What is Digg?Sponsored by Rockstar Games
Grand Theft Auto: Episodes from Liberty City view!
rockstargames.com - Out Now on Disc for Xbox 360. Includes The Lost and Damned plus the all-new The Ballad of Gay Tony.
312 Comments
- ZenMojo, on 10/21/2007, -8/+46I'm not coming down on any side of the argument. These are the FACTS as they stand from Vanity Fair, voice recordings, and the 9/11 commission report.
1. Donald Rumsfeld was allowed to enter the 9/11 site and collect souvenirs from the rubble. Donald Rumsfeld also contracted the massive disposal of 9/11 debris against the wishes of the FBI who actually filed an injunction in court to prevent removal of evidence from the site. When his "mistake" was realized, Donald Rumsfeld apologized for destroying the evidence but made no effort to recover it.
2. Months in advance, exercises mimicking airplane attacks on the World Trade Center were scheduled for September 11th.
3. Warnings were relayed from military oversight to Dick Cheney that a plane was hijacked. Dick Cheney said he would tell the president, and he did ... over an hour later.
4. The original 9/11 commission was composed of a bipartisan panel. What is not said is that several members of the 9/11 commission originally posed a highly controversial rehearsal of facts that moved Dick Cheney's ignorance not only bordered on suspicious but actually made him seem borderline malicious in his activity. The Republican side of the 9/11 commission intervened, including some who agreed that the facts made Dick Cheney look like a malicious actor, and, fearing a partisan brawl and doubt cast on the entire findings, forced a rewording of this section of the report and the omission of several facts.
Regardless of whether people believe there was a conspiracy or not, the facts (NONE OF THIS IS SPECULATION, THESE ARE ALL INCONTROVERTIBLE FACTS) above can easily be found with a quick search on Vanity Fair (which had an astoundingly profound coverage of the events of that day not matched in most of the mainstream media, perhaps out of fear) and several other news sources.
Now, if this makes you the least bit suspicious, then good. If you still don't care and think it's a bunch of coincidences, then at least you were open-minded enough to come to your own conclusions based on all of the facts. - inactive, on 10/29/2007, -16/+43martinjd: Your an ignorant person. We were warned of the attack by many countries, our own terror expert in the WH, & the FBI & CIA. NORAD would have stopped all of the planes but war games were confusing the issue on 9/11. Now these war games are normal & annual, but the date was changed to 9/11 on Cheney's orders. Also ever heard of William Kristol &/or PNAC? Well they're a neocon DC think tank that wrote all of our current policies & predicted that we'd need a "Pearl Harbor type event" in order to push them thru Congress into legislation. Wake up dumb ass & do some homework.
- dshPls, on 10/21/2007, -28/+54Good thing coincidences don't amount to proof, otherwise that might matter.
- Frei, on 10/21/2007, -4/+26So you're glad they started doing this before 9/11 so they could prevent 9/11...which they didn't. Infringing on our rights didn't work pre 9/11 and it hasn't worked since. If we give up our freedoms, we lose. You take risks living in a free society and when that society is a superpower with a history of bad foreign policy decisions, you take even greater risks.
- LucidOne, on 10/21/2007, -47/+689/11 was a false flag attack planned and executed by rogue factions within the US military and federal government. The "official" 9/11 conspiracy theory is now on life support. Even NIST was forced this week to admit that 6 years after the attacks they cannot fully explain the collapses, and they never will! Of course it's only because they refused to admit that high explosives and controlled demolition was the true cause. Atomized human bone has been found in the lungs of some of the first responders. There's no other explanation for that then high explosives! Just take a look at the video of WTC7 collapsing, doesn't take a genius to see that building is not falling down due to damage. It's being demolished in a controlled demolition!
- techweenie, on 10/21/2007, -6/+27I think a fair-minded review would show that under Clinton, there were efforts to expand spy powers, as well.
- MacLiberal, on 10/21/2007, -21/+42Anyone who can think for themselves can see it was an inside job.
- LucidOne, on 10/21/2007, -20/+38I know you government shills are getting desperate but come on!!! Larry Silverstein did NOT loose money on the WTC, in fact he made billions on the insurance policy which he took out just a few months before 9/11! Anyone who cares to, can google it can find out the truth. Are you really that missinformed or just lying?
- Vinadetta, on 10/21/2007, -7/+25Shhh. Can't talk their listening!!!! In my best whisper "9-11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB"!!!!!
- david76, on 10/21/2007, -4/+19His observation that 9/11 was convenient, says nothing about the reality of the conspiracy theories.
- reeder, on 10/21/2007, -23/+37I always wonder why no one ever talks about the molten metal spilling out of WTC 1 and 2, even though jet fuel can only burn at a max temp of 2000 Degrees F, and steel melts at 2500 Degrees F. Not to mention that traces of thermite and thermate were found, or the cross-cut steel columns, just like a demolition charge. So strange.
- relaxeder, on 04/17/2009, -3/+16I'm not someone who necessarily believes in the "inside job" thing, but with the recent news about the ex-Qwest CEO and the NSA approaching him even before 9/11 happened, it makes sense that they could have just made every effort to willingly ignore the warning signs -- If it fit into their agenda and all.
Scary. - SiNN4R, on 10/21/2007, -5/+189/11 was fake. You could totally see the strings.
- ChristPissed, on 10/21/2007, -50/+63Oh yet another "convenience" is our zionist pal Lucky Larry of Silverstein Properties Inc., who acquired control of the entire World Trade Center complex, and an insurance policy to cover it, in the early summer of 2001.
- inactive, on 10/21/2007, -31/+43Why do they never mention that Larry Silverstein lost a lot of money after the attacks and continues to lose money to this day because he's still paying rent on the site? Funny, huh?
- 1310nm, on 10/21/2007, -2/+14Richard Clarke says that Bush came to him immediately following the attacks and told him to "find the Iraq link". Iraq has been the target of New American Century propaganda since at least 5 years before the attacks on 9/11. New American Century includes such characters as Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and people of the media like Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard (and frequent Fox News propagandist).
- KingBunny, on 10/21/2007, -5/+16It's odd how some are offended at people asking questions. The accusations are not even outrageous if you know history..
I'll stay "neutral but inquisitive" until someone actually answers the major questions.. for example, I haven't seen any debunking of the MAJOR video discrepancies shown in the "September Clues" series. (search YouTube) This is not to say I stand by them... I WANT to see them debunked. Seriously.
Random Transcript:
(No plane was visible in the video, just an explosion, and the idea of a plane hasn't even been mentioned yet)
Fox Anchor (in studio): "We just saw another plane hit the building"
Fox Anchor (on the ground): "No, there was no plane!! It just exploded!!"
(They talk over his voice and cut off his mic) - Firehed, on 10/21/2007, -2/+12How was that anti-semitic? Quite obviously a conspiracy theorist (and I'd say we're all wise to examine odd "conveniences" such as 9/11), but I fail to see the Jew-hating in that post.
- inactive, on 10/21/2007, -5/+15Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth:
http://www.ae911truth.org/
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html
Twin Towers – the case for explosive demolition
http://www.ae911truth.org/images/gallery/case4EDca ...
How The Towers Fell -- Richard Gage, AIA, Architect gives a technical analysis of the World Trade Center controlled demolition on September 11, 2001.
Full presentation: http://blip.tv/file/306082
Intro & WTC 7: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-176550002 ...
Twin Towers: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3673080104 ... - Krakn3Dfx, on 10/21/2007, -9/+18Best part is how even after 9/11, Bush was completely opposed to creating the Homeland Security Dept, and to this day continues to constantly cut funding to the group that is supposed to be helping our country to stay pro-active when it comes to matters like this and also to be ready to go when such an event occurs.
Anyone who believes for one minute that Bush gives a damn about anyone who died on 9/11 and wouldn't welcome the chance for another terrorist attack to shore up his power base, basically giving him reason and ability to rip up the U.S. Constitution and declare himself ruler almighty obviously haven't been paying attention for the last 7 years. - LucidOne, on 10/21/2007, -17/+26Google is not a site moron, it's a search engine!
- 16x9, on 10/21/2007, -6/+15Good joke, 0olo0! Why can't those foolish liberals understand the "logic" behind the facts that...
* Iraq attacked us on 9/11
* or that we found all those WMD in Iraq
* or that our leader, President Bush, had the foresight to begin expanded spying on our fellow "citizens" (if that is truly who they are) preventing not only 9/11 but also all of the many thousands of attacks that we so-called Americans would have perpetrated on real Americans.
Really, there's just got to be something wrong with the liberal mindset that refuses to see the truth. I'd chat more but my working class neighbors are complaining again that they can't afford health insurance for their kids. I want to go over there and tell them to stop their bitching. - theright, on 10/21/2007, -13/+22Yes, Larry Silverstein received billions in insurance pay outs. No, the insurance pay outs will not cover the cost of rebuilding the World Trade Center complex. In the meantime, Silverstein pays around $200m/year in rent to the PANY&NJ for what is essentially a hole in the ground, not making any money whatsoever.
Yes, he took out an insurance policy a few months before 9/11. News flash: That's when he took ownership of the lease on the complex. The change of ownership and insurance policy was, however, the result of a drawn-out, public process. Silverstein himself wanted to insure the complex for a mere $1.5bn, but was forced to up it to $3.5bn on the insistence of his lenders. Had Silverstein got his way, he would be even more out of pocket now than he already is. - texxmexx, on 10/21/2007, -14/+23There is proof of residue of explosives... ... ...
- n1pz, on 10/21/2007, -2/+11Fancy patterns don't make you more important.
- inactive, on 10/21/2007, -3/+11The alleged 9/11 hijackers (especially Atta) were well known to the Pentagon and CIA. They had been under surveillance for years. They had no difficulty getting visas to come to the US. They travelled unhindered even though there were warrants for their arrest.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?ite ...
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?ti ...
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?ti ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/#Shaffer - jmpeagle, on 10/21/2007, -8/+16it was also convenient for Putin, Blair, Wen Jibao, Chirac and every other single power structure in the whole world who could not expand police powers as people's fear of terrorism grew. Pearl Harbor was convenient for FDR etc... Any tragic event is convenient for those in power because then people are willing to give up more freedom to prevent future attacks.
- inactive, on 10/21/2007, -0/+8I want to believe there was no second plane but my wife, from her office in Jersey City, watched the plane circle around Manhattan Island and hit the second tower.
- empraptor, on 10/18/2007, -2/+9Electronic surveillance didn't stop Richard Reid from getting to the airport now did it? It was the bombmaker's incompetence or dumb luck that prevented the bomb from going off.
Are you telling me that you'd consider the surveillance programs waste of money if the bomb had gone off? In that case, you should consider it a waste of money anyway because otherwise it should have stopped Reid before he got on the plane. - fuzzmeister, on 10/21/2007, -13/+19On the same note of wildly different levels of competency, does it really make sense that a government that could orchestrate an entire faked attack, involving hundreds or thousands of people that all must be kept quiet, couldn't plant a single shred of evidence for WMD in Iraq? I mean, come on.
- jmpeagle, on 10/18/2007, -6/+12do you have film of this molten steel?
- LucidOne, on 10/21/2007, -6/+12Actually I started looking into 9/11almost 4 years ago to prove that the "official" story was true! A friend kept telling me that it was an inside job and I wanted to prove her wrong! I thought I could debunk any "conspiracy theory" out there. I knew Bush was a complete moron and figured he couldn't manage a ham sandwich much less a false flag operation of that magnitude. What I found was astounding! There was absolutely no evidence that the governments story was true! To the contrary there was a mountain of evidence that their version of events could not possibly be true! What they were claiming was outside the laws of physics! Now after 4 years and thousands of hours of research I KNOW that the official story is bull! 9/11 WAS an inside job!
- inactive, on 10/21/2007, -8/+14www.google.com
try it... - ninjasteeve, on 10/18/2007, -8/+14Hmm...Id think taking out an insurance policy to cover purchasing a large asset like a building would be considered more prudent business practice rather than a conspiracy but you're the one wearing the tin foil hat so who's to argue?
- krnldmp, on 10/21/2007, -3/+9Luskin, while you sleep at night, government's Business is to plan ***** of which you wouldn't dream.
- inactive, on 10/21/2007, -13/+19i think 9/11 was a conspiracy, but not in this crackpot way. you know most people talk about the explosion itself, i talk about the reasoning. Bush came into office with an agenda to invade Iraq and iran. How did he invade Iraq? He made people believe that Al Qaida and some other mumbo-jumbo was being supported by Iraq. Where was Al Qaida? Afghanistan. Why did we go to Afghanistan? Because Osama bin Laden attacked the twin towers. Who employed Al Qaida during the Cold war? Usa. It's all linked, and it makes sense. Bush used his old mercenaries to down 9/11, then used the invasion of afghanistan to invade iraq and now iran. if this isn't true, then can you give me a logical reason why we haven't found osama yet? we got saddam in like a year. why are we not concentrating forces on afghanistan? why are we pulling armed forces out to a country (Iraq) where the current force is still standing? Cuz' we can't get osama or he'll rat. everything makes sense. if you don't agree, just reply a reason why. please don't just spam with you're an r*tard posts. at least give a reason why you're calling me an r*tard, and a credible one. no ***** like you're unamerican or some ron paul spam.
- Groovemaster, on 10/18/2007, -5/+11Ah, the tried and trusted 'anti-semite/conspiracy theorist' combo.
Never fails, right? - card51short, on 10/19/2007, -2/+7HAHAHAHHA LOST MONEY?! HAHAHHAHAHH HE MADE 3.5-7 BILLION DOLLARS ON A 100,000 DOLLAR POLICY
HAHAHA THEY ARE SAYING HE LOST MONEY NOW...YOU CAN READ THE COURT RECORDS HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH HILARIOUS! THIS IS ALL THEY GOT NOW...JUST MAKING STUFF UP!
LOL SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS JUST TOO FUNNY HOW MUCH IN DENIAL SOME PEOPLE ARE. - inactive, on 10/18/2007, -4/+9Ya its really odd to take out a policy on a building you just bought....
- fuzzmeister, on 10/21/2007, -10/+15You cannot assume that the jet fuel was the only source of heat. The massive friction caused by the collapsing building would create an unimaginable amount of heat, and when combined with the heat of the existing jet fuel and wood/paper fires, there would be enough heat to cause melted steel or aluminum in the collapsed rubble. Also, no, traces of thermite were not found, it has been proven that those residues could have just as easily come from interactions between aluminum and steel, which definitely happened. As for the cross-cut steel beams, workers taking down rubble don't usually cut in zig-zag patterns, so it would make sense to see cut beams, hmm?
And, yet again, I've been dragged into useless back-and-forth arguing about truther "pseudofacts". Before you even get into your claimed evidence, you must tell me how the government could keep the thousands of people that would have to be involved in a plan of this magnitude silent, with zero leaks whatsoever. It just simply isn't possible. - mlfoley, on 10/18/2007, -1/+6It couldn't have been more fake even if it were filmed by Ed Wood.
- Frei, on 10/21/2007, -1/+6@ "pimptasic"
Right that's 1 foreign attack and what two domestic attacks with no cell network for future attacks. Random terrorism is even more impossible to counter. The others were attack overseas. Do you honestly think the idea of terrorism will go away with wars and a police state? We have a bill of rights and a system of checks and balances for a reason. We have to accept certain risks in a free society. But we already covered that. You've also failed to show what purpose this type of prgram does to help anything because it simply doesn't. All it does is take away some of your rights for the illusion of saftey. So thanks for the half ass comment with no supporting ideas. - dshPls, on 10/21/2007, -29/+34Any proof of explosives? Like maybe explosive residue or parts of explosives.... Oh, nothing like that has ever been found.
- MrEguy, on 10/19/2007, -2/+7stupid dog. no biscuit.
- understudy, on 10/19/2007, -3/+8I'm not saying 9/11 was a conspiracy, but . . .
Why do people think that 'disproving' one piece of a vast conspiracy invalidates the rest of the puzzle?
I think the whole thing warrants a new and further comprehensive investigation.
_ - n1pz, on 10/18/2007, -4/+9You win! 1st person to use the word "truther" about people who care about the state of their own Country, well done.
- krnldmp, on 10/18/2007, -3/+8Not like that clears up a damned thing.
- MrEguy, on 10/21/2007, -1/+6You are SO full of ***** it's not even funny.
- card51short, on 10/19/2007, -2/+6You hear that, ChristPissed? It's a hallucination that Silverstein acquired the world trade center and put out a huge insurance policy specifically covering terrorism MONTHS before 9/11, marking the first change in ownership in the complex's history. It's all make believe according to RGWX!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 313 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 