world super power carries out false flag attack on own soil....... or..... couple fellas in a cave half way round the world plan and execute major terrorist attack. I know what's more likely. for me theres too many red flags in regards to 9/11.... found hijackers passport yet no blackbox? cleared ground zero of all debris before anyone unofficial/independent could take a look. building 7 just falling over by itself.... the list goes on and on.
Trust me, you want to have all those checks at the airports. It might take you longer to get onto your plane but it's well worth it. Other freedoms such as listening in on conversations, monitoring of internet use and the ability to be detained with no evidence are all questionable however. For example a few years ago i was up in central london walking around the Embassees looking at fancie cars, one of my friends didn't recognise a flag and so went up to the door and read the plaque which tells you what country it is. Another 10 metres or so up the road we where surrounded by armed police and searched at gun point under the terrorism act. The police told us that they "knew what we where up to" and could "detain us for 48hours with no evidence" so we should stfu. Of course we actually where doing nothing wrong and eventually where let go. But it goes to show how those freedoms we give up in the name of stopping terror can be abused for different reasons.
9/11 basically made travel in the US a nightmare - the most paranoid, delusional, futile and irritating process just to board a plane. The TSA are a good bunch for the most part, but stuff goes missing way too often from checked baggage. It's about time this process was right sized. Does taking my belt and shoes off really make that much of a ****ing difference. And 300 ml of liquid - really - why 300 - what is 301 going to do that 299, 250 or 200 can't when you're in a pressurized can at 30K feet. Over the last 12 months or so I have had to travel to Argentina, Brazil, India and China. The least aggravating place to get into and out of was Argentina - even when US bound - they didn't care about shoes, belts, computers. China was easy too, they have it down to a science and you get to keep your clothes on. India .... their paranoia starts outside the terminal, if they will let you into the building then it's pretty easy from there to the plane.
"Trust me, you want to have all those checks at the airports. It might take you longer to get onto your plane but it's well worth it." I thought someone might think I was complaining about checks. You've missed the point. The checks are necessary of course, but they are only necessary because of the threat of terrorism, so they have succeeded in having an effect on our daily lives. Checks are a major inconvenience but we're all glad of them, though like YJ I think some of the checks are pretty pointless.
I don't have the facts and figures .... but I'd bet good money that I have a greater probability of being knocked over and killed by a female driving while txting and drying her nails than I have of ever being killed by a terrorist anywhere, anytime. Or put another way - life is fraught with risk. If you don't like it you have a choice, you don't have to participate. All of us who lived in the UK through the 60s, 70s and so on when the IRA were most active and traveled through Ulster during those times understand the concept of terrorism in ways that would cause most people in the US to melt down.
here's a cracker...... guy is given arms by America guy attacks America guy goes off the radar for 10 years they eventually find the guy in Pakistan and kill him. guy is dumped at sea. best one I've heard.....ever. nearly as good as the one about a plane flying into the Pentagon and disintegrating into dust. [video]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O2VXBFW-vzM[/video]
Having worked for an airline based out of Gatwick i have some knowledge of the security checks etc and some things seem pointless but really aren't!
Don't disagree with you ... but why 300 ml of liquid. What can that amount do that say 200 can't when flying in a pressurized can at 30K feet. In the confined space of a plane cabin, surely any amount could be catastrophic. Why are more than 300 ml allowed in luggage in the hold but not in the cabin - again if it's on-board and it's more than 300 .... WTF, it's not going to be pretty is it.
Any amount of explosive could have catastrophic results if detonated on a plane. But there are certain parts of a plane built to withstand certain amounts of explosive damage so as to make it a survivable experience and not take the plane out of the sky.
@knackeredjack - i do get your point btw that the threat of terrorism causes us to live our lives in a different way. A huge example of this is Israel. You can't go into a shopping centre, get on a bus, or any public building/transport really without going through a metal detector, having your bags scanned and possibly more if you look suspicious. I know they are a slightly different example but it's an insight into what happens when fear justifies the loss of freedoms.
There are some very interesting points of view here I must say. WT 7 is a mirror image of a controlled demolition, that is more freaky than the twin towers themselves and a whole other can of worms to open. Regarding checks made on people in Airports it does really suck but I understand it, as somebody who travels regular it wares a bit thin sometimes but these people are just doing their job and its for our safety at the end of the day.
personally I think the twin towers looked just like a controlled demolition also, there's many eye witness accounts saying they heard explosions after the plane hit, there's also a few videos on YouTube with people standing near wt7 and you can clearly hear bomblike explosions as they watch the 1st one come down. no matter how crazy it sounds I fully believe it was a false flag op designed to create fear amongst americans thus allowing the govt to take away freedoms easily and go on a rampage around the world looking for an invisible enemy called terror. the Yank govt is run by wall street and only has it's interests at heart and wars funny enough are the best way to create debt. 7/7, was another false flag operation IMO, the message on the bus, the fact that all our emergency service's were actually running a mock terrorist attack exercise at the exact time it happened screams of suspicious at the very least. the problem is that 90% of people believe what they are told on the news or what the paper reports and that how you get away with it and anyone who question's what we are told is immediately labled a quack or paranoid or stupid.
Interesting topic NJ, there is certainly more to it than meets the eye. However I dont think we will ever discover the true facts. It seems to provide more questions than answers in some areas. Do I believe the US Govt were involved or had prior knowledge, yes but to what degree is anyones guess. If memory serves me right there was emergency simuation planned in NY on that day on a fictional terror attack. The Bush administration certainly benefitted from it as it gave them the green for their war on terror in the years that followed and the world has certainly changed in the aftermath. On a final sidenote Dick Cheney got far more from Halliburton than the other way around.
Regardless of who ever was behind 9/11 those of you who think it is implausible for a government to be behind and capable of terrorist attacks in their own country or in other countries should read up on "Operation Gladio" and secret NATO paramilitary stay-behind Armies. This is not conspiracy. This actually happened and may well still happen. It was never more than rumours and hear say but in 1990, it came to the knowledge of EU after several former Italian Prime Ministers among others aknowledged it's existence and the EU was in uproar demanding full disclosure. Former Gladio Official: "depending on the cases, we would block or encourage far-left or far-right terrorism". Operation Gladio began during the Cold War to oppose Communism but no one really knows what happend to it since and if it is still in effect. I'm not making any connection to 9/11 but nevertheless it's worth knowing that this sort of clandestine operations do take place or at least it did. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio
Having watched Documentaries about 9/11 I wouldn't dis agree with what your saying, there are a lot of things that went on that make you scratch your head,especially from an engineering point of view. When you study the close relationship between the Bush family and the Bin Laden family its not beyond the realms of possibility that a false flag took place, check history for evidence of this. False flag 1 pearl harbour. America knew of the forth coming attack but delayed relaying the information ,the bulk of the fleet was stationed out at sea leaving the older ships in dock at pearl,it was the only way the American government could enter the war with the publics backing. The USA went to War. False flag 2 Gulf of Tonkin. American boats attack by NVA torpedo ships? not exactly,but that's what was reported to congress, in fact the secend attack never took place,american ships were firing at blips on a radar screen but nothing else! The USA went to war. False flag 3 9/11 ,well its all been talked about on here but lets just say. The USA went to war. There seems to be a pattern
Yeah I mean there are some 'fishy' circumstances involved around 9 11. I'll agree on that. But when you dig into some of the claims that the conspiracy movement are making, then it doesn't hold up in court. I made a 100 page history paper in uni, digging into the 'proves' of the movie Zeitgeist (yeah I know), only to discover that 99% of the so called 'facts' are completely unreliable and a lot of it is taken out of thin air. The so called 'experts' which statements the movie is highly based upon are complete nut jobs that believe that FBI is out to get us and that Sony from Sony and Cher were killed by FBI agents (for some weird reason). The 1% of the claims that do have relativily reliable sources do raise some questions though. But not enough for me to believe anything else than the official story. I mean if it was an inside job, too many people had to be involved and we'd probably seen a whistle blower by now (especially after the change of administration).
Norway, the Twin towers did not collapse because of fire. They both had large passenger airlines laden with fuel smashing into them at hundreds of miles an hour which caused a massive explosion causing extensive structural damage, including localized collapse. and that the resulting fires further weakened the steel-framed structures, eventually leading to total collapse. This did not happen in the Madrid fire so it would be quite foolish to imply that the two were 'similar'.
I do have to laugh at those who claim the towers were brought down in a way a demolition building would. 1) When a building is brought down by demolition companies they use high explosives, right, have you heard how loud those explosions are when set off, do you hear VERY loud explosions when the towers collapsed in line with explosives being used? After the all, the WTC is a huge fooking building, they are going to need a huge amount of explosions to demolish that. Also demolition companies to the best of my knowledge use the explosive on lower levels, not from the top. Here is 17 minutes of building demolitions, tell me where any of those resemble the WTC collapse? Note how loud the explosions are and tell me how the government cna cover up huge explosion noises. Its laughable. [video=youtube;eem7d58gjno]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eem7d58gjno[/video] 2) How else should a building fall? Sideways? Upways? Hang to the left or right? Gravity will bring it striaght down and floot by floor will add further weight, which the floors below will not be-able to take the pressure and they like the floors above them collapse, they are after all hollow areas for the eight above to crush, so the building is only going to come downwards. If anything the WTC building came down too straight, where as demolition charged implosions don't come down straight. Gets ya thinking how wrong you could actually be with your conspiracy theories don't it.
