Loose Change 2nd Edition

[2GOLD 0]

There is now a internet story floating around that Barbara Olson was arrested in German or something. Never mind the original story had to be altered five times to reflect the name Olson and even get the border where she was supposedly arrested right.

 

So what this means is, the CTs have officially went into creating lies of their own to prove the government lied to them. They are now saying there was no plane, there was no flight and all the families of those people have been lying through their teeth.

 

There is a line between CT and insane and a lot of them are crossing it.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

If the US government planned the attack, then the military would have had to have been involved in the planning, right? Why would they have chosen THEIR OWN HEADQUARTERS to be attacked, totally disrupting their operations??? It makes no fucking sense. Yet, idiots keep spouting off about how we "don't know everything." Yes, there could have been some insane plot the government had, but you have absolutely no evidence to support that claim, other than hypothetical theories and conjecture. You want people to prove a negative to counteract your argument. You may as well claim that aliens were behind the attack, and shout at people to disprove that theory as well.

 

Also, none of you are experts on aviation, unless some of you have a pilot's license you haven't bothered to bring up as of yet. So, quit saying "they couldn't have flown it that straight for that long." You're not experts on aeronautical physics, so just shut the hell up.

 

Again, I'll ask the most glaring question that you conspiracy theorists ignore: What the fuck happened to the people on the plane (which was recorded as flying) if it was a missile that hit the Pentagon? I'm sure their families and friends would love to know that they weren't smashed into the walls of a building by Arab Muslim terrorists, don't you think?

[Skywarp! 0]

Also, could we get that Pentagon evidence from a neutral source? People that want to believe in conspiracy theories won't accept evidence from that website.

[NoCalMike 0]

Again, I'll ask the most glaring question that you conspiracy theorists ignore: What the fuck happened to the people on the plane (which was recorded as flying) if it was a missile that hit the Pentagon? I'm sure their families and friends would love to know that they weren't smashed into the walls of a building by Arab Muslim terrorists, don't you think?

 

 

Flown right into the ocean...!?! Hell I have no clue. Really though, I am not so sure that "the official 9/11 explanation" isn't true, but that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of coincidences and weird happenings that went on, enough to question it all. That is all I am doing. I am not trying to say I am CONVINCED it is all a conspiracy, I just think there is a lot of information still to come out in the future. I still am also very interested after reading about all the abnormal stock activity for america airlines on Sept 10th, as if someone knew the stock would be falling the next day. A lot of elites made a boatload of cash the second those planes hit the WTC.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

Why would they have chosen THEIR OWN HEADQUARTERS to be attacked, totally disrupting their operations??? It makes no fucking sense.

 

Dur. That's exactly why.

 

I mean, I believe it was Muslim terrorists, but if it WAS the US government, bombing the Pentagon is a good way for them to avoid suspicion. I mean, as you said, it makes "no sense".

[SuperJerk 0]

When the lack of proof becomes the proof, you've got a problem with your argument.

[Guest Big Chris Studd]

 

Again, I'll ask the most glaring question that you conspiracy theorists ignore: What the fuck happened to the people on the plane (which was recorded as flying) if it was a missile that hit the Pentagon? I'm sure their families and friends would love to know that they weren't smashed into the walls of a building by Arab Muslim terrorists, don't you think?

 

 

Flown right into the ocean...!?! Hell I have no clue. Really though, I am not so sure that "the official 9/11 explanation" isn't true, but that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of coincidences and weird happenings that went on, enough to question it all. That is all I am doing. I am not trying to say I am CONVINCED it is all a conspiracy, I just think there is a lot of information still to come out in the future. I still am also very interested after reading about all the abnormal stock activity for america airlines on Sept 10th, as if someone knew the stock would be falling the next day. A lot of elites made a boatload of cash the second those planes hit the WTC.

 

1st, if they went to the trouble of crashing REAL planes into the WTC, (unless they were missles painted to look like planes) why would they not just use a real plane when attacking the pentegon?!?

 

and 2nd,

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

 

...snip

Highly publicized allegations of insider trading in advance of 9/11 generally rest on reports of unusual pre-9/11 trading activity in companies whose stock plummeted after the attacks. Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation. For example, the volume of put options—investments that pay off only when a stock drops in price—surged in the parent companies of United Airlines on September 6 and American Airlines on September 10—highly suspicious trading on its face.

 

Yet, further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades.

 

These examples typify the evidence examined by the investigation. The SEC and the FBI, aided by other agencies and the securities industry, devoted enormous resources to investigating this issue, including securing the cooperation of many foreign governments. These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous. Joseph Cella interview (Sept. 16, 2003; May 7, 2004; May 10–11, 2004); FBI briefing (Aug. 15, 2003); SEC memo,Division of Enforcement to SEC Chair and Commissioners, "Pre-September 11, 2001 Trading Review," May 15, 2002; Ken Breen interview (Apr. 23, 2004); Ed G. interview (Feb. 3, 2004).

[Art Sandusky 0]

1st, if they went to the trouble of crashing REAL planes into the WTC, (unless they were missles painted to look like planes) why would they not just use a real plane when attacking the pentegon?!?

 

While both events occurred on the same day, saying one might have some questions isn't dismissing the other as a farce too. Of course, there are questions about what happened in New York, like the removal of bomb-sniffing dogs in the towers before the first ever powering down of the towers for the purpose of updating the networks within it. This would kill the security cameras also. These both happened a week or less before the attacks. I also don't understand why firefighters would choose to lie about what they saw and experienced when they describe the explosive-looking damage in the building near the ground when the planes had crashed into the towers hundreds of feet higher.

 

My case isn't so much that the government actually did all this, or even had a hand in it. I believe they might have tried to maximize what happened, at the worst. Maybe if it wasn't exploited by those in charge on a constant basis, this weird stuff could be easily dismissed.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Maybe if it wasn't exploited by those in charge on a constant basis, this weird stuff could be easily dismissed.

 

That's your one point I can agree with. Bush has been shameless in exploiting 9/11 and the "war on terror" (how can you have a war on "terror"?...terror is a tactic, not a nation or group). Constantly play the fear card to advance the agenda, etc.

[Guest wildpegasus]

1st, if they went to the trouble of crashing REAL planes into the WTC, (unless they were missles painted to look like planes) why would they not just use a real plane when attacking the pentegon?!?

 

While both events occurred on the same day, saying one might have some questions isn't dismissing the other as a farce too. Of course, there are questions about what happened in New York, like the removal of bomb-sniffing dogs in the towers before the first ever powering down of the towers for the purpose of updating the networks within it. This would kill the security cameras also. These both happened a week or less before the attacks. I also don't understand why firefighters would choose to lie about what they saw and experienced when they describe the explosive-looking damage in the building near the ground when the planes had crashed into the towers hundreds of feet higher.

 

.

 

That's what I want to know too. What's the story behind the bomb sniffing dogs and the collapse of the towers? I remember first seeing it and was totally dumbfounded on how the towers could collapse like that.

 

Everyone here believes that there were explosives or don't they?

[Dobbs 3K 0]

No, I don't believe there were explosives as there is no proof of it.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

I don't believe there were explosives, and I think it's kinda silly that so many people (not here) seem to think that there HAD to be. It just seems to me that when the planes hit, they would've taken out the supports for that floor, which meant that all the weight of the buildings (prolly a lot) above that would've been bearing down on supports which are no longer strong enough. Once they gave, the weight of all those floors was now bearing down on the floor below that, which wasn't able to support it either, and you've got a domino effect of them coming straight down.

 

That's how I figure it happened, anyway.

[chaosrage 0]

Again, I'll ask the most glaring question that you conspiracy theorists ignore: What the fuck happened to the people on the plane (which was recorded as flying) if it was a missile that hit the Pentagon? I'm sure their families and friends would love to know that they weren't smashed into the walls of a building by Arab Muslim terrorists, don't you think?

 

Ever heard of the Bermuda Triangle?

[NoCalMike 0]

 

Again, I'll ask the most glaring question that you conspiracy theorists ignore: What the fuck happened to the people on the plane (which was recorded as flying) if it was a missile that hit the Pentagon? I'm sure their families and friends would love to know that they weren't smashed into the walls of a building by Arab Muslim terrorists, don't you think?

 

 

Flown right into the ocean...!?! Hell I have no clue. Really though, I am not so sure that "the official 9/11 explanation" isn't true, but that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of coincidences and weird happenings that went on, enough to question it all. That is all I am doing. I am not trying to say I am CONVINCED it is all a conspiracy, I just think there is a lot of information still to come out in the future. I still am also very interested after reading about all the abnormal stock activity for america airlines on Sept 10th, as if someone knew the stock would be falling the next day. A lot of elites made a boatload of cash the second those planes hit the WTC.

 

1st, if they went to the trouble of crashing REAL planes into the WTC, (unless they were missles painted to look like planes) why would they not just use a real plane when attacking the pentegon?!?

 

and 2nd,

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

 

...snip

Highly publicized allegations of insider trading in advance of 9/11 generally rest on reports of unusual pre-9/11 trading activity in companies whose stock plummeted after the attacks. Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation. For example, the volume of put options—investments that pay off only when a stock drops in price—surged in the parent companies of United Airlines on September 6 and American Airlines on September 10—highly suspicious trading on its face.

 

Yet, further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades.

 

These examples typify the evidence examined by the investigation. The SEC and the FBI, aided by other agencies and the securities industry, devoted enormous resources to investigating this issue, including securing the cooperation of many foreign governments. These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous. Joseph Cella interview (Sept. 16, 2003; May 7, 2004; May 10–11, 2004); FBI briefing (Aug. 15, 2003); SEC memo,Division of Enforcement to SEC Chair and Commissioners, "Pre-September 11, 2001 Trading Review," May 15, 2002; Ken Breen interview (Apr. 23, 2004); Ed G. interview (Feb. 3, 2004).

 

 

Umm...the wiki is public domain, anyone can go in there and put anything they want, doesn't make it fact.

-----------------

 

www.hereinreality.com/insidertrading.html

 

 

Suppressed Details of Criminal Insider Trading Lead Directly into the CIA’s Highest Ranks

CIA Executive Director “Buzzy” Krongard managed firm that handled “PUT” options on United Airline Stock

by Michael C. Ruppert

 

FTW - October 9, 2001 – Although uniformly ignored by the mainstream U.S. media, there is abundant and clear evidence that a number of transactions in financial markets indicated specific (criminal) foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In the case of at least one of these trades -- which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed -- the firm used to place the “put options” on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency.

 

Until 1997 A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown. A.B. Brown was acquired by Banker’s Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major U.S. banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard’s last position at Banker’s Trust (BT) was to oversee “private client relations.” In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the U.S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.

 

Krongard joined the CIA in 1998 as counsel to CIA Director George Tenet. He was promoted to CIA Executive Director by President Bush in March of this year. BT was acquired by Deutsche Bank in 1999. The combined firm is the single largest bank in Europe. And, as we shall see, Deutsche Bank played several key roles in events connected to the September 11 attacks.

THE SCOPE OF KNOWN INSIDER TRADING

 

Before looking further into these relationships it is necessary to look at the insider trading information that is being ignored by Reuters, The New York Times and other mass media. It is well documented that the CIA has long monitored such trades – in real time – as potential warnings of terrorist attacks and other economic moves contrary to U.S. interests. Previous stories in FTW have specifically highlighted the use of Promis software to monitor such trades.

 

It is necessary to understand only two key financial terms to understand the significance of these trades, “selling short” and “put options”.

 

“Selling Short” is the borrowing of stock, selling it at current market prices, but not being required to actually produce the stock for some time. If the stock falls precipitously after the short contract is entered, the seller can then fulfill the contract by buying the stock after the price has fallen and complete the contract at the pre-crash price. These contracts often have a window of as long as four months.

 

“Put Options,” are contracts giving the buyer the option to sell stocks at a later date. Purchased at nominal prices of, for example, $1.00 per share, they are sold in blocks of 100 shares. If exercised, they give the holder the option of selling selected stocks at a future date at a price set when the contract is issued. Thus, for an investment of $10,000 it might be possible to tie up 10,000 shares of United or American Airlines at $100 per share, and the seller of the option is then obligated to buy them if the option is executed. If the stock has fallen to $50 when the contract matures, the holder of the option can purchase the shares for $50 and immediately sell them for $100 – regardless of where the market then stands. A call option is the reverse of a put option, which is, in effect, a derivatives bet that the stock price will go up.

 

A September 21 story by the Israeli Herzliyya International Policy Institute for Counterterrorism, entitled “Black Tuesday: The World’s Largest Insider Trading Scam?” documented the following trades connected to the September 11 attacks:

 

- Between September 6 and 7, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 put options on United Airlines, but only 396 call options… Assuming that 4,000 of the options were bought by people with advance knowledge of the imminent attacks, these “insiders” would have profited by almost $5 million.

 

- On September 10, 4,516 put options on American Airlines were bought on the Chicago exchange, compared to only 748 calls. Again, there was no news at that point to justify this imbalance;… Again, assuming that 4,000 of these options trades represent “insiders,” they would represent a gain of about $4 million.

 

- [The levels of put options purchased above were more than six times higher than normal.]

 

- No similar trading in other airlines occurred on the Chicago exchange in the days immediately preceding Black Tuesday.

 

- Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., which occupied 22 floors of the World Trade Center, saw 2,157 of its October $45 put options bought in the three trading days before Black Tuesday; this compares to an average of 27 contracts per day before September 6. Morgan Stanley’s share price fell from $48.90 to $42.50 in the aftermath of the attacks. Assuming that 2,000 of these options contracts were bought based upon knowledge of the approaching attacks, their purchasers could have profited by at least $1.2 million. Merrill Lynch & Co., with headquarters near the Twin Towers, saw 12,215 October $45 put options bought in the four trading days before the attacks; the previous average volume in those shares had been 252 contracts per day [a 1200% increase!]. When trading resumed, Merrill’s shares fell from $46.88 to $41.50; assuming that 11,000 option contracts were bought by “insiders,” their profit would have been about $5.5 million.

 

- European regulators are examining trades in Germany’s Munich Re, Switzerland’s Swiss Re, and AXA of France, all major reinsurers with exposure to the Black Tuesday disaster. [FTW Note: AXA also owns more than 25% of American Airlines stock making the attacks a “double whammy” for them.]

 

On September 29, 2001 – in a vital story that has gone unnoticed by the major media – the San Francisco Chronicle reported, “Investors have yet to collect more than $2.5 million in profits they made trading options in the stock of United Airlines before the Sept. 11, terrorist attacks, according to a source familiar with the trades and market data.

“The uncollected money raises suspicions that the investors – whose identities and nationalities have not been made public – had advance knowledge of the strikes.” They don’t dare show up now. The suspension of trading for four days after the attacks made it impossible to cash-out quickly and claim the prize before investigators started looking.

 

“… October series options for UAL Corp. were purchased in highly unusual volumes three trading days before the terrorist attacks for a total outlay of $2,070; investors bought the option contracts, each representing 100 shares, for 90 cents each. [This represents 230,000 shares]. Those options are now selling at more than $12 each. There are still 2,313 so-called “put” options outstanding [valued at $2.77 million and representing 231,300 shares] according to the Options Clearinghouse Corp.”

 

“…The source familiar with the United trades identified Deutsche Bank Alex. Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of these options…” This was the operation managed by Krongard until as recently as 1998.

 

As reported in other news stories, Deutsche Bank was also the hub of insider trading activity connected to Munich Re. just before the attacks.

 

CIA, THE BANKS AND THE BROKERS

 

Understanding the interrelationships between CIA and the banking and brokerage world is critical to grasping the already frightening implications of the above revelations. Let’s look at the history of CIA, Wall Street and the big banks by looking at some of the key players in CIA’s history.

 

Clark Clifford – The National Security Act of 1947 was written by Clark Clifford, a Democratic Party powerhouse, former Secretary of Defense, and one-time advisor to President Harry Truman. In the 1980s, as Chairman of First American Bancshares, Clifford was instrumental in getting the corrupt CIA drug bank BCCI a license to operate on American shores. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and banker.

 

John Foster and Allen Dulles – These two brothers “designed” the CIA for Clifford. Both were active in intelligence operations during WW II. Allen Dulles was the U.S. Ambassador to Switzerland where he met frequently with Nazi leaders and looked after U.S. investments in Germany. John Foster went on to become Secretary of State under Dwight Eisenhower and Allen went on to serve as CIA Director under Eisenhower and was later fired by JFK. Their professions: partners in the most powerful - to this day - Wall Street law firm of Sullivan, Cromwell.

 

Bill Casey – Ronald Reagan’s CIA Director and OSS veteran who served as chief wrangler during the Iran-Contra years was, under President Richard Nixon, Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and stockbroker.

 

David Doherty - The current Vice President of the New York Stock Exchange for enforcement is the retired General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency.

 

George Herbert Walker Bush – President from 1989 to January 1993, also served as CIA Director for 13 months from 1976-7. He is now a paid consultant to the Carlyle Group, the 11th largest defense contractor in the nation, which also shares joint investments with the bin Laden family.

 

A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard – The current Executive Director of the Central Intelligence Agency is the former Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown and former Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust.

 

John Deutch - This retired CIA Director from the Clinton Administration currently sits on the board at Citigroup, the nation’s second largest bank, which has been repeatedly and overtly involved in the documented laundering of drug money. This includes Citigroup’s 2001 purchase of a Mexican bank known to launder drug money, Banamex.

 

Nora Slatkin – This retired CIA Executive Director also sits on Citibank’s board.

 

Maurice “Hank” Greenburg – The CEO of AIG insurance, manager of the third largest capital investment pool in the world, was floated as a possible CIA Director in 1995. FTW exposed Greenberg’s and AIG’s long connection to CIA drug trafficking and covert operations in a two-part series that was interrupted just prior to the attacks of September 11. AIG’s stock has bounced back remarkably well since the attacks. To read that story, please go to http://www.copvcia.com/stories/part_2.html.

 

One wonders how much damning evidence is necessary to respond to what is now irrefutable proof that CIA knew about the attacks and did not stop them. Whatever our government is doing, whatever the CIA is doing, it is clearly NOT in the interests of the American people, especially those who died on September 11.

[SuperJerk 0]

Yes, corporations like to pay former government officials to sit on their boards. That's because they think it'll will get them preferential treatment with federal regulators, not because the banks control the CIA.

 

My favorite, though, is...

 

George Herbert Walker Bush – President from 1989 to January 1993, also served as CIA Director for 13 months from 1976-7. He is now a paid consultant to the Carlyle Group, the 11th largest defense contractor in the nation, which also shares joint investments with the bin Laden family.

 

I'm sure if we tried really hard, we could link all of these people to Kevin Bacon.

[NoCalMike 0]

I'm sure if we tried really hard, we could link all of these people to Kevin Bacon.

 

 

Funny you should say that because Richard Clarke was on Mahr's show the other week and basically said they will be playing the six degrees to Kevin Bacon(except insert "random terrorist here" instead of Mr. Bacon) once the Phone number database is collected.

[Guest wahoo]

It just seems to me that when the planes hit, they would've taken out the supports for that floor, which meant that all the weight of the buildings (prolly a lot) above that would've been bearing down

 

Building 7 was not hit by a plane.

http://www.wtc7.net/

 

Physicist's research into why they think planes did not cause the collapse:

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

[Guest wildpegasus]

No, I don't believe there were explosives as there is no proof of it.

 

 

So what do you think of all the people's claims that there were explosives?

[Dobbs 3K 0]

They're claims with no serious evidence to back them up, and nothing more. That's what I think about them.

 

Really, some of these claims would make exciting movie plots, but they have no serious basis in reality.

[Guest wildpegasus]

They're claims with no serious evidence to back them up, and nothing more. That's what I think about them.

 

Really, some of these claims would make exciting movie plots, but they have no serious basis in reality.

 

Why would all the firefighters lie about explosions?

[NoCalMike 0]

See here is what I don't get. When it comes to "Did a plane hit the pentagon" people keep throwing "There were witnesses dammit, what else do you need, you tin foil hat hippie" at me, however when it comes to witnesses and FIRST HAND ACCOUNTS at the WTC buildings, as far as explosions go it's always, "People are fucking stupid, they don't know what the fuck they are talking about, EOS"

 

So what is it, are eye witnesses credible or not?

 

I really wish there was a website that featured all the coverage, UNFILTERED of the actual REAL-TIME events of 9/11, Not just the planes hitting, but news reports, first hand eye witness accounts...EVERYTHING that was going on that day. There was so much reporting that conflicts with what the official story BECAME several days later, that it brings up serious questions and conflicts. It just seems that any reports that mesh with the official story have all but dissapeard or have been edited.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Because it's not about eye witness accounts. There's footage of a large object hitting the Pentagon, just like there's footage of the planes hitting the WTC towers. Yeah, I know the object in the Pentagon footage is hard to see, because it's moving very fast. But, we know a plane was headed that way, and then was gone, etc.

 

Snopes.com has a great section devoted to all these 9/11 myths, including the supposed missile or truck that exploded in the Pentagon.

[SuperJerk 0]

You know what I'd like to fly a hijacked plane into? This thread.

[Guest wahoo]

Snopes.com has a great section devoted to all these 9/11 myths

 

They don't really offer much in addressing most of the unanswered questions. Just like Popular Mechanics they put most of the focus on more sensational stuff like missile pods.

 

Snopes says FEMA was not deployed to go to New York until after the attack. Rudy Giuliani's testimony to the 9/11 Commision says they were already going to be there to set up for a drill.

 

 

Rudy says : "The reason Pier 92 was selected as a command center was because on the next day, on September 12, Pier 92 was going to have a drill, it had hundreds of people here, from FEMA, from the Federal Government, from the State, from the State Emergency Management Office, and they were getting ready for a drill for biochemical attack. So that was gonna be the place they were going to have the drill. The equipment was already there, so we were able to establish a command center there, within three days, that was two and a half to three times bigger than the command center that we had lost at 7 World Trade Center. And it was from there that the rest of the search and rescue effort was completed."

 

 

Wow, a terror response drill was already scheduled for September 12! Looks like Snopes doesn't know everything.

 

War Games scheduled for 9/11 :

Northern Vigilance: a yearly Air Force drill simulating a Russian attack, in which defense aircraft normally patrolling the Northeast are re-deployed to Canada and Alaska.

Vigilant Guardian: a NORAD exercise posing an imaginary crisis to North American Air Defense outposts nationwide with a simulated air war and an air defense exercise simulating an attack on the United States.

National Reconnaissance Office emergency response drill of a small aircraft crashing into its own headquarters.

 

 

The terrorists picked the perfect day for the attack. The people on the ground may have been confused, thinking it was all part of a drill. Even if CNN and them ignored it, it is still fact that there were War Games going on and there are videos online of Cynthia McKinney questioning Rumsfeld about it. Did the government do a proper job in keeping the War Games secret?

 

 

The anthrax attacks - a few weeks before the Patriot Act was to be voted on it was sent to members of Congress who had raised suspicions about the need for it and also to members of the media. No more anthrax letters were sent after the Patriot Act passed. Cheney and staff were already on Cipro and despite lawsuits from dead postal worker's families we don't know why and when they were warned. The government's refusal to comment on things like this that naturally fuel conspiracy theories.

 

 

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646

 

Follow that link for a big list of unanswered questions and weird coincidences, most of which snopes and Popular Mechanics ignores.

[Gary Floyd 0]

Man, the quality of this thread went down faster than an unwanted pregnancy at prom night.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

Oh my god, this is the first I looked at this thread. Some people should be embarrassed. Lovecraft, however, should get bonus points for that last one.

[chaosrage 0]

Wait, some people here are actually stupid enough to believe any of this?

[SuperJerk 0]

Man, the quality of this thread went down faster than an unwanted pregnancy at prom night.

You, sir, are wrongfully implying there was any quality to this thread to begin with.

[Guest wildpegasus]

Wait, some people here are actually stupid enough to believe any of this?

 

Depends on what you mean by "this".

 

I believe there was some suspicious stuff done by the US government. I don't exactly know what but there is something wrong here. I thought something was weird as soon as I saw the buildings crumble. Everything just doesn't add up and given the track record of the US government I think it's incredibly naive to believe everything they tell you.

[chaosrage 0]

Wait, some people here are actually stupid enough to believe any of this?

 

Depends on what you mean by "this".

 

9/11 conspiracy stuff.