station then why was it retained under national security laws for five years?

 

The Doubletree hotel video apparently does not contain the impact either according to the FBI. This video is due to be released on or around November 9. There is a mystery surrounding the Sheraton hotel video though. The FBI says no such video exists, but According to a CNN FOIA request however, a nearby hotel's video DID capture the impact. There were also mainstream media reports that indicated that the staff from this hotel "sat and watched the video in horror" before it was confiscated by the FBI.

 

Is the government muddying the waters again with this latest release which has been hyped up for a long time now? This will once again whip up into a frenzy the no plane theories. If that happens and the next video, or perhaps the one after that, shows a clear impact of flight 77, then the alternative 9/11 theories that are gaining so much attention now will be widely and viciously attacked.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LJvFjsl6zk

 

 

Long-sought 9/11 videotape didn't capture attack

 

Raw Story | September 15 2006

 

A convenience store videotape long-sought by September 11 conspiracy theorists does not actually show the attack on the Pentagon, RAW STORY has learned.

 

Many believed the video would show American Airlines Flight 77 -- or something else -- striking the Pentagon. The videotape, which depicts views from the gas station's six security cameras, shows that the CITGO cameras did not seem to capture the actual attack.

 

Conservative organization Judicial Watch obtained the footage through a Freedom of Information Act request filed December 15, 2004. The request sought all records pertaining to September 11, 2001 camera recordings of the Pentagon attack from the Nexcomm/CITGO gas station, Pentagon security cameras and the Virginia Department of Transportation.

 

In May 2006, The Department of Defense released a number of videos depicting the attack in response to a Judicial Watch lawsuit. The group filed another lawsuit against the FBI on June 22, 2006.

 

The FBI has also agreed to release to Judicial Watch a videotape obtained from the Doubletree Hotel near the Pentagon by November 9, 2006.

 

"With the release of this videotape, we are one step closer to completing the public record on the September 11 terrorist attacks," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a statement. "The CITGO tape evidently does not show the Pentagon attack, which the American people can now see for themselves. This videotape was the subject of intense public debate. Now that it has been released to the public, there is no reason for further speculation about what it does or does not show."

 

The video may be viewed below. Images from inside the store have been partially obscured by the FBI to protect the privacy of store customers and employees.

Setting aside the divisive controversy over what exactly hit the Pentagon that day, there is one unmistakable truth about 9/11 that no one - not even the government - can deny.

 

The total disintegration of every piece of concrete in the twin towers means that the official version of how they came down can only be described as either a Miracle or a Lie.

 

Even the portion of the Pentagon, which was allegedly hit by a plane similar to those that hit the towers, did not distintegrate but instead collapsed with its concrete walls and floors largely intact. (I say allegedly because, not having seen all the evidence, reasonable people can differ.)

 

However, no one can deny that only a miracle could bring down the towers as it did - completely pulverized, solely as a result of structural failures.

 

If, on the other hand, you have a mind of your own and have the good sense to question the nature of miraculous events - especially those that conveniently serve special interests - then after watching the videos below, and this one on pyroclastic flows, you can only conclude - it's a LIE.

 

Structural Failure vs. Controlled Demolition

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkk8uE-wB2E

 

"Watch both buildings collapsing straight down, directly into the path of most resistance - which is all the floors and all the mass of the building itself."

 

 

* * *

 

"In order for the floor to fall down, thousands of [metal] joints would have to break simultaneously. And then if you look at the speed with which this came down - less than 10 seconds - you blink your eye and thousands of joints have popped, somehow. The only way you can explain that is with explosives."

 

--Eric Hufschmid, Metal Cutting Expert

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_cC37d5kOs

 

"You have two hundred and ten story office buildings. You don't find a desk. You don't find a chair. You don't find a telephone, a computer. The biggest piece of a telephone I found was about half of a keypad and it was about this big [the size of a post-it]."

 

--Joe Casaliggi, Engine 7

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5kF9ldtgrc

 

"This was the South Tower. This was 104, 106 stories, all of it - this is what is left. Up there was the North Tower. And you look and you see - there's no concrete. There's very little concrete. All you see is aluminum and steel.

 

 

--George Pataki, Governor of New York

 

 

Seeing is believing - it's a lie. Pass it on.

Explosions and collapses can be studied and analysed and traits identified, but at the end of the day, weird things happen when things blow up or fall down. Can anyone seriously predict how two massive towers would behave if they were subjected to heavy structural damage both inside and out, and also raging fires, as well as its own weight?

What? so two buildings hit in different parts with fires not hot enough to weaken the steal and with any number of variables going on would explode (sorry, collapse) in exactly the same way? In an impossible time? There's too much wrong with what the official line that the points made in the video shouldn't be ignored...

if it was planned, theres too many things that could go wrong.

too many people would have to know about it and keep silent. Thousands of people would have to be in on it.

No, that argument doesn't fly.

yes it does fly

 

Someone has to come up with the idea, someone has to plan it, someone has to do this, that etc, then they all have poeple below them, who have people below them. hundreds, maybe thousands.

 

If youve ever worked for a corporation you'd know, it takes half a dozen people to change a lightbulb.

 

and theres just waaaaaayyyyyyyyy to many things that could go wrong. What sort of people would take that chance?

"If youve ever worked for a corporation you'd know, it takes half a dozen people to change a lightbulb."

 

Ok, if your going to use such examples to explain a government cover-up then I guess you need a new topic for that.

 

This DID go wrong because we have caught them out so many times.

No you havent caught them out so many times.

 

theres more theories on 9/11 then stars in the sky.

 

Your theories have been proved wrong by many sources and yet you claim its the government controlling the media - except when it supports what you say.

 

Hypocrite.

"Your theories have been proved wrong by many sources"

 

Where?

 

How many times does the media support what I have been posting about???

 

hardly ever.

 

but proper reporters sometimes actually do some good work and they do report on matters truthfully......and what happens about it? Nothing because people just brush it off as simply nothing......so how are we every going to get our points across? the alternative media is the only viable way at present.

Watch this and watch it all - in a serious manner.

It's very good.

 

9/11 Mysteries - Part 1 - Controlled Demolition

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003

WTC Bombshell: Internal EPA Papers Fuel Christie Critics

 

 

WTC Bombshell: Internal EPA Papers Fuel Christie Critics

 

SUSAN EDELMAN and DAN MANGAN / NY Post, September 22 2006

 

Christie Todd Whitman, while head of the federal EPA, "conspired" to falsely reassure the public that the air around Ground Zero was safe to breath, according to critics and bombshell new documents.

 

In 2003, Whitman's then-spokeswoman, Tina Kreisher, was asked by an Environmental Protection Agency internal investigator "whether there was a conscious effort to reassure the public [in the fall of 2001].

 

"Ms. Kreisher said there was such an effort. This emphasis 'came from the administrator [Whitman] and the White House,' " according to newly released quotes from EPA papers.

 

Hugh Kaufman, an EPA senior policy analyst, told The Post yesterday, that Kreisher "blew the whistle not just on the White House, but on Whitman as well,"

 

Kreisher's comment was included in the investigator's notes made during the interview with her. But her quote was not released in the EPA inspector general's final report in 2003, which blamed the White House - not Whitman - for telling the EPA to publicly play up reassuring information and downplay concerns about air around Ground Zero.

 

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-Manhattan) blasted Whitman over the new disclosure.

 

"She conspired [with the White House] to convince people to go into an unsafe environment . . . For that, she ought to be prosecuted," Nadler said. "People are dead because of her."

 

Whitman's current spokeswoman responded by sending The Post a statement that her boss had recently released on the controversy over air quality.

 

"We agreed then, and I reiterate now, that the air on the site was not clean," Whitman said.

 

"We were emphatic that workers needed to wear respirators, a message that I repeated frequently. But I did not have the jurisdiction to force workers to wear them."

 

Meanwhile, Whitman's newly released financial-disclosure forms show that she said seven months before 9/11 that she would not get involved in any issue related to the finances of the Port Authority - which owns the WTC site - because she or her family owned PA bonds. Its finances could be impacted by lawsuits growing of the cleanup.

 

"I understand the following interests that belong to me, my spouse or my children present a conflict of interest," Whitman wrote at the time. She then listed various investments, including the bistate agency.

 

But Whitman was involved at Ground Zero despite that recusal, although she or her family also owned shares of Citigroup, whose insurance-company subsidiary, The Travelers, paid out hundred of millions of dollars in claims to downtown residents displaced by the attacks.

 

Critics said the documents indicate Whitman encouraged people to move back to near Ground Zero and work on the cleanup despite a health threat, which could have bolstered the bottom line of both the PA and Travelers.

 

That's because both the PA and Travelers now can argue in civil suits that they believed there was little or no danger from the air around the Trade Center based on statements made by the EPA.

 

 

David Worby, who represents 8,000 workers at and around Ground Zero, said, "The fact that the head of the EPA had a financial conflict defies imagination."

 

Whitman's camp pointed out that she previously had been cleared by the EPA's inspector general on conflict-of-interest accusations.