With all due respect, people should view this banned Youtube video and judge for themselves if our very own government has been, and currently still is, feeding us FAKE news:
What active CIA Bob Baer isn't telling all of u is that Tim Osman (Osama Bin Laden) was doing everything his CIA handlers had him do, to give the charade of him being some Jihad leader, when in reality he was a part of the CIA manipulative plan to fear hate and kill Afghanistan and Mid East Taliban and Al Qaeda to excuse the murder of people in the way of their pipeline, heroin, and mineral mining plans. Osama, Taliban, Al Qeada, all CIA creations. The Bin Laden family are CIA insiders.
@virtualrealityknows In other words, it was a long near 3 decade plan solely created by the US government using the CIA to further cause all of these problems in order for the USA, NATO, the UN and all working with the very real New World Order to give the illusion of then being the solution. Bob knows for a fact there is indeed a New World Order and he is very much a part of it and has chosen to be since he began working for the CIA. Do NOT be fooled by his warm and fuzzy personable tactics.
You're wrong Bob. Wait till you hear of the torture techniques I got in store for the muslim parasites. You'll understand. You're welcome. Thanks for your views Bob. Please don't use "we" when you mean "you" Bob. Thanks. You're welcome.
You're wrong Bob. Wait till you hear of the torture techniques I got in store for the muslim parasites. You'll understand. You're welcome. Thanks for your views Bob.
this man blame Iran for 9/11! dont fall for this, this is another propaganda for the war elite!
And again, Al quida is build up by the CIA,mi6... his background as a CIA agent makes me suspicious! Dont believe anything you hear ,before you search it yourself!
The part about box cutters bothers me. I'm not that strong of a guy and I am not violent but if someone on a plane is threatening to hijack with box cutters you're goin to f'ing die anyway if you don't try to fight those people. I just find it hard to believe that a bunch of Americans were over taken by box cutters. It just doesn't make any sense to me. We have f*cking baseball bats here.
I take your video seriously! and when baer says that investigations reap more quality convictions than torture he's actually spelling out why they torture and it's because if they did investigations then the intelligence community cia,mossad,isi,mi6 would end up in the dock. They need these patsies!
NO ONE TAKES YOUR SERIOUSLY WHEN YOU VIDEO TAPE YOUR TV. Read online how to pass through your signal into your camera to record. Then capture into your editing program. There are many free ones out there you can use to do this.
I'm a sceptic, but like all good sceptics, I'm open to knew information. I saw we torture... I mean, aggressive information retrieval, Bush 'n' co and find out what they'll admit to.
The goal of torture & warrantless wiretaps may (emphasis on may) not be to gain intel, but to intimidate the american public.
If all of Bush's crtics think they are being illegally spied on or may be tortured someday, they will shut up.
So that is a theory, no idea if it is true or not. But torture & warantless wiretaps (which are unnecessary, counterproductive and inhuman) may be designed to intimidate the US public, not gain counterterror information.
1984 is more real than you might know. The technology is in place, and I know for a fact, 'they,' whoever they're, are not afraid to use it. It's too easy to pass their guinea pigs off as nut jobs. Who would believe a so-called "schizophrenic maniac?"
No evidence, except for a faulty, highly suspect tape the Government stumbled upon showing a man purported to be Bin Laden. And the money trail has an ally of the United States ordering Al Qaida to wire $100,000 to Atta, the lead hijacker. INSIDE JOB!!!
7 of the supposed "hijackers" are still alive--is that proof enough for you?
Watch the Venice Flying Circus to find out more about Muhammed Atta. He was/is (his father says he's still alive) a cokehead drug smuggler with a blond American girlfriend--does that sound like an Islamic extremeist capable of organizing 9/11?
dani: Unanswered questions are the stuff of my existence as a scientist. But, like every other scientist, I eventually have to come down from my "suspicions" and construct something that can be tested, or at least tested as a thought problem. Without that, nothing will ever happen.
No - they didn't. Fact: The FSC (family steering committee) FOUGHT for the Commission. With EVERY other tragedy - (Pearl Harbor, JFK, Challenger explosion etc) - An investigation was implemented WITHIN ONE WEEK. It took Bush over 400 days for the worst terror attack on US soil - and only after INTENSE pressure by families
dani: Sorry, guy gotta give up on this. You absolutely refuse to come up with any sort of specific thing, so you've fallen into the same trap as others who may not feel a thorough investigation was done. Without a specific complaint, there is nothing anyone can do.
The specific complaint was there was not thorough investigation performed. There was no testing done on the steel to rule out thermite. The media didn't cover: Bush's brother's company was head of security at the WTC/Dulles and United airlines, bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the WTC days before, steel beams at ground zero were found with the 45 deg angles typical of those seen following demolition, molten steel - do some research and draw a reasonable, rational conclusion.
dani: You continue to believe I haven't seen all these assertions, and that I have not looked into all of them?!!? Do you actually believe you are the very first person to raise all these issues?? All this has been explained time and time again. I'm not answering any more of your stuff. It wouldn't matter how much evidence I gave you, you will never give up.
No, I know the questions into 9/11 are deep and far reaching...however, if you haven't even read the 9/11 Report and searched the questions the FSC formulated - you haven't fully researched.
dani: When you decide to come up with something substantive to talk about, then you'll be making some progress. Until then, take care of your brain cells, lol.
once the last of the gold was recovered, the VERY NEXT DAY the search and recovery was called off. whats that tell you about how much thought and remorse they had for the victums. money is the root of all evil. and ofcourse dont forget about power and control.
Christine Whitman (EPA chief) misled America about the air quality at ground zero... the whitehouse demanded to review her statement prior to her releasing it. They quickly shipped the steel and debries out of the US. 1000's of Americans are dying as a result of their heroic clean up efforts the months following 9/11...and the govt has turned their backs on them in their time of need.
"Who" were they explained by? The 9/11 Panel? No. Why was there molten steel at WTC 7 for months after 9/11? That can ONLY be the result of a chemical reaction - thermite. You can't guess or speculate unless there is a valid and independent study of ALL the evidence. Peruse this site:
dot journalof911studies dot com/beginners dot html
Frut - the Feds confiscated over 81 shots from that side of the pentacon. There are cameras on EVERY angle of the pentagon - they have footage. IF a plane hit it - there ought to be ONE picture of it within those reports of 81...don't ya think?
Hallelujah!somebody does get it.Have you watched How to create an Angry American.Watch the lies in real time.Watch Powell say Saddam had no WMD,s in 2001.Watch Rumsfeld say Saddam never had a nucleur programme,watch Rice say "Of course it was information that was mistaken".
The war in Iraq was planned long before 9/11 - that day was just the vehicle. Once you have ALL their words in one video - you realize all the propaganda they are feeding the public. The media is so controlled - they won't tell you.
So true - the Dem vs Republican is the biggest con on Americans...while we debate abortion and "family values" - they are planning behind closed doors how to destroy our sovereignty for a buck.
The supposed proof of Saddams Nucleur weapons programme was 10 year old already debunked crap about yellowcake from Niger and Aluminum tubes.Powell brought this 10 year old crap up as new evidence in 2003 and the whole world laughed at him for being a lying piece of shit.
Yes, b/c we ALL know how forthright the 9/11 Ommission report was - just ask the Family Steering Committee - they failed to answer 3/4 of their questions in their non-report.
Olbermann is a pussy. Look at him: he's the stereotypical bespectacled pasty-faced brie-eathing northeastern liberal faux intellectual. College faculties are full of these wimpy soft-handed empty suits who are leftwingers who have never done a day of real work, have never contributed anything to society.
The use of torture makes the war last longer by making more people hate us enough to take up arms against us.
Of course, the longer the war lasts, the longer Bush's Carlyle Group and Halliburton, and Bush senior's former intern Erik Prince (owner of Blackwater) will make huge amounts of money.
Really, the Iraq slot machine is pouring out the money, and they only have to put in a few lives to keep it paying.
frut: Are you being paid by one of the companies that get so many of our tax dollars? It must make you very proud to make money off our brave soldiers while they die or get maimed so our MI complex folks can make more money.
fruti: You must be completely confused by Petraeus' strategy in Iraq. Who the hell ever heard of taking anthropologist with you? What the hell is Petraeus doing working _with_ tribal leaders (formerly called "worlords"). Shouldn't we be torturing people and kicking butt??
frut: Isn't it important to torture more people, and have more Abu Ghraib's, so we can give Al Qaeda talking points for when they recruit new folks to martyr themselves? I guess you don't care about Americans who may be out of the country and the dangers they might face because of these insane policies. Aren't you proud you can shill for the admin while guaranteeing greater danger for good Americans overseas??
Defending yourself is an insane policy? I guess if you're a insane leftwing nut, it is. So you don't think we should be retaliating for 9-11? What you're basically saying is they attacked us, but we shouldn't fight back because that will just make them madder and recruit more terrorists. That's fucking nuts. If you roll over, THAT'S when they attack. Just like Bill Fucking Clinton rolled over.
Ok - Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. The funding for 9/11 supposedly came from Pakistan and the 15 of 19 hijackers were Saudi's. We have attacked neither of those counties.
Let me ask you this? Who exports the highest number of terrorists? Before you google it...
SAUDI
Iraq didn't attack us - neither has Iran. We invaded their country - killed 1M Iraqis while there liberating them. We built a $600M empire/embassy there. If China or Mexico did that here - damn straight we'd fight them.
Look, kook. No country attacked us in an official capacity; not Saudi, not Pakistan. So your argument about not attacking a country is specious. But we know Iraq was one of the countries who officially harbored, encouraged, and paid for terrorists. Saddam was actively involved in terrorism, refused to disarm, threatened the U.S. and was the region's biggest hostile power. He was the natural target. Anybody with two brain cells to rub together knows this.
A "natural target" would be Kim Song. He actually HAS the money and the weaponry to carry out nuclear attacks. He's a horrible dictator... but fortunately for him...he doesn't sit on a bed of oil.
The majority of terrorist come out of Saudi - google it. You've bought into the CFR controlled media telling you that it was Iraq.
Anybody with 2 brain cells know that Saddam worked for the US and started the Iran war and murdered his own people at Washington's request. Youtube Rumsfield hugging Saddam in Baghdad!
He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.
Colin Powell Feb 2001
Saddam does not control the northern part of the country,We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.
Robb, Everybody agrees that Saddam was actively working on nuclear capability and was weeks or months away. The 9-11 Commission admitted such. Thank God Bush was preemptive in the war against terror. If only FDR had been preemptive against Hitler. 20 million people would have been spared. Bush had the guts and fortitude FDR did not.
Absolute nonsense!.The whole world knows that Saddam was broken by the sanctions.There never was a nucleur weapons programme,there were no WMD,s,there were no terrorist connections and worse than that Colin Powell knew all those things were false.Saddam was a threat to nobody and the world knew that,only idiots still believe that crap.
"I" have nuclear "capability" - give me a break. He coulda doesn't equate "he does, we know where they are". You have bought the propaganda...hook, line, sinker.
That really furthers your arguement well. I hate to break this to you bud - I'm a republican...and there are a TON of folks just like me. So - the liberal name callin' doesn't hold water - are you a neo-con or what? Let me guess...you're voting for Rudy or Fred, right? LOL - yeah, true conservative there fella.
danit, You're a Republican? Big fucking deal. So was Jim Jeffords. So is McCain. So is Hagel. These people are all moderates. And moderates are nothing but liberals who are afraid to say who they are.
Do you know the difference between a conservative and a liberal? Ron Paul is extremely conservative...John McCain - a "moderate"? LOL - sure - he's a moderate conservative pushing for amnesty for millions. Stop watching MSM.
Ron Paul is good in many ways, but he is unelectable, and worse, he doesn't seem to recognize the need for a war against terror. That point alone disqualifies him to be president. Don't misunderstand. I hate McCain for his various sellouts. But he does have an overall conservative voting record, so you can't call him a straight liberal.
The war against "terror" is much like fighting a war on drugs or a war against gang violence. It's impossible. Think about it. Ron Paul makes sense...I wouldn't underestimate his electibility either. Given the media blackout and smear tactics - it's amazing what he's pulled off.
Ok - first...the "reason" our administration gave us to attack Iraq - was the WMD theory...then they changed it to be we were liberting the Iraqis from their dictator. If was linked to 9/11 in the media - however, our govt states they were not related. 15/19 hijackers were from Saudi - Pakistan funded the hijackers. Your reasoning is not valid based on the "logic" you're providing.
Iraq was the leader in international terrorism, in that it was the most powerful arab country, an avid sponsor terrorism, and openly hostile to the U.S. In addition, Saddam refused to follow the U.N.'s inspections, and the U.N. authorized violence because of that. But you think we should have attacked Saudi because some of the hijackers were from there?
ha ha ha. saddam and bin laden hated each other. stop watching fox news. the cia trained and put saddam into power. we backed him against iran, where do you think he got the chemical weapons? and no im not a liberal, im republican.
frut: "harbored, encouraged, and paid for terrorists": this is one of those idiotic beliefs that a simple examination of Saddam will straighten out. Saddam was a brutal pretender, and a secular pan-Arabist. He wanted power in the region, and dealing with terrorists would have been the abaolute LAST thing he would have been interested in. Do you not understand that "pan-Arabism" and "terror" are polar opposites in terms of attitude???
frutic: If you're talking about people fighting Israel, then I can't say no, but as being involved in some major plan to attack the u.s. or euro countries, saddam had nothing to do with any of that.
bin laden is saudi, 80% of the 911 hijackers were saudi, over 50% of the suicide bombers in iraq are saudi. not to hard to figure out who attacked and are still is attacking us.
thrash: Well, I don't think Saudi Arabia as a nation is attacking us, even if many of the 9/11 murderers were from there. AQ is an alienated group of stateless fanatics who are probably spread out over quite a bit of the arab world.
If you don't "think" Saudi is attacking us - than you must KNOW Iraq wasn't attacking us. Your logic isn't making sense. How can you be "preemptive" on fighting terror - when US presence in Iraq is creating new citizen soldiers that were not considered "terrorists" before the war in Iraq. We have more enemies now than before 9/11. We are NOT going to be able to "stabilize" this area... democracy by force? It won't work.
dani: "If you don't 'think' Saudi' is attacking us" This sentence indicates that you are responding to me. But I never said anything about wanting to be preemptive. Yes, we have more enemies now than before 9/11. Stabilization in Iraq is an interesting question, currently being explored one tribal leader at a time by Gen'l Petreaus.
fruti: Man, I'm surprised you are not for calling back Petraeus. That guy is trying to instill cooperation, using an anthropologist to understand cultural nuances. If you came face to face with him, would you call him a pussy-boy?? I mean, for god's sake, what kind of butt-kicking behavior is _that_ ???!!!!
fruticetum: I'm glad you know more than Petraeus! That is terrific, and I'm hoping to learn more about you in the papers. You can be a Cheney adherent and say things like, "let's go kick some butt," or "bring it on." I imagine you dream about comparing your dick size with other guys? What is it about you people that makes using your head some sort of admission of cowardice? Please stay in the cave . .
My words are echoing those of Petraeus. He said we are winning; we are making progress. That's what I said, especially since the casualties are even at a lower rate since Petraeus spoke.
frut: That's cool, but I was referring more to his methods, which are more eggheaded, less "militant." He's got all sorts of ph.d's working with him. I'm just making the point that we should focus on figuring our enemy(ies) out and dealing with them in more politically-skilled ways.
frut: "I just think doing nothing about terrorism is the wrong way to go. You can't be hands off on this issue. You have to be preemptive." I think our argument hinges on your/my definition of "doing nothing" and "preemptive."
Petraeus was saying what he was told to say, and many of his phrases were even identical to phrases Bush had used in speeches--that's why he betrayed us.
All he had to do was tell the truth and he couldn't even do that.
Just b/c Americans are self absorbed apathetic sheep - doesn't change the facts behind 9/11. In any event, they did march the streets in NYC - were you there?
"Just b/c Americans are self absorbed apathetic sheep"
Yeah, keep talking buddy, I'm sure that win over your intended audience!
Apparently, they just don't believe these dishonest and stupid "inside job" conspiracy theories. As for the New York "march", it looks as though their turnout was a bit low. WeAreChange was stuck trying to hawk their excess supply of conspiracy theory t-shirts.
cons, you obviously have not researched the events of that day. Read the 9/11 commission report and then read the list of questions the families gave to the commission - 3/4 of which were not answered....see if you think there is some coverup.
I've researched plenty. There are anomalies in every event of this magnitude and some people will never be satisfied with the answers but that doesn't prove the conspiracy theories. People say things like "the collapse of the WTC looks like a controlled demolition to me" as if that is evidence. It isn't.
I don't doubt there was an attempt to cover up incompetence on the part of some people, but that hardly proves the "inside job" conspiracy theories either.
Cons, When something like this occurs - this magnitude - you better well PROVE the official version is true...they failed to do that. I have yet to ever see a bldg fall due to fire like WTC 7 in history... was it made of toothpicks to freefall? One always questions authority - we are not sheep... they work for us...or have you forgot?
Well, there is ample evidence Islamic militants carried out the attacks, if you don't want to believe it, that is up to you. Whether you or I ever saw a WTC7-type collapse before is immaterial because the events on 9/11 were unique. As for trusting the government, I happen to think the current US Administration is a disaster and I don't trust them as far as I can throw them, but I don't see any evidence they perpetrated the attacks.
Cons: There are Islam people everywhere... you don't generalize and invade any country on a whim b/c there are Islamic people there. It's not "immaterial" that no other bldg in history has ever collapsed due to fire. Did you see the bldg in Spain that burned for days - still standing. Why did BBC report it had fallen (live) 20 min before it did?
I don't recall ever claiming a country should be invaded just because "there are Islamic people there." Saying other buildings didn't collapse when they caught fire doesn't prove anything unless the situations were identical and they weren't.
Of course they perpetrated the attacks! Norman Minetta said that Cheney gave the stand down order on 9-11, and if jet fuel melts steel, then why don't planes explode in midair? Google Loose Change, 9-11=inside job!!
There are far better 9/11 truth documentaries. I never recommend Loose Change. I'm not trying to knock you, though. Thank you for trying to spread awareness. I suggest that everyone watch (GoogleVid): 9/11 Mysteries Richard Gage's 9/11 Revisited Zeitgeist 1 Part II: All the World's A Stage - a youtubeDOTcom/watch?v=HZ2vAupmooU youtubeDOTcom/watch?v=EZeaW4ybejs David Ray Griffin's 9/11: the Myth and the Reality Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime Martial Law 9/11 9/11 Press for Truth
all they have to do is show a plane hitting the pentagon from one of the 100's of cameras. but they havent, why is that? we seen the planes hitting the towers for how many times in the months following?
They haven't shown a plane hitting the Pentagon, because who the hell would know it was going to happen? Is there something wrong with liberals' thought capacity?
You need to get past the liberal vs conservative mindset, Frut. The liberal socialist elites are on BOTH sides of our government. The media is "liberal" however - it's controlled by the CFR. The liberal terminology is rather outdated given the monopolization of it and that it's severely influenced by government.
um frut, they have run 100's of drills for that scenario. what does that have to do with the cameras anyway? learn how to read and stop watching SAUDI owned fox news, you sound just like that dick oreilly. and you question my CONSERVATIVE thought capacity? again, im a republican NOT a liberal.
danitexas: There might be a coverup. There might be 3 coverups. However, until you put forth some sort of scenario, a sort of "this is what we think happened," even for just one part of the 9/11 event, then no one is going to investigate anything.
I try not to speculate. There are many theories out there. I only look at the evidence that was ignored. That evidence and the events prior to and after that day - warrant AN INDEPENDENT investigation. Sadly, our govt is all powerful and would be very influential on any true investigation and it's outcome.
danitexas: There will be no investigation without a hypothesis. I think you simply don't understand how scientific investigations are handled. The primary mistake of the truth movement is that it simply will not advance any sort of theory, scenario, etc. Nothing will be investigated without something specific to investigate.
I disagree. This is not an "experiment". Ground zero should have been treated much like a crime scene. This should have been handled much like the TWA plane crash in the 80's. Collect evidence, interview witnesses, and reconstruct what happened to come to a conclusion.
dani: To the extent they can conduct an investigation, they've conducted one, and come to a conclusion. Some people are still suspicious, some people have more questions. The problem is, people want to re-do the whole investigation. Ain't gonna happen. Gotta come up with explicit specific questions about specific things. Things that can be answered and then filed in a file drawer so they don't need to be investigated again.
dani: Personal attacks or attempts to make attributions for opinions will only weaken your argument. It doesn't matter whether anyone had a person die. Some specific grievance with a part of the "official" explanation must be mounted. There is no other way.
I agree. I didn't make any personal attacks. It does matter if you personally had a family member or friend die. How helpful you would feel if the majority of Americans blindly believe the govt's version - defending their position - w/o even reading the Commission's report.
dani: Concerned metallurgists, fire engineers, structural engineers, worked for a long time to come up with a scenario that best fit the facts, without regard to whether they had a friend killed or injured. No one is "blindly" believing anything. If you're unhappy with the commission's report, what specific thing about the report are you unhappy with?
Not true - the official version began emerging that day. The reports of the names of hijackers were released to the public - who weren't even on flight manifests. Discussion of the steel giving way b/c of the fuel was talked about that morning... interviews of ppl talking about explosions were edited out of main stream media. There are too many inconsistencies to discuss on this tiny post. They aren't hard to find online.
dani: Some stuff you're saying on here are not true. If you're going to attest to them, you need to cite sources. But even so, these are merely suspicions, which afford us nothing. You seem to believe that bunches of inconsistencies need to be explained. The answer to that approach is a flat out NO!
dani: "Names of hijackers were released to the public but they were not on flight manifests. Interviews of people talking about explosions were edited out of mainstream media."- Please cite sources for these statements. "The official version needs to be proved."-- What part needs to be "proved"??
dani: I don't need to read the report at all. You are the one unhappy with the report. If you have a gripe with the report, what specifically is your gripe?
It was a whitewash of the events of that day. Read the list of questions the family spents countless hours preparing and gave to the panel. Read the Commission Report. It's important for you to read it.
dani: It is absolutely _unimportant_ for me to read it. If you have one of those questions that you want the answer to, what is it? Your calling it a whitewash is exactly what is wrong here. In what _way_ was it a whitewash?
How can you have an opinion (there was "a valid investigatin") if you haven't even researched the questions that the FSC gave the panel nor the Report? The report failed to answer any questions - it failed to prove the official version - in fact, it proved it wrong in many ways.
dani: For the last time, the fsc may have not been answered completely, and there can be all sorts of problem with the report. The report may have failed to prove the official version. But until there is some working idea for something to investigate, nothing is going to go forward.
traitor: I am not going to depend on anyone's word as far as telling me that they don't torture in Israeli prisons. On the other hand, I have no evidence they do torture.
You don't have to rely on word of mouth. The Israeli prisons are surprisingly open. If you're in the country, make an appointment and they'll let you in. You can talk to the prisoners yourself and ask them how they're being treated.
traitor: I don't believe I can depend on the word of a prisoner being held custody in any jail anywhere for how they are being treated. There are probably organizations that are credible with regard to the presence of absence of torture in Israeli jails.
I'm not saying Israel hasn't tortured, ever. Of course they've used torture. They've just decided it doesn't work as well as interrogation - which is a pretty frightening process on its own.
If the torturer decides torture doesn't work...I tend to believe him.
guardian dot co dot uk/israel/Story/0,,2074067 comma 00 dot html Okay, here is the sort of thing that makes you question what is the truth. The Israeli guards at checkpoints have been known to use all sorts of humiliation methods, even toward women. They've convinced themselves that their enemy has no legitimacy and is deserving of harsh methods, I believe.
Perhaps I should clarify. They don't use torture for interrogation purposes, as it provides useless information - people tell them anything to get them to stop, regardless of its truthfulness.
I'm sure that torture for the purposes of humiliation is still quite effective, however.
Bush and the Clintons, in fact most presidential candidates are all involved in a plot for world government and enslavement of mankind. wake up people
infowars d0t com
VOTE RON PAUL or vote for your own ENSLAVEMENT. WAKE UP THERE ISN'T MUCH TIME LEFT.
lol, a CIA agent just admitted something that us 'nutcase truthers' have been saying since the KSM 'confession' came out - he had nothing to do with Pearl beheading. but back then, we were called nutty.
al i can say is that there are a lot of intelligent people watching these videos. We know what happened on 9/11 was at minimum different than what we were told. We know this and want a new investigation. Why would anyone be scared of a new investigation. The strip our civil liberties and tell us that if we have nothing to hide, then why be scared. Well I offer them the same advice. Open a new investigation...if you have nothing then hide then you have nothing to worry about.
music: The problem is, any further investigation has to be built around some possible scenario, some reasonable hypothesis (even unreasonable), something that can be tested. No one is going to investigate anything if the idea is to go on wild good chases, because those can go on until the end of time.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
What "evidence"? The people who believe this "inside job" crap do so because they want to. In their minds America is evil, nothing more needs to be said.
Notice Baer doesn't endorse any of this dopey "inside job" crap. You clowns are so desperate you just twist this comments into and endorsement of your kooky anti-American conspiracy theories.
Heh, ok whatever, keep drinking the Kool-Aid. Any child with half a brain can look at building 7 and know it was demolished Vegas-style. But whatever, stay in the Matrix, you deserve to be there.
look: Good explanations for the wtc7 collapse are readily available. The building suffered a huge gash on one side, and burned up from the inside (lots of fuel available in the building). But in the end it was pulled down.
danit: This guy named manuel garcia, Ph.d. Princeton, Aerospace and mechanical engineering, now working as a physicist at Lawrence Livermore labs, has a good description: counterpunch dot org/darkfire11282006 dot html Also, this one is helpful and relies on a lot of interviews with firemen on the scene: debunking911 dot com/pull dot htm
Whenever you read someone attempting to 'debunk' the questions brought up about 9/11 - do some research...find out WHO they work for - who their bosses work for - and which corporations own their company. Many a time - you will find ONE common demoninator of ALL those who attempt a "debunking" - THE COUNCIL OF FOREIGN RELATIONS = government = (prime example: The CEO of The Hearst Corp is a member of the CFR - they OWN the History Channel AND Popular Mechanics magazine - NO CREDIBILITY. BIASED
dani: I gave you a couple sites to go to. What you gotta come up with is a specific evidence-based scenario or hypothesis. Even without evidence, come up with at least some scenario for what you think happened in just one aspect of the 9/11 event. The stuff you're talking about does nothing for your case.
I've done quite a bit of research... I voted for Bush (twice) - I'm a Republican. I no longer buy the official version. It needs to be proved to me as it doesn't make sense. I've read the Commission Report and Thomas Kean's book W/O Precedent. The report was a whitewash...and he basically said that. It wasn't to hold anyone or agency accountable. They were working on a non-budget with MUCH resistance from the administration and agencies.
dani: I can appreciate your approach, but there is no possible way that anyone is going to put up with a fishing expedition. I know you are suspicious, but people could be debunking for 100 years, and you still wouldn't buy it.
This has been flagged as spam show
With all due respect, people should view this banned Youtube video and judge for themselves if our very own government has been, and currently still is, feeding us FAKE news:
vimeo(dot)com(forward slash)34714039
letstalkaboutstuff 1 week ago
What active CIA Bob Baer isn't telling all of u is that Tim Osman (Osama Bin Laden) was doing everything his CIA handlers had him do, to give the charade of him being some Jihad leader, when in reality he was a part of the CIA manipulative plan to fear hate and kill Afghanistan and Mid East Taliban and Al Qaeda to excuse the murder of people in the way of their pipeline, heroin, and mineral mining plans. Osama, Taliban, Al Qeada, all CIA creations. The Bin Laden family are CIA insiders.
virtualrealityknows 5 months ago
@virtualrealityknows In other words, it was a long near 3 decade plan solely created by the US government using the CIA to further cause all of these problems in order for the USA, NATO, the UN and all working with the very real New World Order to give the illusion of then being the solution. Bob knows for a fact there is indeed a New World Order and he is very much a part of it and has chosen to be since he began working for the CIA. Do NOT be fooled by his warm and fuzzy personable tactics.
virtualrealityknows 5 months ago
i want to see this movie!! going to check out in webmovietube
amielanquist41 11 months ago
watch my video whip my hair i need some middle eastern hits
bigbrorich27 1 year ago
You're wrong Bob. Wait till you hear of the torture techniques I got in store for the muslim parasites. You'll understand. You're welcome. Thanks for your views Bob. Please don't use "we" when you mean "you" Bob. Thanks. You're welcome.
MrElmarwan 1 year ago
You're wrong Bob. Wait till you hear of the torture techniques I got in store for the muslim parasites. You'll understand. You're welcome. Thanks for your views Bob.
MrElmarwan 1 year ago
You're wrong Bob.
MrElmarwan 1 year ago
this man blame Iran for 9/11! dont fall for this, this is another propaganda for the war elite!
And again, Al quida is build up by the CIA,mi6... his background as a CIA agent makes me suspicious! Dont believe anything you hear ,before you search it yourself!
rip
W Cooper.
Metalgear55 1 year ago
@Metalgear55 this man doesn't lie as far i know him. He has never said iran was behind 9/11. Go youtube his interview on hardtalk. Stop chatting shyt
adygondal 1 year ago
@adygondal you say that i talk shyt... what?? keep sleeping sheep, its seems you to brainwashed..
He has said that iran was behind 9/11! i heard it with my own ears.. search and you will know sheep.
he is an insider for the CIA and yes he blamed iran in an interview.... dont be a sheep and reject anything you haven't heard...
Metalgear55 1 year ago
@Metalgear55 lol americans are facing threat from out of space and now from men from caves. Fucking jokers
adygondal 1 year ago
The part about box cutters bothers me. I'm not that strong of a guy and I am not violent but if someone on a plane is threatening to hijack with box cutters you're goin to f'ing die anyway if you don't try to fight those people. I just find it hard to believe that a bunch of Americans were over taken by box cutters. It just doesn't make any sense to me. We have f*cking baseball bats here.
sfsoundhound 2 years ago
In Lies We Trust - illiminati
goodnoah 2 years ago 2
tin foil hat anyone?
thebackbencher666 2 years ago
Speak for yourself kramit. He got the audio right, and better than I can say for a lot of other videos out there.
Thanks for posting the video evolvingmedium.
Time4SomeTruth 3 years ago
I take your video seriously! and when baer says that investigations reap more quality convictions than torture he's actually spelling out why they torture and it's because if they did investigations then the intelligence community cia,mossad,isi,mi6 would end up in the dock. They need these patsies!
freedomfight2012 3 years ago
NO ONE TAKES YOUR SERIOUSLY WHEN YOU VIDEO TAPE YOUR TV. Read online how to pass through your signal into your camera to record. Then capture into your editing program. There are many free ones out there you can use to do this.
krammitAll 3 years ago
TO ALL 9/11 TRUTHERS:
I'm a sceptic, but like all good sceptics, I'm open to knew information. I saw we torture... I mean, aggressive information retrieval, Bush 'n' co and find out what they'll admit to.
Dang it, this'll be fun.
bersaba 3 years ago
Robert Baer, your my hero.
csmith624 3 years ago 10
The goal of torture & warrantless wiretaps may (emphasis on may) not be to gain intel, but to intimidate the american public.
If all of Bush's crtics think they are being illegally spied on or may be tortured someday, they will shut up.
So that is a theory, no idea if it is true or not. But torture & warantless wiretaps (which are unnecessary, counterproductive and inhuman) may be designed to intimidate the US public, not gain counterterror information.
ToddBudreau 4 years ago 5
1984
PieDumpster 4 years ago 5
1984 is more real than you might know. The technology is in place, and I know for a fact, 'they,' whoever they're, are not afraid to use it. It's too easy to pass their guinea pigs off as nut jobs. Who would believe a so-called "schizophrenic maniac?"
asobermindisawasted1 3 years ago
Robert Baer is awesome.
overmind25 4 years ago 7
No evidence, except for a faulty, highly suspect tape the Government stumbled upon showing a man purported to be Bin Laden. And the money trail has an ally of the United States ordering Al Qaida to wire $100,000 to Atta, the lead hijacker. INSIDE JOB!!!
charlesfloyb 4 years ago 12
The FBI apparently agrees.
Check FBI's website for Most Wanted Terrorist (Usama Bin Laden) & try to find ANY reference to 9/11.
It's been more than 6 yrs.
Still, ZERO link between Bin Laden & 9/11.
GruesomeTruth 4 years ago 7
They'd better be looking for Efraim Halevy, there are more clues to gather there.
spadonius 4 years ago
its obvious 911 was an inside job
bohemianowl 4 years ago 5
7 of the supposed "hijackers" are still alive--is that proof enough for you?
Watch the Venice Flying Circus to find out more about Muhammed Atta. He was/is (his father says he's still alive) a cokehead drug smuggler with a blond American girlfriend--does that sound like an Islamic extremeist capable of organizing 9/11?
EchelonMonitor 4 years ago
Nich: "Gotta come up with explicit specific questions about specific things"
GOOGLE: Family steering committee list of unanswered questions
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: Unanswered questions are the stuff of my existence as a scientist. But, like every other scientist, I eventually have to come down from my "suspicions" and construct something that can be tested, or at least tested as a thought problem. Without that, nothing will ever happen.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
Nich: "they've conducted an investigation".
No - they didn't. Fact: The FSC (family steering committee) FOUGHT for the Commission. With EVERY other tragedy - (Pearl Harbor, JFK, Challenger explosion etc) - An investigation was implemented WITHIN ONE WEEK. It took Bush over 400 days for the worst terror attack on US soil - and only after INTENSE pressure by families
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: Sorry, guy gotta give up on this. You absolutely refuse to come up with any sort of specific thing, so you've fallen into the same trap as others who may not feel a thorough investigation was done. Without a specific complaint, there is nothing anyone can do.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
The specific complaint was there was not thorough investigation performed. There was no testing done on the steel to rule out thermite. The media didn't cover: Bush's brother's company was head of security at the WTC/Dulles and United airlines, bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the WTC days before, steel beams at ground zero were found with the 45 deg angles typical of those seen following demolition, molten steel - do some research and draw a reasonable, rational conclusion.
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: You continue to believe I haven't seen all these assertions, and that I have not looked into all of them?!!? Do you actually believe you are the very first person to raise all these issues?? All this has been explained time and time again. I'm not answering any more of your stuff. It wouldn't matter how much evidence I gave you, you will never give up.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
No, I know the questions into 9/11 are deep and far reaching...however, if you haven't even read the 9/11 Report and searched the questions the FSC formulated - you haven't fully researched.
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: When you decide to come up with something substantive to talk about, then you'll be making some progress. Until then, take care of your brain cells, lol.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
once the last of the gold was recovered, the VERY NEXT DAY the search and recovery was called off. whats that tell you about how much thought and remorse they had for the victums. money is the root of all evil. and ofcourse dont forget about power and control.
thrashermich 4 years ago
Christine Whitman (EPA chief) misled America about the air quality at ground zero... the whitehouse demanded to review her statement prior to her releasing it. They quickly shipped the steel and debries out of the US. 1000's of Americans are dying as a result of their heroic clean up efforts the months following 9/11...and the govt has turned their backs on them in their time of need.
danitexas 4 years ago
"Who" were they explained by? The 9/11 Panel? No. Why was there molten steel at WTC 7 for months after 9/11? That can ONLY be the result of a chemical reaction - thermite. You can't guess or speculate unless there is a valid and independent study of ALL the evidence. Peruse this site:
dot journalof911studies dot com/beginners dot html
danitexas 4 years ago
Frut - the Feds confiscated over 81 shots from that side of the pentacon. There are cameras on EVERY angle of the pentagon - they have footage. IF a plane hit it - there ought to be ONE picture of it within those reports of 81...don't ya think?
danitexas 4 years ago
Hallelujah!somebody does get it.Have you watched How to create an Angry American.Watch the lies in real time.Watch Powell say Saddam had no WMD,s in 2001.Watch Rumsfeld say Saddam never had a nucleur programme,watch Rice say "Of course it was information that was mistaken".
robbaggott 4 years ago
The war in Iraq was planned long before 9/11 - that day was just the vehicle. Once you have ALL their words in one video - you realize all the propaganda they are feeding the public. The media is so controlled - they won't tell you.
danitexas 4 years ago
The media is controlled by the Left.
fruticetum 4 years ago
conservative liberal moderates neo-con republican dont you get it its all BS every body else in the world gets it but us
farasfarasfaras 4 years ago
So true - the Dem vs Republican is the biggest con on Americans...while we debate abortion and "family values" - they are planning behind closed doors how to destroy our sovereignty for a buck.
danitexas 4 years ago
The supposed proof of Saddams Nucleur weapons programme was 10 year old already debunked crap about yellowcake from Niger and Aluminum tubes.Powell brought this 10 year old crap up as new evidence in 2003 and the whole world laughed at him for being a lying piece of shit.
robbaggott 4 years ago 2
You have no idea what you're talking about, you liberal skank.
fruticetum 4 years ago
The 9-11 Commission admitted such.
Yes, b/c we ALL know how forthright the 9/11 Ommission report was - just ask the Family Steering Committee - they failed to answer 3/4 of their questions in their non-report.
danitexas 4 years ago
Olbermann is a pussy. Look at him: he's the stereotypical bespectacled pasty-faced brie-eathing northeastern liberal faux intellectual. College faculties are full of these wimpy soft-handed empty suits who are leftwingers who have never done a day of real work, have never contributed anything to society.
fruticetum 4 years ago
9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!
Kahlid Sheik Muhammed would have confessed to killing Kennedy too if the CIA wanted him too.
ceresone 4 years ago 3
Inside Job!
Lungyao1 4 years ago 3
The use of torture makes the war last longer by making more people hate us enough to take up arms against us.
Of course, the longer the war lasts, the longer Bush's Carlyle Group and Halliburton, and Bush senior's former intern Erik Prince (owner of Blackwater) will make huge amounts of money.
Really, the Iraq slot machine is pouring out the money, and they only have to put in a few lives to keep it paying.
EchelonMonitor 4 years ago 5
Don't you get tired of cheering for the fucking terrorists and against the innocent people they are murdering?
fruticetum 4 years ago
When did I ever cheer for Bush and Cheney?
EchelonMonitor 4 years ago
Oh, I get it. You're one of those Arab Muslim ragheads.
fruticetum 4 years ago
lol
EchelonMonitor 4 years ago 2
frut: Are you being paid by one of the companies that get so many of our tax dollars? It must make you very proud to make money off our brave soldiers while they die or get maimed so our MI complex folks can make more money.
nicholas9999 4 years ago 2
lol
nicholas9999 4 years ago
fruti: You must be completely confused by Petraeus' strategy in Iraq. Who the hell ever heard of taking anthropologist with you? What the hell is Petraeus doing working _with_ tribal leaders (formerly called "worlords"). Shouldn't we be torturing people and kicking butt??
nicholas9999 4 years ago
frut: Isn't it important to torture more people, and have more Abu Ghraib's, so we can give Al Qaeda talking points for when they recruit new folks to martyr themselves? I guess you don't care about Americans who may be out of the country and the dangers they might face because of these insane policies. Aren't you proud you can shill for the admin while guaranteeing greater danger for good Americans overseas??
nicholas9999 4 years ago
Defending yourself is an insane policy? I guess if you're a insane leftwing nut, it is. So you don't think we should be retaliating for 9-11? What you're basically saying is they attacked us, but we shouldn't fight back because that will just make them madder and recruit more terrorists. That's fucking nuts. If you roll over, THAT'S when they attack. Just like Bill Fucking Clinton rolled over.
fruticetum 4 years ago
Ok - Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. The funding for 9/11 supposedly came from Pakistan and the 15 of 19 hijackers were Saudi's. We have attacked neither of those counties.
danitexas 4 years ago
So you think we should attack Pakistan or Saudi Arabia? Why? Neither of those countries attacked us.
fruticetum 4 years ago
Let me ask you this? Who exports the highest number of terrorists? Before you google it...
SAUDI
Iraq didn't attack us - neither has Iran. We invaded their country - killed 1M Iraqis while there liberating them. We built a $600M empire/embassy there. If China or Mexico did that here - damn straight we'd fight them.
danitexas 4 years ago 3
Look, kook. No country attacked us in an official capacity; not Saudi, not Pakistan. So your argument about not attacking a country is specious. But we know Iraq was one of the countries who officially harbored, encouraged, and paid for terrorists. Saddam was actively involved in terrorism, refused to disarm, threatened the U.S. and was the region's biggest hostile power. He was the natural target. Anybody with two brain cells to rub together knows this.
fruticetum 4 years ago
You went to public school didn't you? You've been trained well via government education and controlled media.
danitexas 4 years ago
Yes, I am very familiar with the liberal mainstream media, and the PC government schools.
fruticetum 4 years ago
A "natural target" would be Kim Song. He actually HAS the money and the weaponry to carry out nuclear attacks. He's a horrible dictator... but fortunately for him...he doesn't sit on a bed of oil.
The majority of terrorist come out of Saudi - google it. You've bought into the CFR controlled media telling you that it was Iraq.
danitexas 4 years ago
1) Did Saudi officially attack us as a country?
2) Kim Song is a pipsqueak midget. He backed away very docilely when he saw Bush meant business.
fruticetum 4 years ago
Anybody with 2 brain cells know that Saddam worked for the US and started the Iran war and murdered his own people at Washington's request. Youtube Rumsfield hugging Saddam in Baghdad!
sean77741111 4 years ago
Sean, Saddam was thought to be the lesser of two evils at one time. Whoever said circumstances can't change over time?
fruticetum 4 years ago
He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.
Colin Powell Feb 2001
Saddam does not control the northern part of the country,We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.
Condi Rice 2001
robbaggott 4 years ago
Robb, Everybody agrees that Saddam was actively working on nuclear capability and was weeks or months away. The 9-11 Commission admitted such. Thank God Bush was preemptive in the war against terror. If only FDR had been preemptive against Hitler. 20 million people would have been spared. Bush had the guts and fortitude FDR did not.
fruticetum 4 years ago
Absolute nonsense!.The whole world knows that Saddam was broken by the sanctions.There never was a nucleur weapons programme,there were no WMD,s,there were no terrorist connections and worse than that Colin Powell knew all those things were false.Saddam was a threat to nobody and the world knew that,only idiots still believe that crap.
robbaggott 4 years ago 2
What? You don't believe the United Nations? They have "our" best interests in mind - and they promote PEACE.... right?
NOT
danitexas 4 years ago
"I" have nuclear "capability" - give me a break. He coulda doesn't equate "he does, we know where they are". You have bought the propaganda...hook, line, sinker.
danitexas 4 years ago
So you don't believe the 9-11 Commission Report? I thought all liberals did.
fruticetum 4 years ago
That really furthers your arguement well. I hate to break this to you bud - I'm a republican...and there are a TON of folks just like me. So - the liberal name callin' doesn't hold water - are you a neo-con or what? Let me guess...you're voting for Rudy or Fred, right? LOL - yeah, true conservative there fella.
danitexas 4 years ago
danit, You're a Republican? Big fucking deal. So was Jim Jeffords. So is McCain. So is Hagel. These people are all moderates. And moderates are nothing but liberals who are afraid to say who they are.
fruticetum 4 years ago
Do you know the difference between a conservative and a liberal? Ron Paul is extremely conservative...John McCain - a "moderate"? LOL - sure - he's a moderate conservative pushing for amnesty for millions. Stop watching MSM.
danitexas 4 years ago
Ron Paul is good in many ways, but he is unelectable, and worse, he doesn't seem to recognize the need for a war against terror. That point alone disqualifies him to be president. Don't misunderstand. I hate McCain for his various sellouts. But he does have an overall conservative voting record, so you can't call him a straight liberal.
fruticetum 4 years ago
The war against "terror" is much like fighting a war on drugs or a war against gang violence. It's impossible. Think about it. Ron Paul makes sense...I wouldn't underestimate his electibility either. Given the media blackout and smear tactics - it's amazing what he's pulled off.
danitexas 4 years ago
I just think doing nothing about terrorism is the wrong way to go. You can't be hands off on this issue. You have to be preemptive.
fruticetum 4 years ago
If we were going about this preemptively - we would have hit Saudi and Pakistan and not Iraq.
danitexas 4 years ago
If you object to our attacking Iraq because they did not attack us in an official capacity, then you how can you attack Saudi and Pakistan?
fruticetum 4 years ago
Ok - first...the "reason" our administration gave us to attack Iraq - was the WMD theory...then they changed it to be we were liberting the Iraqis from their dictator. If was linked to 9/11 in the media - however, our govt states they were not related. 15/19 hijackers were from Saudi - Pakistan funded the hijackers. Your reasoning is not valid based on the "logic" you're providing.
danitexas 4 years ago
Iraq was the leader in international terrorism, in that it was the most powerful arab country, an avid sponsor terrorism, and openly hostile to the U.S. In addition, Saddam refused to follow the U.N.'s inspections, and the U.N. authorized violence because of that. But you think we should have attacked Saudi because some of the hijackers were from there?
fruticetum 4 years ago
ha ha ha. saddam and bin laden hated each other. stop watching fox news. the cia trained and put saddam into power. we backed him against iran, where do you think he got the chemical weapons? and no im not a liberal, im republican.
thrashermich 4 years ago
Don't you get oh so tired of people calling you a liberal?
danitexas 4 years ago
its funny how frut has issues with others thought capacity....lol
thrashermich 4 years ago
frut: "harbored, encouraged, and paid for terrorists": this is one of those idiotic beliefs that a simple examination of Saddam will straighten out. Saddam was a brutal pretender, and a secular pan-Arabist. He wanted power in the region, and dealing with terrorists would have been the abaolute LAST thing he would have been interested in. Do you not understand that "pan-Arabism" and "terror" are polar opposites in terms of attitude???
nicholas9999 4 years ago
Really? Did you know Saddam subsidized families of dead terrorists?
fruticetum 4 years ago
frutic: If you're talking about people fighting Israel, then I can't say no, but as being involved in some major plan to attack the u.s. or euro countries, saddam had nothing to do with any of that.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
bin laden is saudi, 80% of the 911 hijackers were saudi, over 50% of the suicide bombers in iraq are saudi. not to hard to figure out who attacked and are still is attacking us.
thrashermich 4 years ago
thrash: Well, I don't think Saudi Arabia as a nation is attacking us, even if many of the 9/11 murderers were from there. AQ is an alienated group of stateless fanatics who are probably spread out over quite a bit of the arab world.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
If you don't "think" Saudi is attacking us - than you must KNOW Iraq wasn't attacking us. Your logic isn't making sense. How can you be "preemptive" on fighting terror - when US presence in Iraq is creating new citizen soldiers that were not considered "terrorists" before the war in Iraq. We have more enemies now than before 9/11. We are NOT going to be able to "stabilize" this area... democracy by force? It won't work.
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: "If you don't 'think' Saudi' is attacking us" This sentence indicates that you are responding to me. But I never said anything about wanting to be preemptive. Yes, we have more enemies now than before 9/11. Stabilization in Iraq is an interesting question, currently being explored one tribal leader at a time by Gen'l Petreaus.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
fruti: Man, I'm surprised you are not for calling back Petraeus. That guy is trying to instill cooperation, using an anthropologist to understand cultural nuances. If you came face to face with him, would you call him a pussy-boy?? I mean, for god's sake, what kind of butt-kicking behavior is _that_ ???!!!!
nicholas9999 4 years ago
fruticetum: I'm glad you know more than Petraeus! That is terrific, and I'm hoping to learn more about you in the papers. You can be a Cheney adherent and say things like, "let's go kick some butt," or "bring it on." I imagine you dream about comparing your dick size with other guys? What is it about you people that makes using your head some sort of admission of cowardice? Please stay in the cave . .
nicholas9999 4 years ago
My words are echoing those of Petraeus. He said we are winning; we are making progress. That's what I said, especially since the casualties are even at a lower rate since Petraeus spoke.
fruticetum 4 years ago
frut: That's cool, but I was referring more to his methods, which are more eggheaded, less "militant." He's got all sorts of ph.d's working with him. I'm just making the point that we should focus on figuring our enemy(ies) out and dealing with them in more politically-skilled ways.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
Nich, Sure, we can do that. Why would you say I'm opposed to it?
fruticetum 4 years ago
frut: "I just think doing nothing about terrorism is the wrong way to go. You can't be hands off on this issue. You have to be preemptive." I think our argument hinges on your/my definition of "doing nothing" and "preemptive."
nicholas9999 4 years ago
Petraeus was saying what he was told to say, and many of his phrases were even identical to phrases Bush had used in speeches--that's why he betrayed us.
All he had to do was tell the truth and he couldn't even do that.
EchelonMonitor 4 years ago 4
We rant against the lies and distortions, and when they tell the truth, it's a different story.
Glad you love it.
EchelonMonitor 4 years ago 2
9-11 was an inside job!!!! We should be in the streets screaming bloody murder for what the government has done to us!!!!
sean77741111 4 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"9-11 was an inside job!!!! We should be in the streets screaming bloody murder for what the government has done to us!!!!"
Right, and since no one is one the streets screaming "bloody murder" I guess you don't have much of a case.
ConsDemo 4 years ago
correction "in the streets"
ConsDemo 4 years ago
Just b/c Americans are self absorbed apathetic sheep - doesn't change the facts behind 9/11. In any event, they did march the streets in NYC - were you there?
danitexas 4 years ago
"Just b/c Americans are self absorbed apathetic sheep"
Yeah, keep talking buddy, I'm sure that win over your intended audience!
Apparently, they just don't believe these dishonest and stupid "inside job" conspiracy theories. As for the New York "march", it looks as though their turnout was a bit low. WeAreChange was stuck trying to hawk their excess supply of conspiracy theory t-shirts.
ConsDemo 4 years ago
cons, you obviously have not researched the events of that day. Read the 9/11 commission report and then read the list of questions the families gave to the commission - 3/4 of which were not answered....see if you think there is some coverup.
danitexas 4 years ago
I've researched plenty. There are anomalies in every event of this magnitude and some people will never be satisfied with the answers but that doesn't prove the conspiracy theories. People say things like "the collapse of the WTC looks like a controlled demolition to me" as if that is evidence. It isn't.
I don't doubt there was an attempt to cover up incompetence on the part of some people, but that hardly proves the "inside job" conspiracy theories either.
ConsDemo 4 years ago
Cons, When something like this occurs - this magnitude - you better well PROVE the official version is true...they failed to do that. I have yet to ever see a bldg fall due to fire like WTC 7 in history... was it made of toothpicks to freefall? One always questions authority - we are not sheep... they work for us...or have you forgot?
danitexas 4 years ago 3
Well, there is ample evidence Islamic militants carried out the attacks, if you don't want to believe it, that is up to you. Whether you or I ever saw a WTC7-type collapse before is immaterial because the events on 9/11 were unique. As for trusting the government, I happen to think the current US Administration is a disaster and I don't trust them as far as I can throw them, but I don't see any evidence they perpetrated the attacks.
ConsDemo 4 years ago
Cons: There are Islam people everywhere... you don't generalize and invade any country on a whim b/c there are Islamic people there. It's not "immaterial" that no other bldg in history has ever collapsed due to fire. Did you see the bldg in Spain that burned for days - still standing. Why did BBC report it had fallen (live) 20 min before it did?
danitexas 4 years ago
I don't recall ever claiming a country should be invaded just because "there are Islamic people there." Saying other buildings didn't collapse when they caught fire doesn't prove anything unless the situations were identical and they weren't.
ConsDemo 4 years ago
Of course they perpetrated the attacks! Norman Minetta said that Cheney gave the stand down order on 9-11, and if jet fuel melts steel, then why don't planes explode in midair? Google Loose Change, 9-11=inside job!!
sean77741111 4 years ago 2
Do you have information on that question?
Archosz 4 years ago
RandleEl11 4 years ago
all they have to do is show a plane hitting the pentagon from one of the 100's of cameras. but they havent, why is that? we seen the planes hitting the towers for how many times in the months following?
thrashermich 4 years ago
They haven't shown a plane hitting the Pentagon, because who the hell would know it was going to happen? Is there something wrong with liberals' thought capacity?
fruticetum 4 years ago
You need to get past the liberal vs conservative mindset, Frut. The liberal socialist elites are on BOTH sides of our government. The media is "liberal" however - it's controlled by the CFR. The liberal terminology is rather outdated given the monopolization of it and that it's severely influenced by government.
danitexas 4 years ago
um frut, they have run 100's of drills for that scenario. what does that have to do with the cameras anyway? learn how to read and stop watching SAUDI owned fox news, you sound just like that dick oreilly. and you question my CONSERVATIVE thought capacity? again, im a republican NOT a liberal.
thrashermich 4 years ago
danitexas: There might be a coverup. There might be 3 coverups. However, until you put forth some sort of scenario, a sort of "this is what we think happened," even for just one part of the 9/11 event, then no one is going to investigate anything.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
I try not to speculate. There are many theories out there. I only look at the evidence that was ignored. That evidence and the events prior to and after that day - warrant AN INDEPENDENT investigation. Sadly, our govt is all powerful and would be very influential on any true investigation and it's outcome.
danitexas 4 years ago
danitexas: There will be no investigation without a hypothesis. I think you simply don't understand how scientific investigations are handled. The primary mistake of the truth movement is that it simply will not advance any sort of theory, scenario, etc. Nothing will be investigated without something specific to investigate.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
I disagree. This is not an "experiment". Ground zero should have been treated much like a crime scene. This should have been handled much like the TWA plane crash in the 80's. Collect evidence, interview witnesses, and reconstruct what happened to come to a conclusion.
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: To the extent they can conduct an investigation, they've conducted one, and come to a conclusion. Some people are still suspicious, some people have more questions. The problem is, people want to re-do the whole investigation. Ain't gonna happen. Gotta come up with explicit specific questions about specific things. Things that can be answered and then filed in a file drawer so they don't need to be investigated again.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
Nich - did you have a family member die that day?
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: Personal attacks or attempts to make attributions for opinions will only weaken your argument. It doesn't matter whether anyone had a person die. Some specific grievance with a part of the "official" explanation must be mounted. There is no other way.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
I agree. I didn't make any personal attacks. It does matter if you personally had a family member or friend die. How helpful you would feel if the majority of Americans blindly believe the govt's version - defending their position - w/o even reading the Commission's report.
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: Concerned metallurgists, fire engineers, structural engineers, worked for a long time to come up with a scenario that best fit the facts, without regard to whether they had a friend killed or injured. No one is "blindly" believing anything. If you're unhappy with the commission's report, what specific thing about the report are you unhappy with?
nicholas9999 4 years ago
Not true - the official version began emerging that day. The reports of the names of hijackers were released to the public - who weren't even on flight manifests. Discussion of the steel giving way b/c of the fuel was talked about that morning... interviews of ppl talking about explosions were edited out of main stream media. There are too many inconsistencies to discuss on this tiny post. They aren't hard to find online.
danitexas 4 years ago 2
dani: Some stuff you're saying on here are not true. If you're going to attest to them, you need to cite sources. But even so, these are merely suspicions, which afford us nothing. You seem to believe that bunches of inconsistencies need to be explained. The answer to that approach is a flat out NO!
nicholas9999 4 years ago
Which is not true and I'll cite you a source.
The official version needs to be proved. Period. It wasn't proved with the government Report.
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: "Names of hijackers were released to the public but they were not on flight manifests. Interviews of people talking about explosions were edited out of mainstream media."- Please cite sources for these statements. "The official version needs to be proved."-- What part needs to be "proved"??
nicholas9999 4 years ago
Lastly, I can tell by your comments that you have not read the 9/11 Commission Report.
In order to be able to debate this issue - and make informed opinions - you have to read the report.
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: I don't need to read the report at all. You are the one unhappy with the report. If you have a gripe with the report, what specifically is your gripe?
nicholas9999 4 years ago
It was a whitewash of the events of that day. Read the list of questions the family spents countless hours preparing and gave to the panel. Read the Commission Report. It's important for you to read it.
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: It is absolutely _unimportant_ for me to read it. If you have one of those questions that you want the answer to, what is it? Your calling it a whitewash is exactly what is wrong here. In what _way_ was it a whitewash?
nicholas9999 4 years ago
How can you have an opinion (there was "a valid investigatin") if you haven't even researched the questions that the FSC gave the panel nor the Report? The report failed to answer any questions - it failed to prove the official version - in fact, it proved it wrong in many ways.
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: For the last time, the fsc may have not been answered completely, and there can be all sorts of problem with the report. The report may have failed to prove the official version. But until there is some working idea for something to investigate, nothing is going to go forward.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
If the Israelis have decided that torture doesn't work, then it doesn't work. Because you know they'd use it all the time if it DID work.
TraitortotheCause 4 years ago
traitor: I am not going to depend on anyone's word as far as telling me that they don't torture in Israeli prisons. On the other hand, I have no evidence they do torture.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
You don't have to rely on word of mouth. The Israeli prisons are surprisingly open. If you're in the country, make an appointment and they'll let you in. You can talk to the prisoners yourself and ask them how they're being treated.
TraitortotheCause 4 years ago
traitor: I don't believe I can depend on the word of a prisoner being held custody in any jail anywhere for how they are being treated. There are probably organizations that are credible with regard to the presence of absence of torture in Israeli jails.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
I'm not saying Israel hasn't tortured, ever. Of course they've used torture. They've just decided it doesn't work as well as interrogation - which is a pretty frightening process on its own.
If the torturer decides torture doesn't work...I tend to believe him.
TraitortotheCause 4 years ago
guardian dot co dot uk/israel/Story/0,,2074067 comma 00 dot html Okay, here is the sort of thing that makes you question what is the truth. The Israeli guards at checkpoints have been known to use all sorts of humiliation methods, even toward women. They've convinced themselves that their enemy has no legitimacy and is deserving of harsh methods, I believe.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
Perhaps I should clarify. They don't use torture for interrogation purposes, as it provides useless information - people tell them anything to get them to stop, regardless of its truthfulness.
I'm sure that torture for the purposes of humiliation is still quite effective, however.
TraitortotheCause 4 years ago
End the madness, vote Ron Paul
greenback001 4 years ago 6
Bush and the Clintons, in fact most presidential candidates are all involved in a plot for world government and enslavement of mankind. wake up people
infowars d0t com
VOTE RON PAUL or vote for your own ENSLAVEMENT. WAKE UP THERE ISN'T MUCH TIME LEFT.
RON PAUL 2008
CitizenBrain 4 years ago 4
ron paul 08
bobakpa21 4 years ago 3
lol, a CIA agent just admitted something that us 'nutcase truthers' have been saying since the KSM 'confession' came out - he had nothing to do with Pearl beheading. but back then, we were called nutty.
just wait until WTC7 stories come out
grozlz 4 years ago 2
Labels mean nothing. Knowledge is everything.
millsley 4 years ago
To those who know the truth, get involved. Join a local meetup group.
music4mic 4 years ago
al i can say is that there are a lot of intelligent people watching these videos. We know what happened on 9/11 was at minimum different than what we were told. We know this and want a new investigation. Why would anyone be scared of a new investigation. The strip our civil liberties and tell us that if we have nothing to hide, then why be scared. Well I offer them the same advice. Open a new investigation...if you have nothing then hide then you have nothing to worry about.
music4mic 4 years ago 2
music: The problem is, any further investigation has to be built around some possible scenario, some reasonable hypothesis (even unreasonable), something that can be tested. No one is going to investigate anything if the idea is to go on wild good chases, because those can go on until the end of time.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
is this the real jack bauer?
PFCAhammed 4 years ago
Torture -- A Wet-Dream of Every Proud War-Mongering, Sadistic Neo-Con!!
RBLA818 4 years ago 4
impeach bush and cheney for alowing this shit!!! YEAH????
gingerlives 4 years ago 8
torture is pointless..
check out some news on terrorism at allamericanews*com
sergeiche 4 years ago
The evidence is overwhelming that 911 was an Inside Job. What's the solution when the U.S. government kill its own people to steal oil?
wtc7demo 4 years ago 9
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What "evidence"? The people who believe this "inside job" crap do so because they want to. In their minds America is evil, nothing more needs to be said.
Notice Baer doesn't endorse any of this dopey "inside job" crap. You clowns are so desperate you just twist this comments into and endorsement of your kooky anti-American conspiracy theories.
ConspiracyNut 4 years ago
Heh, ok whatever, keep drinking the Kool-Aid. Any child with half a brain can look at building 7 and know it was demolished Vegas-style. But whatever, stay in the Matrix, you deserve to be there.
Look4Truth 4 years ago 2
look: Good explanations for the wtc7 collapse are readily available. The building suffered a huge gash on one side, and burned up from the inside (lots of fuel available in the building). But in the end it was pulled down.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
And don't forget it was made of toothpicks. Funny - I was boiling noodles on my stove tonite and my steel pot melted in front of my eyes...
danitexas 4 years ago 2
danit: This guy named manuel garcia, Ph.d. Princeton, Aerospace and mechanical engineering, now working as a physicist at Lawrence Livermore labs, has a good description: counterpunch dot org/darkfire11282006 dot html Also, this one is helpful and relies on a lot of interviews with firemen on the scene: debunking911 dot com/pull dot htm
nicholas9999 4 years ago
Whenever you read someone attempting to 'debunk' the questions brought up about 9/11 - do some research...find out WHO they work for - who their bosses work for - and which corporations own their company. Many a time - you will find ONE common demoninator of ALL those who attempt a "debunking" - THE COUNCIL OF FOREIGN RELATIONS = government = (prime example: The CEO of The Hearst Corp is a member of the CFR - they OWN the History Channel AND Popular Mechanics magazine - NO CREDIBILITY. BIASED
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: I gave you a couple sites to go to. What you gotta come up with is a specific evidence-based scenario or hypothesis. Even without evidence, come up with at least some scenario for what you think happened in just one aspect of the 9/11 event. The stuff you're talking about does nothing for your case.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
I've done quite a bit of research... I voted for Bush (twice) - I'm a Republican. I no longer buy the official version. It needs to be proved to me as it doesn't make sense. I've read the Commission Report and Thomas Kean's book W/O Precedent. The report was a whitewash...and he basically said that. It wasn't to hold anyone or agency accountable. They were working on a non-budget with MUCH resistance from the administration and agencies.
danitexas 4 years ago
dani: I can appreciate your approach, but there is no possible way that anyone is going to put up with a fishing expedition. I know you are suspicious, but people could be debunking for 100 years, and you still wouldn't buy it.
nicholas9999 4 years ago
That's ridiculous. who told you that, Bill O'Reilly?
music4mic 4 years ago