1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

Do you believe the official version of 9/11?

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by jared2, Mar 22, 2006.

  1. jared2

    jared2 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    1,615
    1
    0
    Polls indicate that over 50% of New Yorkers do not believe the official version of 9/11. In this article, the actor Martin Sheen discusses some of these doubts.

    Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | March 20 2006

    Actor Charlie Sheen has joined a growing army of other highly credible public figures in questioning the official story of 9/11 and calling for a new independent investigation of the attack and the circumstances surrounding it.

    Over the past two years, scores of highly regarded individuals have gone public to express their serious doubts about 9/11. These include former presidential advisor and CIA analyst Ray McGovernRay McGovern, the father of Reaganomics and former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury Paul Craig Roberts, BYU physics Professor Steven Jones, former German defense minister Andreas von Buelow, former MI5 officer David Shayler, former Blair cabinet member Michael Meacher, former Chief Economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term Morgan Reynolds and many more.

    Speaking to The Alex Jones Show on the GCN Radio Network, the star of current hit comedy show Two and a Half Men and dozens of movies including Platoon and Young Guns, Sheen elaborated on why he had problems believing the government's version of events.

    Sheen agreed that the biggest conspiracy theory was put out by the government itself and prefaced his argument by quoting Theodore Roosevelt in stating, "That we are to stand by the President right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

    "We're not the conspiracy theorists on this particular issue," said Sheen.

    "It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75% of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory. It raises a lot of questions."

    Sheen described the climate of acceptance for serious discussion about 9/11 as being far more fertile than it was a couple of years ago.

    "It feels like from the people I talk to in and around my circles, it seems like the worm is turning."

    Suspicious collapse of buildings

    Sheen described his immediate skepticism regarding the official reason for the collapse of the twin towers and building 7 on the day of 9/11.

    "I was up early and we were gonna do a pre-shoot on Spin City, the show I used to do, I was watching the news and the north tower was burning. I saw the south tower hit live, that famous wide shot where it disappears behind the building and then we see the tremendous fireball."

    "There was a feeling, it just didn't look any commercial jetliner I've flown on any time in my life and then when the buildings came down later on that day I said to my brother 'call me insane, but did it sorta look like those buildings came down in a controlled demolition'?"

    Sheen said that most people's gut instinct, that the buildings had been deliberately imploded, was washed away by the incessant flood of the official version of events from day one.

    Sheen questioned the plausibility of a fireballs traveling 110 feet down an elevator shaft and causing damage to the lobbies of the towers as seen in video footage, especially when contrasted with eyewitness accounts of bombs and explosions in the basement levels of the buildings.

    Regarding building 7, which wasn't hit by a plane, Sheen highlighted the use of the term "pull," a demolition industry term for pulling the outer walls of the building towards the center in an implosion, as was used by Larry Silverstein in a September 2002 PBS documentary when he said that the decision to "pull" building 7 was made before its collapse. This technique ensures the building collapses in its own footprint and can clearly be seen during the collapse of building 7 with the classic 'crimp' being visible.

    The highly suspicious collapse of building 7 and the twin towers has previously been put under the spotlight by physics Professor Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan of Underwriters Laboratories, the company that certified the steel components used in the construction of the World Trade Center towers.

    "The term 'pull' is as common to the demolition world as 'action' and 'cut' are to the movie world," said Sheen.

    Sheen referenced firefighters in the buildings who were eyewitnesses to demolition style implosions and bombs.

    "This is not you or I watching the videos and speculating on what we saw, these are gentlemen inside the buildings at the very point of collapse."

    "If there's a problem with building 7 then there's a problem with the whole thing," said Sheen.

    Bush's behavior on 9/11

    Sheen then questioned President Bush's actions on 9/11 and his location at the Booker Elementary School in Florida. Once Andy Card had whispered to Bush that America was under attack why didn't the secret service immediately whisk Bush away to a secret location?

    By remaining at a location where it was publicly known the President would be before 9/11, he was not only putting his own life in danger, but the lives of hundreds of schoolchildren. That is unless the government knew for sure what the targets were beforehand and that President Bush wasn't one of them.

    "It seems to me that upon the revelation of that news that the secret service would grab the President as if he was on fire and remove him from that room," said Sheen.

    The question of how Bush saw the first plane hit the north tower, when no live footage of that incident was carried, an assertion that Bush repeated twice, was also put under the spotlight.

    "I guess one of the perks of being President is that you get access to TV channels that don't exist in the known universe," said Sheen.

    "It might lead you to believe that he'd seen similar images in some type of rehearsal as it were, I don't know."

    The Pentagon incident

    Sheen outlined his disbelief that the official story of what happened at the Pentagon matched the physical evidence.

    "Show us this incredible maneuvering, just show it to us. Just show us how this particular plane pulled off these maneuvers. 270 degree turn at 500 miles and hour descending 7,000 feet in two and a half minutes, skimming across treetops the last 500 meters."

    We have not been able to confirm that a large commercial airliner hit the Pentagon because the government has seized and refused to release any footage that would show the impact.

    "I understand in the interest of national security that maybe not release the Pentagon cameras but what about the Sheraton, what about the gas station, what about the Department of Transportation freeway cam? What about all these shots that had this thing perfectly documented? Instead they put out five frames that they claim not to have authorized, it's really suspicious," said Sheen.

    Sheen also questioned how the plane basically disappeared into the Pentagon with next to no wreckage and no indication of what happened to the wing sections.

    Concerning how the Bush administration had finalized Afghanistan war plans two days before 9/11 with the massing of 44,000 US troops and 18,000 British troops in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, and in addition the call for "some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor," as outlined in the PNAC documents, Sheen stated, "you don't really put those strategies together overnight do you for a major invasion? Those are really well calculated and really well planned."

    "Coincidence? We think not," said Sheen and he called the PNAC quotes "emblematic of the arrogance of this administration."

    A real investigation

    Sheen joined others in calling for a revised and truly independent investigation of 9/11.

    Sheen said that "September 11 wasn't the Zapruder film, it was the Zapruder film festival," and that the inquiry had to be, "headed, if this is possible, by some neutral investigative committee. What if we used retired political foreign nationals? What if we used experts that don't have any ties whatsoever to this administration?"

    "It is up to us to reveal the truth. It is up to us because we owe it to the families, we owe it to the victims. We owe it to everybody's life who was drastically altered, horrifically that day and forever. We owe it to them to uncover what happened."

    Charlie Sheen joins the rest of his great family and notably his father Martin Sheen, who has (been) lambasted for opposing the Iraq war before it had begun yet has now been proven right in triplicate, in using his prominent public platform to stand for truth and justice and we applaud and salute his brave efforts, remembering Mark Twain's quote.

    "In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."

    ------------------------------------
     
  2. jared2

    jared2 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    1,615
    1
    0
     
  3. finman

    finman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2004
    1,287
    111
    0
    Location:
    Albany, OR
    Vehicle:
    2014 Nissan LEAF
    Of course not, you'd have to be an idiot to believe ANYTHING this administration says. Question authority...better yet question the brainwashing.
     
  4. Betelgeuse

    Betelgeuse Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    1,460
    24
    1
    Location:
    New York, NY, USA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    When Charlie Sheen is your "highly credible public figure," you know you're in trouble. I mean this article must be a joke, right? Interviewing Charlie Sheen about his thoughts on structural engineering: are you kidding me?!?! :lol: :lol: :lol:
     
  5. Mystery Squid

    Mystery Squid Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    2
    3
    0
    I wanted to comment on this particular piece of absurdity michael moore tried to shove down people's throats:

    Think about this: WHY didn't Bush just up and leave? Now, use LOGIC here...

    A surprise attack has just taken place, and is unfolding in a manner for which you do NOT know the extent of. Would you be stupid enough to move from where you were until your Secret Service detail made SURE they could safely get you out? Everything changed at that very moment, aside from the typical configuration of their detail, they suddenly went into a faaaaaaar higher mode of alert. They HAD to secure the President first (to a level greater than ordinary security), before they could move him. For all they knew, long range snipers could have surrounded the school, or any one of a million other scenarios.

    I wish people would think for themselves versus believe the crap that comes out of the mouths of michaal moore, or worse yet, celebrities...
     
  6. jared2

    jared2 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    1,615
    1
    0
    There are a few others -
    These include former presidential advisor and CIA analyst Ray McGovernRay McGovern, the father of Reaganomics and former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury Paul Craig Roberts, BYU physics Professor Steven Jones, former German defense minister Andreas von Buelow, former MI5 officer David Shayler, former Blair cabinet member Michael Meacher, former Chief Economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term Morgan Reynolds and many more.
     
  7. Betelgeuse

    Betelgeuse Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    1,460
    24
    1
    Location:
    New York, NY, USA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    See, I might disagree with you here. I think that, if the Secret Service was really concerned that the President's life, they would want to secure him IMMEDIATELY. Maybe this involves storming the classroom, but I don't think they are just going to let him sit there and keep reading.

    As much as it pains me to say this, I don't think Bush was irresponsible in this situation by keeping reading to the kids. No one knew the extent of the attack at that point, and no one really knew all of the horrors that were going to happen and had already happened. It's easy to say in hindsight that he should have been up and out of there right away, but I don't know that this was a clear decision at the time.
     
  8. Mystery Squid

    Mystery Squid Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    2
    3
    0
    You're not thinking about what might be going on outside the classroom...
     
  9. jared2

    jared2 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    1,615
    1
    0
    "I think that, if the Secret Service was really concerned that the President's life, they would want to secure him IMMEDIATELY"

    The point is that the secret service are trained to immediately remove the president from a known and pubicized location in an emergency. Why didn't they follow their training?
     
  10. bigbaldcuban

    bigbaldcuban New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2004
    599
    1
    0
    Location:
    Mansfield, TX
    As much as I deeply dislike the way the president does business, especially after 9/11, I believe 9/11 itself was simply us getting caught with our pants down and our dingus hanging out. Pearl Harbor could have also been prevented and it wasn't.
     
  11. Betelgeuse

    Betelgeuse Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    1,460
    24
    1
    Location:
    New York, NY, USA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Right. I saw that. But Sheen is the one that they relied on for most of their information in the article (or, at least, the one they quoted most extensively). If there was some well-respected structural engineer commenting on this, I might be more inclined to listen and devote more time thinking about it. So far, I have yet to read/see anything that was convincing. No good reason as to why someone would want to do this. Nothing about how they would do it other than, "Gee. It really looks like what happens when a building is imploded." How do you explain the planes that many people saw crashing into the building. Sheen even seems to suggest that there's some "funny business" there.

    Look. Even if you believe that the US Govt. is pure evil and would like to do something like this to further their political goals, something like this would take massive coordination and massive conspiracy. Someone, somewhere would have leaked something by now. I mean, Clinton couldn't even keep his affair secret.
     
  12. Betelgeuse

    Betelgeuse Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    1,460
    24
    1
    Location:
    New York, NY, USA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Because, very simply, I don't think anyone realized the extent and severity of the attacks (or, even that they were "attacks" for sure) at that point. If they thought that there was any danger to his life at that point, I think they would have removed him immediately.
     
  13. Mystery Squid

    Mystery Squid Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    2
    3
    0

    and do what? immediately run outside and shove him in a car that for which any idiot knows he HAS to leave the building somehow, they needed to secure the AREA first to move him.

    whatever though, y'all believe what you like... Logical arguments don't really hold well in this crowd anyway...
     
  14. Mystery Squid

    Mystery Squid Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    2
    3
    0
    Logic:

    What do you think the most rational assumption would be at the precise moment information of the attacks was transmitted to the SS and President? Most certainly NOT standing around thinking about it.

    WORST CASE SCENARIO.
     
  15. jared2

    jared2 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    1,615
    1
    0
    It is their duty to remove him due to the very real possiblity of an air attack. What they would not do it let him read a story about a goat for 10 or 15 minutes.
     
  16. airportkid

    airportkid Will Fly For Food

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2005
    2,191
    538
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area CA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    There is absolutely no question that Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, et. al. get down on their knees every night and Thank God for 9/11; for them and their agenda, 9/11 was a gift of 24K gold.

    But it was a gift, they didn't execute it.

    First, this most secretive of administrations, most leakproof in generations, can't keep some secrets secret. A planned 9/11 would require a huge phalanx of cooperative people who would first be willing to commit an obscenity of unprecedented scale and then be able to keep their mouths shut. A planned 9/11 would be one secret impossible to keep.

    Second, this administration has proved itself inept at everything it turns its hands to. The 9/11 attack was anything but inept. Had the Bush cabal planned and executed 9/11, they'd've hijacked a few buses after getting lost trying to find the airports, and driven the buses into culverts trying to aim them into McDonalds - on separate days because they'd gotten uncoordinated on their schedules.

    Finally, Lee Harvey Oswald and Elvis Presley are dead, and thus unavailable to participate in a conspiracy. That all by itself should quench any hairball idea about a Bush planned 9/11, but in the heat of passion even the soundest reasoning gets trampled.
     
  17. Mystery Squid

    Mystery Squid Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    2
    3
    0
    An air attack is one of MANY scenarios. BTW, what do you think they were doing in those moments? Sitting around talking? Twiddling their thumbs due to shock? No way, they were securing the area to move him, and that takes TIME.
     
  18. Betelgeuse

    Betelgeuse Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    1,460
    24
    1
    Location:
    New York, NY, USA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    OK. We're disagreeing on a minor point. I don't think they removed him because they didn't recognize the severity of the attack. You don't think they removed him because they didn't have a secure location to remove him to.

    I think that both of us would agree that the fact that they didn't remove him immediately doesn't imply some broad, wide-ranging conspiracy.
     
  19. Mystery Squid

    Mystery Squid Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    2
    3
    0
    Agreed. :D
     
  20. dbermanmd

    dbermanmd New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    8,553
    18
    0
    Location:
    manhattan
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius

    It just provides everyone with evidence of how intellectually bankrupt they are when they have to use an actor as an expert engineering witness. And they are worried about how people view America? I would be more worried about how people view them.

    Wait for Michael Moores movie on Cindy Sheehan proves 9/11 was a CIA conspiracy - oh wait - aren't they making that one now :p

    I wonder if Barbara Streisand said that President Bush is right about Iraq, if they would now become believers in the war on terror :blink:

    Do they think the moon landings were fake too?

    How about the tooth fairy?

    What did Santa leave you last Christmas?

    And the magic bullet theory - you believe that one too?

    I would go on, except ET is beaming me up to conduct experiments on my body ;)