The 100% Impossible 9/11 Inside Job

[trustbutverify]

Is that even Osama bin Laden in that video? I mean the real Osama bin Laden? If it is, how can we be certain he's telling the truth? Could he have been a CIA/Mossad operative?



That's because you believe in a false paradigm where there's a separate private sector and a separate public sector, when the real truth is is our government is owned and controlled by private sector entities while masquerading around before the American people as a legitimate government.



Why not? Maybe he's a big fan of the U.S. government. Maybe he's a statist. Maybe he's angling for a U.S. government job in the future. You don't know his real agenda.



How ironic. Logical fallacy, straw man. I never made this argument.

I'm sorry you're "movement" has collapsed. I'm sorry the leaders have all been exposed and humiliated. I'm sorry all of the silly arguments have been so brutally debunked. Sorry you've been spanked so hard in this thread.

But could you please stop crying and whining?

 

[SpringHallConvert]

Since arielflight mentioned no other explanation for US intervention in Vietnam then there was no strawman involved on my side.

Arielflight didn't need to, nor was he/she required to to qualify his statement, therefore you did engage in a straw man fallacy.

It's as plain as day.

 

[SpringHallConvert]

I'm sorry you're "movement" has collapsed. I'm sorry the leaders have all been exposed and humiliated. I'm sorry all of the silly arguments have been so brutally debunked. Sorry you've been spanked so hard in this thread.

But could you please stop crying and whining?

And this is what the government truthers have been reduced to. Grade school antics.

By the way, it's 'your movement', not 'you're movement'.

 

[arielflight]

On the contrary, I quoted arielflight saying:



Since arielflight mentioned no other explanation for US intervention in Vietnam then there was no strawman involved on my side.

It would not be true to say that the Gulf of Tonkin incident led to an immediate escalation, since the US was already involved pretty deeply with advisors and military aid to South Vietnam. 400 American servicemen lost their lives up to 1964, and Johnson's administration had just increased the number of advisors by 5,000 almost immediately before the incident. Yet despite the congressional resolution, neither the commitment of ground troops nor the start of Rolling Thunder followed immediately from the incident or from the resolution. There was, after all, an election on. Nor when ground troops were committed was there a clear strategy to use American forces offensively. That evolved later, and with that later change of strategy, the prime cause of the higher total of American casualties (as well as Vietnamese casualties, due to the lavish use of firepower and airpower in support of American infantry).

It is also somewhat suspect to imply that had Congress or Johnson himself been in full possession of the facts that there wouldn't have been a resolution; this was the era of the Cold War, not long after the Cuban Missile Crisis, and containment was still the basic American strategy in the Cold War. The country had gone to war in Korea not long before and suffered almost as many casualties as later occurred in Vietnam. There was strong bipartisan support among politicians for the intervention and also strong support from public opinion in the early years of the ground war. The consensus in American society in support of containment and 'stopping communism' was very strong - until the strategy of containment visibly failed in Vietnam.

Johnson is often portrayed as a warmonger, but there is plenty of evidence to indicate he wasn't nearly as keen as people have sometimes said he was to escalate the conflict. Not only did he say he wasn't keen, but the halting escalation in 1964-5 indicates this

Oh, by the way, Johnson's opponent in the 1964 campaign, Barry Goldwater, rather famously suggested using nuclear weapons to defoliate the Vietnamese jungle in May 1964.

So the lie is irrelevant ?
The irony for me is, in 8th grade school debate, I was assigned to debate the pro war side. This was in the 60's. Hmmmm, difficult to find anything official to support the war, except, The Gulf of Tonkin, Domino Theory, and the sacrifices of the men who already died would be for nothing if we withdrew.
No computers then, or whistleblowers, or Foia releases, so the public only knew what was told to them by the officials.

 

[grandmastershek]

And this is what the government truthers have been reduced to. Grade school antics.

By the way, it's 'your movement', not 'you're movement'.

And your "NUH UH! NUH UH!" arguments are nothing but the highest caliber to be sure.

 

[DGM]

And this is what the government truthers have been reduced to. Grade school antics.

By the way, it's 'your movement', not 'you're movement'.

So, do you plan to debate soon? You've had two legitimate offers (so far).

Do you even know what a debate it?

 

[arielflight]

Why is it so difficult to imagine, since you said you don't know, that someone else might know?

You don't know who planned it.
Others do.

However, you ignore them because you're a child who needs attention.

What others? Source? How do you know he's a child who needs attention? Source?

 

[Nick Terry]

Is that even Osama bin Laden in that video? I mean the real Osama bin Laden? If it is, how can we be certain he's telling the truth? Could he have been a CIA/Mossad operative?

Until you provide some proof for these assertions, then the rest of us are entitled to ignore them and treat the video as evidence for 9/11 which is independent of the US government.

That's because you believe in a false paradigm where there's a separate private sector and a separate public sector, when the real truth is is our government is owned and controlled by private sector entities while masquerading around before the American people as a legitimate government.

LOL. Northwestern University doesn't own the US federal government. It's not even a for-profit corporation. It is in no way, shape or form part of any cabal or entity which pulls any strings anywhere. Heck, they even have a freaking Holocaust denier tenured there.

Why not? Maybe he's a big fan of the U.S. government. Maybe he's a statist. Maybe he's angling for a U.S. government job in the future. You don't know his real agenda.

The agenda of an engineering professor in his 60s employed by a private not for profit university is going to be knowledge and truth, bust. Someone who has written 450 articles isn't going to give a fig about writing one just to please some nameless master somewhere in the government. Nor is someone going to be awarded five honorary doctorates by foreign universities unless he is recognised internationally. You simply cannot pretend that someone like Bazant is a Lysenko-style paid lackey of 'the government'. That's simply not how the academic world works.

How ironic. Logical fallacy, straw man. I never made this argument.

Yes you did, and yes you have repeatedly. I was replying to this gibberish post:

"But, but, but, the government says it's true and since I spent my life being indoctrinated in a government indoctrination camp, I don't have the thinking skills to question anything! So you're wrong! I just know it! Just because!!!

which clearly indicates that you seem to believe that people here make up their minds solely because 'the government' tells them what to think.

This is clearly untrue, since the overwhelming majority of information most of us receive comes from the worldwide media, reported by diverse newspapers and television channels, all of whom chase a particular story because it's the news. For Al-Jazeera and the BBC and CNN and The Guardian and Le Monde and the New York Times all to be 'in on it' is impossible. They are not controlled by "the government". They are independent sources of information. They are of course subject to bias and error like any other source of information, including the government.

Universities are also not "the government", even where they are state owned. There are fifteen layers of bureaucracy between any minister or secretary and a professor, too many to tell the professor exactly what to think. And too many examples of independent minded professors who say the opposite of what "the government" says to pretend that they're all mind-controlled from Washington. Are you going to try claiming that Noam Chomsky is under the thumb of "the government"?

In case you didn't realise, in the United States there's also this little thing called the separation of powers. That means that the judiciary is also independent of "the government". And guess what, the judiciary has weighed in on the subject of 9/11 just like the universities and the media.

There are four main mechanisms for determining facts that carry any significant currency in the modern world:

a) journalism
b) academia
c) the courts
d) government or political enquiries (Congressional hearings etc)

Journalism and academia are international. Courts and government enquiries are almost always national, although there are a few exceptions (International Criminal Court, the UN). The internationalisation of journalism and academia is a prime defence against any attempt by a particular government to distort facts. It's also a huge headache for conspiracy theorists who don't seem to realise that journalism and academia are global networks.

You've tried to label people here 'government truthers' on repeated occasions, yet a significant quantity of the information which leads people to disagree with you doesn't come from "the government". That book The Looming Tower which you keep being recommended wasn't written by anyone in "the government".

Don't insult our intelligence with this 'government truther' nonsense anymore.

 

[arielflight]

Please provide details of that protocol,and elucidate for us

• What time intervals do these protocols allow for a) time from noticing problem to alerting NORAD b) Time from alerting NORAD to fighter lift-off c) Time from fighter lift-off to intercept (fighter actually behind target).
• Tell us where in the USA there are actual fighters on alert that can be used for such intercepts, and discuss what that means with regard to the time until intercepting airliners anywhere within the Continental USA
• How often had the rotocal been put into action in the years before 9/11 to actually intercept civilian planes over the Continental USA?
• What was the mean, and the shortest, time interval was from first sign of a problem to issuing an alarm at NORAD to actual intercept (fighter follows target close behind) for these intercepts over the Continental USA?
• Then discuss the time intervals actually available on 9/11, location of alert fighters, actual event, and compare with protocols and experience before 9/11!

I think if you go through that, you will find that there was absolutely no chance at all to intercept, let alone shoot down, AA11 and UA 175 even assuming perfect information and actions by all concerned. As for AA77, you will find that, while it may have been physically possible to intercept that flight, it wasn't actually possible because the various agencies did not share whatever information arose perfectly and efficiently. There might have been a slim chance to intercept UA93 if it had not crashed before getting closer to the east coast.

If you have trouble doing that research, feel free to ask for assistance. But it could be a good exercise for you to try it on your own. I did that about 2 years ago myself, even contacted a Lieutenant colonel of the German airforce, former NATO staff officer, to explain these protocols to me (they are basically the same in all NATO member states). That officer was even a borderline truther! He thought the inability of NORAD to intercept the planes was suspicious, but was smart and stopped short of making any claim of foul play. During my exchange with him I found that he was not informed about the locations and number of alert fighters in the north-eastern USA (he believed that Andrews AFB would have had alert crews, which simply isn't the case), and this misinfirmation was ultimately the cause for his suspicion. Working with factual information, you will find that NORAD had its resources too thinly spread since the end of the Cold War and some cut-backs after 1991.

And who is this Lt Colonel of the German Airforce?

 

[Oystein]

So the lie is irrelevant ?

Yes, with regared to 9/11, a lie made 35 years and more before that date is irrelevant.

Relevant in this current debate however is your dishinesty, arielflight. You copied a long tract of text and made it appear like it was your own work. You didn't comment yet on the fact that you didn't think for yourself when you posted nonsense.

The irony for me is, in 8th grade school debate, I was assigned to debate the pro war side. This was in the 60's. Hmmmm, difficult to find anything official to support the war, except, The Gulf of Tonkin, Domino Theory, and the sacrifices of the men who already died would be for nothing if we withdrew.
No computers then, or whistleblowers, or Foia releases, so the public only knew what was told to them by the officials.

You have my sympathy.

Can we now debate 9/11, please?

[remainder of post deleted as it became obsolete with ariel's latest post]

 

[Nick Terry]

So the lie is irrelevant ?
The irony for me is, in 8th grade school debate, I was assigned to debate the pro war side. This was in the 60's. Hmmmm, difficult to find anything official to support the war, except, The Gulf of Tonkin, Domino Theory, and the sacrifices of the men who already died would be for nothing if we withdrew.
No computers then, or whistleblowers, or Foia releases, so the public only knew what was told to them by the officials.

Your invocation of the Gulf of Tonkin incident is at best an extremely bad argument by analogy. Yes, there were screw-ups in the reporting of information back to Washington, but that actually meant that Johnson had made his mind up before he heard about the second incident. The full extent of the screwups didn't become clear until years later. It's therefore stretching things to say that there was a "lie" - shots were fired, without US casualties, and there was a political consensus to respond, as indicated by the bipartisan vote in favour of the resolution.

This is quite a different beast to the implied analogy with 9/11.

 

[BStrong]

Gotta say, there is so much more. Some people cannot see the forest for the trees.
Some cannot read between the lines. Some cannot follow the money. Some people cannot concieve of the lies, deaths, and suffering of innocent people.
People in this country who have worked for and have ties to our government, lied about the Gulf of Tonkin, the Vietnam War cost the United States 58,000 lives and 350,000 casualties. It also resulted in between one and two million Vietnamese deaths.
Project Paperclip, bringing in Nazi war criminals to our country, who then started MKULTRA, who experimented on innocent unknowing, Americans including children.
Then we have the Plutonium Papers, exposing Americans to harmful radiation unknowingly.
When did we learn of these things? Long after the people responsible were around to be held accountable. Why should 9/11 be any different?
We went to Iraq based on LIES, look at all of our men and women and innocent Iraqi's who have died and suffered. America now condones TORTURE as a valid way to get information. If you witnessed your child being tortured, you would lie your ass off to make them stop, even if you didn't know anything!
We have lost our dignity, privacy, our rights. America has good people who want to help others, but they are not in power; and these lying mfer's, (want to know who they are?.....follow the money), have ruined this country are so obscenely wealthy and protected by the media and politicians they own, that they can and do get away with murder. They laugh at you, because they know that you will keep believing their bs, it doesn't even bother you, that the 9/11 Commission admits there are lies. Do you really believe that it was all just incompetence? The Commission had to find some way to explain the lies without the real criminals being accused.
Have a nice day.
TRANSCRIPT: On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 men armed with boxcutters directed by a man on dialysis in a cave fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily-defended airspace in the world, overpowering the passengers and the military combat-trained pilots on 4 commercial aircraft before flying those planes wildly off course for over an hour without being molested by a single fighter interceptor.

These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who liked to drink alcohol, snort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers, managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 planes in New York, while in Washington a pilot who couldn’t handle a single engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8,000 foot descending 270 degree corskscrew turn to come exactly level with the ground, hitting the Pentagon in the budget analyst office where DoD staffers were working on the mystery of the 2.3 trillion dollars that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced “missing” from the Pentagon’s coffers in a press conference the day before, on September 10, 2001.

Luckily, the news anchors knew who did it within minutes, the pundits knew within hours, the Administration knew within the day, and the evidence literally fell into the FBI’s lap. But for some reason a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists demanded an investigation into the greatest attack on American soil in history.

The investigation was delayed, underfunded, set up to fail, a conflict of interest and a cover up from start to finish. It was based on testimony extracted through torture, the records of which were destroyed. It failed to mention the existence of WTC7, Able Danger, Ptech, Sibel Edmonds, OBL and the CIA, and the drills of hijacked aircraft being flown into buildings that were being simulated at the precise same time that those events were actually happening. It was lied to by the Pentagon, the CIA, the Bush Administration and as for Bush and Cheney…well, no one knows what they told it because they testified in secret, off the record, not under oath and behind closed doors. It didn’t bother to look at who funded the attacks because that question is of “little practical significance“. Still, the 9/11 Commission did brilliantly, answering all of the questions the public had (except most of the victims’ family members’ questions) and pinned blame on all the people responsible (although no one so much as lost their job), determining the attacks were “a failure of imagination” because “I don’t think anyone could envision flying airplanes into buildings ” except the Pentagon and FEMA and NORAD and the NRO.

The DIA destroyed 2.5 TB of data on Able Danger, but that’s OK because it probably wasn’t important.

The SEC destroyed their records on the investigation into the insider trading before the attacks, but that’s OK because destroying the records of the largest investigation in SEC history is just part of routine record keeping.

NIST has classified the data that they used for their model of WTC7′s collapse, but that’s OK because knowing how they made their model of that collapse would “jeopardize public safety“.

The FBI has argued that all material related to their investigation of 9/11 should be kept secret from the public, but that’s OK because the FBI probably has nothing to hide.

This man never existed, nor is anything he had to say worthy of your attention, and if you say otherwise you are a paranoid conspiracy theorist and deserve to be shunned by all of humanity. Likewise him, him, him, and her. (and her and her and him).

Osama Bin Laden lived in a cave fortress in the hills of Afghanistan, but somehow got away. Then he was hiding out in Tora Bora but somehow got away. Then he lived in Abottabad for years, taunting the most comprehensive intelligence dragnet employing the most sophisticated technology in the history of the world for 10 years, releasing video after video with complete impunity (and getting younger and younger as he did so), before finally being found in a daring SEAL team raid which wasn’t recorded on video, in which he didn’t resist or use his wife as a human shield, and in which these crack special forces operatives panicked and killed this unarmed man, supposedly the best source of intelligence about those dastardly terrorists on the planet. Then they dumped his body in the ocean before telling anyone about it. Then a couple dozen of that team’s members died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.
This is the story of 9/11, brought to you by the media which told you the hard truths about JFK and incubator babies and mobile production facilities and the rescue of Jessica Lynch.

If you have any questions about this story…you are a *******, paranoid, tinfoil, dog-abusing baby-hater and will be reviled by everyone. If you love your country and/or freedom, happiness, rainbows, rock and roll, puppy dogs, apple pie and your grandma, you will never ever express doubts about any part of this story to anyone. Ever.

Proof for the above bolded assertions?

 

[Oystein]

And who is this Lt Colonel of the German Airforce?

His name is Jochen Scholz. What does it matter?

Now you:

Please provide details of that protocol,and elucidate for us

• What time intervals do these protocols allow for a) time from noticing problem to alerting NORAD b) Time from alerting NORAD to fighter lift-off c) Time from fighter lift-off to intercept (fighter actually behind target).
• Tell us where in the USA there are actual fighters on alert that can be used for such intercepts, and discuss what that means with regard to the time until intercepting airliners anywhere within the Continental USA
• How often had the rotocal been put into action in the years before 9/11 to actually intercept civilian planes over the Continental USA?
• What was the mean, and the shortest, time interval was from first sign of a problem to issuing an alarm at NORAD to actual intercept (fighter follows target close behind) for these intercepts over the Continental USA?
• Then discuss the time intervals actually available on 9/11, location of alert fighters, actual event, and compare with protocols and experience before 9/11!

I think if you go through that, you will find that there was absolutely no chance at all to intercept, let alone shoot down, AA11 and UA 175 even assuming perfect information and actions by all concerned. As for AA77, you will find that, while it may have been physically possible to intercept that flight, it wasn't actually possible because the various agencies did not share whatever information arose perfectly and efficiently. There might have been a slim chance to intercept UA93 if it had not crashed before getting closer to the east coast.

If you have trouble doing that research, feel free to ask for assistance. But it could be a good exercise for you to try it on your own. [snipped Scholz story] Working with factual information, you will find that NORAD had its resources too thinly spread since the end of the Cold War and some cut-backs after 1991.

 

[Oystein]

Proof for the above bolded assertions?

He doesn't. He stole that long text from somewhere else without giving credit.
Shame on him.

 

[NoahFence]

What others? Source? How do you know he's a child who needs attention? Source?

Are you mm or ergo?

 

[Nick Terry]

Arielflight didn't need to, nor was he/she required to to qualify his statement, therefore you did engage in a straw man fallacy.

It's as plain as day.

Sorry, no. Arielflight mentioned the Gulf of Tonkin incident in the course of a massive rant which would qualify as a 'gish gallop' in most people's books. The part I quoted dealt exclusively with Vietnam and mentioned nothing other than the 'lies' over the Gulf of Tonkin incident which resulted in massive numbers of American and Vietnamese deaths.

My comment was that reducing the escalation of US intervention in Vietnam to the GoT incident would be an insta-fail on any history course. That isn't actually a strawman but a cold hard fact.

It's irrefutable that America was deeply involved in Vietnam for 14 years before the incident, with no fewer than three previous presidents making decisions about that involvement; it's also irrefutable that there was extensive debate before and after the incident about what form American involvement should take - ranging from the use of nuclear weapons to the much later decision to commit ground forces, first to guard air bases and only much later, to mount search and destroy operations.

Moreover, it is dubious to say that GoT was even a "lie" of the kind that you seem to believe was told on 9/11. It's as dumb as invoking Operation Northwoods, or spinning fantasies about the Reichstag fire, or trying to claim inside knowlege of Pearl Harbor, or any of the other historical analogies that truthers make which exposes them all as morons when it comes to really knowing 20th Century history.

 

[Nick Terry]

Project Paperclip, bringing in Nazi war criminals to our country, who then started MKULTRA, who experimented on innocent unknowing, Americans including children.

I think you're confusing a sub-plot of the X-Files with historical reality. Operation Paperclip didn't overlap with Project MKULTRA.

There were also very few outright war criminals employed in Operation Paperclip - exposure of one such case led to the immediate emigration of the scientist to Argentina. In about 1952, so it wasn't even very well covered up.

Sorry to disrupt your paranoid fantasies on this.

 

[BStrong]

Sorry, no. Arielflight mentioned the Gulf of Tonkin incident in the course of a massive rant which would qualify as a 'gish gallop' in most people's books. The part I quoted dealt exclusively with Vietnam and mentioned nothing other than the 'lies' over the Gulf of Tonkin incident which resulted in massive numbers of American and Vietnamese deaths.

My comment was that reducing the escalation of US intervention in Vietnam to the GoT incident would be an insta-fail on any history course. That isn't actually a strawman but a cold hard fact.

It's irrefutable that America was deeply involved in Vietnam for 14 years before the incident, with no fewer than three previous presidents making decisions about that involvement; it's also irrefutable that there was extensive debate before and after the incident about what form American involvement should take - ranging from the use of nuclear weapons to the much later decision to commit ground forces, first to guard air bases and only much later, to mount search and destroy operations.

Moreover, it is dubious to say that GoT was even a "lie" of the kind that you seem to believe was told on 9/11. It's as dumb as invoking Operation Northwoods, or spinning fantasies about the Reichstag fire, or trying to claim inside knowlege of Pearl Harbor, or any of the other historical analogies that truthers make which exposes them all as morons when it comes to really knowing 20th Century history.

We had men on the ground with Ho fighting the Japanese and advisors to the Viets as soon as the French lost their lease in '54.

Don't forget the men on the ground in Laos (Project White Star) under Ike, '57-'58.

 

[Nick Terry]

We went to Iraq based on LIES, look at all of our men and women and innocent Iraqi's who have died and suffered.

I was just as opposed to the Iraq War as anyone else was, but it's quite a stretch to say that the Bush and Blair governments "lied" as clearly as you seem to think. They were both victims of group-think and being told what they wanted to hear.

The very fact that neither government fabricated 'proof' of WMDs after the invasion is of course a perennial problem for truthers. I've still yet to hear anyone explain why Bush et al slipped up so badly on that one when they were supposedly able to orchestrate 9/11 and whatnot...

 

[arielflight]

Gotta say, there is so much more. Some people cannot see the forest for the trees.
Some cannot read between the lines. Some cannot follow the money. Some people cannot concieve of the lies, deaths, and suffering of innocent people.
People in this country who have worked for and have ties to our government, lied about the Gulf of Tonkin, the Vietnam War cost the United States 58,000 lives and 350,000 casualties. It also resulted in between one and two million Vietnamese deaths.
Project Paperclip, bringing in Nazi war criminals to our country, who then started MKULTRA, who experimented on innocent unknowing, Americans including children.
Then we have the Plutonium Papers, exposing Americans to harmful radiation unknowingly.
When did we learn of these things? Long after the people responsible were around to be held accountable. Why should 9/11 be any different?
We went to Iraq based on LIES, look at all of our men and women and innocent Iraqi's who have died and suffered. America now condones TORTURE as a valid way to get information. If you witnessed your child being tortured, you would lie your ass off to make them stop, even if you didn't know anything!
We have lost our dignity, privacy, our rights. America has good people who want to help others, but they are not in power; and these lying mfer's, (want to know who they are?.....follow the money), have ruined this country are so obscenely wealthy and protected by the media and politicians they own, that they can and do get away with murder. They laugh at you, because they know that you will keep believing their bs, it doesn't even bother you, that the 9/11 Commission admits there are lies. Do you really believe that it was all just incompetence? The Commission had to find some way to explain the lies without the real criminals being accused.
Have a nice day.
From The Corbett ReportTRANSCRIPT On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 men armed with boxcutters directed by a man on dialysis in a cave fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily-defended airspace in the world, overpowering the passengers and the military combat-trained pilots on 4 commercial aircraft before flying those planes wildly off course for over an hour without being molested by a single fighter interceptor.

These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who liked to drink alcohol, snort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers, managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 planes in New York, while in Washington a pilot who couldn’t handle a single engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8,000 foot descending 270 degree corskscrew turn to come exactly level with the ground, hitting the Pentagon in the budget analyst office where DoD staffers were working on the mystery of the 2.3 trillion dollars that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced “missing” from the Pentagon’s coffers in a press conference the day before, on September 10, 2001.

Luckily, the news anchors knew who did it within minutes, the pundits knew within hours, the Administration knew within the day, and the evidence literally fell into the FBI’s lap. But for some reason a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists demanded an investigation into the greatest attack on American soil in history.

The investigation was delayed, underfunded, set up to fail, a conflict of interest and a cover up from start to finish. It was based on testimony extracted through torture, the records of which were destroyed. It failed to mention the existence of WTC7, Able Danger, Ptech, Sibel Edmonds, OBL and the CIA, and the drills of hijacked aircraft being flown into buildings that were being simulated at the precise same time that those events were actually happening. It was lied to by the Pentagon, the CIA, the Bush Administration and as for Bush and Cheney…well, no one knows what they told it because they testified in secret, off the record, not under oath and behind closed doors. It didn’t bother to look at who funded the attacks because that question is of “little practical significance“. Still, the 9/11 Commission did brilliantly, answering all of the questions the public had (except most of the victims’ family members’ questions) and pinned blame on all the people responsible (although no one so much as lost their job), determining the attacks were “a failure of imagination” because “I don’t think anyone could envision flying airplanes into buildings ” except the Pentagon and FEMA and NORAD and the NRO.

The DIA destroyed 2.5 TB of data on Able Danger, but that’s OK because it probably wasn’t important.

The SEC destroyed their records on the investigation into the insider trading before the attacks, but that’s OK because destroying the records of the largest investigation in SEC history is just part of routine record keeping.

NIST has classified the data that they used for their model of WTC7′s collapse, but that’s OK because knowing how they made their model of that collapse would “jeopardize public safety“.

The FBI has argued that all material related to their investigation of 9/11 should be kept secret from the public, but that’s OK because the FBI probably has nothing to hide.

This man never existed, nor is anything he had to say worthy of your attention, and if you say otherwise you are a paranoid conspiracy theorist and deserve to be shunned by all of humanity. Likewise him, him, him, and her. (and her and her and him).

Osama Bin Laden lived in a cave fortress in the hills of Afghanistan, but somehow got away. Then he was hiding out in Tora Bora but somehow got away. Then he lived in Abottabad for years, taunting the most comprehensive intelligence dragnet employing the most sophisticated technology in the history of the world for 10 years, releasing video after video with complete impunity (and getting younger and younger as he did so), before finally being found in a daring SEAL team raid which wasn’t recorded on video, in which he didn’t resist or use his wife as a human shield, and in which these crack special forces operatives panicked and killed this unarmed man, supposedly the best source of intelligence about those dastardly terrorists on the planet. Then they dumped his body in the ocean before telling anyone about it. Then a couple dozen of that team’s members died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.

This is the story of 9/11, brought to you by the media which told you the hard truths about JFK and incubator babies and mobile production facilities and the rescue of Jessica Lynch.

If you have any questions about this story…you are a *******, paranoid, tinfoil, dog-abusing baby-hater and will be reviled by everyone. If you love your country and/or freedom, happiness, rainbows, rock and roll, puppy dogs, apple pie and your grandma, you will never ever express doubts about any part of this story to anyone. Ever.

From The Corbett Report