Charlie Sheen Requests Meeting With Obama Over 9/11 Cover-Up

**Det_ard** · September-10-09, 03:51 PM

I think we should all listen to ghettopalmetto who obviously has more experience in failure than we do.

ccbatson · September-10-09, 03:52 PM

Birther's have more solid rational grounds on which to stand. However, it is a moot point and destructive concept to pursue.

**Ray1936** · September-10-09, 06:21 PM

I think I saw muslims on the grassy knoll.

**Big Dog** · September-10-09, 07:28 PM

Kaaa-ching!

Lorax · September-10-09, 07:39 PM

The bats are Muslim! I saw them flying out of the bat cave with beards and wearing turbans.

**Pam** · September-11-09, 06:42 AM

Ugh, again with the "demolitions". Why the need to even go there? There is plenty of open evidence of the evil of Bush and co. without looking for preposterous shit. [[i.e. ignoring the warning memos, profiteering from pointless wars, using 9-11 to whip up public fear, torture etc.)

**East Detroit** · September-11-09, 06:59 AM

Bush and Company were obviously unable to plan, execute and coverup such a feat.

On that basis alone, I don't believe in a conspiracy.

However, just to throw out a bone... maybe it was like Pearl Harbor... they knew it was going to happen and didn't stop it.

**elganned** · September-11-09, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

What precisely makes you think these failures "look like planned implosion demolitions"?

That's like asking, "What about this animal makes you think it looks like a duck?" If it looks like a duck, one can't be faulted for wondering if it is a duck.

What kind of demolition knowledge and experience do you have?

One need not have extensive knowledge of duck anatomy in order to say, "That looks like a duck."

How many implosions have you witnessed?

How many ducks does one have to see before on can say, "I think that thing looks like a duck."

What kind of explosives would have been used? How many tons? How were the charges installed without anyone noticing? What kind of manpower would be necessary to perform this work? Was the Pentagon "imploded" as well? Where are the 3000 missing persons?

All moot questions, outside the scope of what can be observed from a film, which is what we're discussing.

Engineering sure is easy, isn't it?

Well, it's not that difficult; that's why I am one.

**ghettopalmetto** · September-11-09, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by elganned

That's like asking, "What about this animal makes you think it looks like a duck?" If it looks like a duck, one can't be faulted for wondering if it is a duck.One need not have extensive knowledge of duck anatomy in order to say, "That looks like a duck."How many ducks does one have to see before on can say, "I think that thing looks like a duck."All moot questions, outside the scope of what can be observed from a film, which is what we're discussing.

Well, it's not that difficult; that's why I am one.

Terrific, but we're not talking about ducks. We're talking about 3000 dead civilians whose memory you tarnish with bullshit reasoning. You may be an engineer, but you're certainly not a structural engineer if you think watching a film "proves" some half-cocked theory cooked up by people who don't understand the mechanisms of structural failures. If you are a structural engineer, God help you.

The questions I asked are not moot. They are questions that would be asked by any opposing counsel were you to give such crap testimony in a deposition or on a witness stand. They are questions designed to establish credibility, or lack thereof.

If you're going to make wild allegations, the least you can do is be a man and provide some support for them.

Lorax · September-11-09, 09:02 AM

Allowing 9/11 to happen was the real crime committed by the Bush Crime Family.

The intelligence assembled by Richard Clarke's counter-terrorism team was clear in what was coming, and Tush decided to go on vacation, and Condi Rice decided not to push her new boss into reading the PDB of August 2001.

This was allowed to happen, right down to the purposeful lack of military aircraft anywhere near NY or DC.

**Gannon** · September-11-09, 09:06 AM

If you wish to enter a debate about it, then cut the emotional crapola...like bringing up those who died and insulting someone over their gender.

The events of 9/11 were a staged event, planned by a small group of individuals hidden by Top Secret protections. The whole day went largely as they planned.

It didn't take that many people to pull it off, because the WHOLE SYSTEM is designed to look away and ignore others operating within that clearance level and above.

"If you know about it, you are not supposed to talk about it."

Those were the words from a rocket scientist to me over dinner in Albuquerque regarding an unrelated topic...but he was ready to call me in until he learned that everything I spoke of was gleaned from public sources over time.

I thanked him for confirming the accuracy of my conclusions.

Back to 9/11...the buildings had strange security shutdowns in the two weeks leading up to the event. These were widely reported, and I got stuck in a line waiting to see the observation deck at that very time. More than enough duration to install all of the thermite and thermate they could.

The angled-cut I-beam photo from before they put the wall around the site was enough of a smoking gun to prove they demolished both of the main buildings on purpose, under an elaborate hoax. Building Seven is no question.

Nineteen hijackers from Saudi Arabia could not get NORAD to stand down. Dick Cheney could...and did. And was quoted repeatedly telling one young man such during the course of the disaster.

Anyone who feels the need to argue this simply needs to read up on the plan from 1962 called Operation Northwoods on how the Pentagon planned to incite the populace to war against Cuba...before JFK pulled the plug on that operation.

We saw what happened to him.

9/11 was simply the updated version of that plan, nothing more, nothing less.

In the TRUE honor of all who died that day, respectfully,
John

**ghettopalmetto** · September-11-09, 09:10 AM

Tell us, Gannon. How much thermite would have been required to destroy just one of the columns in the World Trade Center?

How did the criminal masterminds manage to keep the thermite in direct contact with the steel?

I respect a person's right to express his opinion, but you are WAY beyond your realm of expertise, sir. There is absolutely no scientific foundation for any of the claims you are making. Have you no decency?

**Gannon** · September-11-09, 09:18 AM

Who cares?

I'm not going to be blowing anything up.

But if YOU know about thermite and thermate, then you absolutely know the two products of their use...TONS OF GRAY SMOKE AND DUST.

Did you see that image with the angled-cut steel? Did you watch the relatively undamaged Building 7 go? If you are an explosives expert, and it seems like you want to go there, hurrah for you, then you know what you saw.

Why do you doubt that men in the Pentagon and beyond...like the CIA and the Project for the New American Century...could not only imagine but carry off such a deed?

I am more a student of human nature than I am explosives...although occasionally they can be MORE volatile and unreasonable.

Sincerely,
John

**Gannon** · September-11-09, 09:20 AM

BTW, I have incredible amounts of decency, I will not let those people die in vain. Nor will I allow the obvious to go unsaid. Those are congruous concerns.

**Meddle** · September-11-09, 09:20 AM

The events of 9/11 were a staged event, planned by a small group of individuals hidden by Top Secret protections. The whole day went largely as they planned.

And they were Saudis.

**ghettopalmetto** · September-11-09, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by Gannon

Who cares?

I'm not going to be blowing anything up.

But if YOU know about thermite and thermate, then you absolutely know the two products of their use...TONS OF GRAY SMOKE AND DUST.

Did you see that image with the angled-cut steel? Did you watch the relatively undamaged Building 7 go? If you are an explosives expert, and it seems like you want to go there, hurrah for you, then you know what you saw.

Why do you doubt that men in the Pentagon and beyond...like the CIA and the Project for the New American Century...could not only imagine but carry off such a deed?

I am more a student of human nature than I am explosives...although occasionally they can be MORE volatile and unreasonable.

Sincerely,
John

I care, because you're spreading lies, and you refuse to recognize that perhaps the truth is beyond your comprehension. You could at least provide some evidence to your claims. You have none.

You know what else causes "tons" of gray smoke and dust? Crushed concrete and gypsum drywall.

WTC 7 was not "relatively" undamaged. It was damaged to the point that it collapsed. But of course you knew that.

This is not a silly sociological study of human nature. This is engineering, a field in which I have years of education and experience, and you do not. The official explanation makes perfect sense--if one is willing to understand the science of structural failure.

**Meddle** · September-11-09, 09:24 AM

Remember what your partner Sgt. Friday says, "Just the facts, Ma'am, Just the facts."

**Gannon** · September-11-09, 09:26 AM

When did Dick Cheney achieve Saudi citizenry?!

The Bushes have been kissing close to the Sheiks-in-Charge there for years and years.

Nibble away, it doesn't change the fact that nothing of the official story jibes with reality.

Those who refuse to see it are in denial.

Sincerely,
John

**Meddle** · September-11-09, 09:27 AM

BTW, I have incredible amounts of decency,

You sure that isn't incredible amounts of daquiris?

**Gannon** · September-11-09, 09:29 AM

I am not spreading lies.

Amazing how deeply in denial you are over mere human nature and how acts of war are propagated.

This is not the first false flag operation justified for bigger goals, and will not be the last.

Did you even dare to READ that Operation Northwoods article?! Declassified six months before 9/11, as if someone deep within were trying to warn the populace.

I am amazed that it even saw sunshine.

Nah, stop being unreasonable over the ONE tiny portion of this that you consider yourself an expert in...it is just making this painful for others.

Sincerely,
John

**Gannon** · September-11-09, 09:31 AM

Nice job with the personal attack, Meddle.

Orange Juice, Yogurt, a Bagel with Cream Cheese...and next the Banana.

No alcohol in my breakfast. Nothing other than good food.

Thanks though for the dig, it is very admirable of you to go there!

**ghettopalmetto** · September-11-09, 09:32 AM

Originally Posted by Gannon

Nibble away, it doesn't change the fact that nothing of the official story jibes with reality.

Those who refuse to see it are in denial.

Sincerely,
John

How is your version "reality"? Why should you have more credibility on this issue than the dozens of experienced structural engineers who conducted the investigation? You have no education in the realm of structural failures, no practical experience, and no basis for any of your conclusions. You have repeatedly failed to provide anything resembling evidence for any of your assertions in this matter. The engineers have scads of evidence and have made conclusions based upon that evidence that are consistent with engineering principles. What do you have? Speculation?

So why are you correct?

**ghettopalmetto** · September-11-09, 09:39 AM

Originally Posted by Gannon

I am not spreading lies.

Amazing how deeply in denial you are over mere human nature and how acts of war are propagated.

This is not the first false flag operation justified for bigger goals, and will not be the last.

Nah, stop being unreasonable over the ONE tiny portion of this that you consider yourself an expert in...it is just making this painful for others.

Sincerely,
John

So factual accuracy is unreasonable? Why is that? Because it conflicts with your convenient story?

If you cannot conclusively prove that the World Trade Center and Pentagon were demolished through use of explosives, your entire story falls apart. It does not matter what prophecies space aliens handed to Moses in the 6th Century BC. Why you believe such bullshit lies over the expertise of knowledgeable people is beyond me, but it doesn't speak well of your character.

**Gannon** · September-11-09, 09:40 AM

Heh.

Wow. Tenacious.

It is not MY version of anything...reality is reality.

We all have our perceptions of it, I guess, perhaps mostly distorted by the things we IGNORE.

How many of your structural engineers were independent of the Sword of Damocles dangling over their heads...there are a few, and their testimony has been given.

For you to pick and choose which structural engineers you choose to listen to...shows that you have bias. Admit it.

I have it too, but mine is strengthened by ALL of the available data, including Operation Northwoods and the NORAD stand-down. Both bigger than a bunch of Saudi losers on a supposed mission.

Sincerely,
John

**elganned** · September-11-09, 09:42 AM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Terrific, but we're not talking about ducks. We're talking about 3000 dead civilians whose memory you tarnish with bullshit reasoning. You may be an engineer, but you're certainly not a structural engineer if you think watching a film "proves" some half-cocked theory cooked up by people who don't understand the mechanisms of structural failures. If you are a structural engineer, God help you.

The questions I asked are not moot. They are questions that would be asked by any opposing counsel were you to give such crap testimony in a deposition or on a witness stand. They are questions designed to establish credibility, or lack thereof.

If you're going to make wild allegations, the least you can do is be a man and provide some support for them.

Whoa, boy! Settle down; take your heart medicine and don't jump to so many conclusions. That's what we keep Cc around for.

I make no allegations. We are not in a court of law, nor am I giving testimony. I'm not trying to "prove" any "half-cocked" theory, or any theory at all for that matter . I don't have a theory. I make no inferences, tarnish no memories, nor any of the other wild acusations you inferred without evidence.

I simply state that, from watching the fims, it looks to me like a planned demolition. Was it? I don't know. Who might have been responsible if it was? I don't know. How was it done if it was? I don't know.

I'm not a structural engineer, but I move in engineering circles and have asked the opinions of several structural engineers, some of whom have read the reports. [[You won't be surprised to find this is a subject of considerable professional interest for them.) They have questions as to how it could have happened as reported--failure modes, timing, and the like. There is, as I've stated, no concensus; some say yes, some no.

So why should a layperson be vilified for having questions if even the professionals still do?

Don't ascribe positions to me which I haven't taken. You may have inferred premises from my question, but I assure you I didn't intend to imply any.