radiohogan, although i disagree with you on economics, i do agree with you on this subject. Six of the nine 911 investigation commissioners even thought it was a coverup/whitewash.
The truth is that 9/11 was nothing but a classic false flag operation. Those false flag operations were also used to declare war on vietnam ( research Tonkin incident).
Just search for "False flag" on your Wikipedia to find out how this really works.
This is something we both agree on....Now why do you still trust the govt on making economic decissions when they cant even run a proper investigation of 9/11? You are right, now one knows exactly what happend, but in the back of your mind you are saying to yourself that there is some kind of coverup. So I ask again, what makes you think that they won't create more problems with our economy..remeber they were the ones saying that the economy was fine just before the market crashed in 10/2008.
I agree, there was never a real investigation. Why? Either because the fox was guarding the hen house or the Bushies got had so bad that they just can't own up to it.
9/11 was an inside job or a false flag operation because Bush and Cheney refused to testify publicly under oath, but They finally made a deal with the Commission to testify April 29, 2004, with specific conditions:
1.They would testify together,
2.They would testify behind closed doors,
3. They would not be under oath, and
4. Their testimony would not be recorded electronically or transcribed
5 years before 9/11 the TWA 747 blew up off the coast of long island over 80 witnesses seen two seperate smoke trails heading towards the plane yet the conclusion was that a short circut in a fuel tank ignited vapours, this is a preposterous theroy and ignores both the evidence of the witnesses and airline pilots who reported smoke trails from rockets heading towards their aircraft in the years preceeding 1996, both a british airways crew and a pakistan international crew reported on this.
Hello, Michael. Okay, I'm confused about something here if I'm understanding correctly. Why blow the World Trade Center buildings up and then hit them with these huge planes laden with jet fuel immediately afterwards? I mean... I'd think that hitting the World Trade Centers with huge planes laden with jet fuel would be sufficient to get the World Trade Centers to come tumbling down. So, what might be the point of blowing them up first?
The explosions came after the planes hit. Many engineers have said the towers could not have come down from the planes alone. These engineers claim the towers could not have come straight down into its footprint without thermite (to cut steel) explosive devices having been set throughout the building, well before 9/11.
Hello again, Mike. Perhaps I'm naive, but, to me, it seems just as likely,... in fact, more likely because of what is at least known... that Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda simply pulled off an amazing (horrible yes) operation on 9/11 and inadvertently played into the Bush Neo-Cons hands.
@pmccarthy001 That's the point, the planes were never enough to bring the buildings down. The fires you saw were not from the jet fuel, that was burnt off in the initial fireball, officially that is.
The buildings were designed, nay had to be designed, to survive plane impacts. Look it up for yourself. The blowing up was necessary to make sure they did actually come down, because they needed to be brought down for whatever reason.
9/11 was an inside job or a false flag operation because Bush and Cheney refused to testify publicly under oath, but They finally made a deal with the Commission to testify April 29, 2004, with specific conditions:
1.They would testify together,
2.They would testify behind closed doors,
3. They would not be under oath, and
4. Their testimony would not be recorded electronically or transcribed
Well said. The truth is, no-one, but a few perhaps, are privy to all the information necessary to make a definite judgement. Add to that the fact that history is full of false flag operations, it seems scepticism is the most honest option here.
well put Mr Hogan. Seems that the eyewitness accounts always have to creep up in a book or article of a "conspiracy theorist". A term that almost discredits the article and is dismissive. and like you said this has reoccurred all throughout history. its a shame that those priceless souls are lost in vain and dont even deserve a proper investigation.
radiohogan, although i disagree with you on economics, i do agree with you on this subject. Six of the nine 911 investigation commissioners even thought it was a coverup/whitewash.
AussieAustrianBlog 1 year ago
The truth is that 9/11 was nothing but a classic false flag operation. Those false flag operations were also used to declare war on vietnam ( research Tonkin incident).
Just search for "False flag" on your Wikipedia to find out how this really works.
Lintflas 1 year ago
Alan Sabrosky, Alan Hart, and Francisco Cossiga all said that israhell did it
TheFlex21 1 year ago
This is something we both agree on....Now why do you still trust the govt on making economic decissions when they cant even run a proper investigation of 9/11? You are right, now one knows exactly what happend, but in the back of your mind you are saying to yourself that there is some kind of coverup. So I ask again, what makes you think that they won't create more problems with our economy..remeber they were the ones saying that the economy was fine just before the market crashed in 10/2008.
g3okar 1 year ago
9-11 was an israel job, with neocon elements in the us assisting.
rooper666hell 2 years ago
I agree, there was never a real investigation. Why? Either because the fox was guarding the hen house or the Bushies got had so bad that they just can't own up to it.
ole9421 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
9/11 was an inside job or a false flag operation because Bush and Cheney refused to testify publicly under oath, but They finally made a deal with the Commission to testify April 29, 2004, with specific conditions:
1.They would testify together,
2.They would testify behind closed doors,
3. They would not be under oath, and
4. Their testimony would not be recorded electronically or transcribed
omar58603 2 years ago
5 years before 9/11 the TWA 747 blew up off the coast of long island over 80 witnesses seen two seperate smoke trails heading towards the plane yet the conclusion was that a short circut in a fuel tank ignited vapours, this is a preposterous theroy and ignores both the evidence of the witnesses and airline pilots who reported smoke trails from rockets heading towards their aircraft in the years preceeding 1996, both a british airways crew and a pakistan international crew reported on this.
SuperGeorge8888 2 years ago
Conspiracy or not, one thing we can agree on:
We have less freedom as Americans after 9/11/2001 than we did before. And the erosion of that freedom continues.
JPScanga 2 years ago
Hello, Michael. Okay, I'm confused about something here if I'm understanding correctly. Why blow the World Trade Center buildings up and then hit them with these huge planes laden with jet fuel immediately afterwards? I mean... I'd think that hitting the World Trade Centers with huge planes laden with jet fuel would be sufficient to get the World Trade Centers to come tumbling down. So, what might be the point of blowing them up first?
pmccarthy001 2 years ago
Shame on me for confusing you.
The explosions came after the planes hit. Many engineers have said the towers could not have come down from the planes alone. These engineers claim the towers could not have come straight down into its footprint without thermite (to cut steel) explosive devices having been set throughout the building, well before 9/11.
Al the Best / Mike H
radiohogan 2 years ago
Hello again, Mike. Perhaps I'm naive, but, to me, it seems just as likely,... in fact, more likely because of what is at least known... that Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda simply pulled off an amazing (horrible yes) operation on 9/11 and inadvertently played into the Bush Neo-Cons hands.
pmccarthy001 2 years ago
OBL & Al Qaeda are fiction. It is like reading a comic book, when I was a kid.
radiohogan 2 years ago
anus
dermhovin 2 years ago
@pmccarthy001
you've been completely brainwashed
TheFlex21 1 year ago
@pmccarthy001 That's the point, the planes were never enough to bring the buildings down. The fires you saw were not from the jet fuel, that was burnt off in the initial fireball, officially that is.
The buildings were designed, nay had to be designed, to survive plane impacts. Look it up for yourself. The blowing up was necessary to make sure they did actually come down, because they needed to be brought down for whatever reason.
DarkwingScooter 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
9/11 was an inside job or a false flag operation because Bush and Cheney refused to testify publicly under oath, but They finally made a deal with the Commission to testify April 29, 2004, with specific conditions:
1.They would testify together,
2.They would testify behind closed doors,
3. They would not be under oath, and
4. Their testimony would not be recorded electronically or transcribed
omar58603 2 years ago
Well said. The truth is, no-one, but a few perhaps, are privy to all the information necessary to make a definite judgement. Add to that the fact that history is full of false flag operations, it seems scepticism is the most honest option here.
Ontologistics 2 years ago
well put Mr Hogan. Seems that the eyewitness accounts always have to creep up in a book or article of a "conspiracy theorist". A term that almost discredits the article and is dismissive. and like you said this has reoccurred all throughout history. its a shame that those priceless souls are lost in vain and dont even deserve a proper investigation.
NOTHING CONSPIRACY THEORIST ABOUT THAT!!!
ceezybaby 2 years ago 2
@ceezybaby THEORETIC
ceezybaby 2 years ago
it's not a theory if you can prove it, it's a FACT
TheFlex21 2 years ago
What has been proven? Please elaborate. Have you viewed my video?
radiohogan 2 years ago
ay stfu nothing was proven bitch.
koans808 2 years ago